Youth-Led Participatory Budgeting in Municipal Government: Youth Perceptions and Experiences

Background and Purpose: Participatory budgeting (PB) is a democratic process where members of a community determine how to spend allocated governmental funds.  PB originated in Brazil in 1989 and spread throughout Latin America, Europe and North America.  The PB process includes: community members brainstorming ideas, using the ideas to develop community projects, community members voting on the projects, and the government implementing the voted on projects. PB has been used primarily with adult populations; however, in recent years a small number of projects have focused on engaging youth. There is limited empirical information focused on youth engagement in PB processes.  The current study expands the literature by examining the perceptions and experiences of youth involved in the first youth-led PB project in the United States (Boston, MA).

Methods: For the past three years, the Mayor of Boston has set aside $1 million dollars of the capital budget for youth, ages 12-25 years, to solicit ideas, develop proposals, and vote on capital projects that enhance the well-being of the city for young people.  An in-depth study was conducted on Boston’s PB process using ethnographic methods.  Data were collected in collaboration with PB adult and youth members.  Data collection included individual interviews with 30 youth, four focus groups with 50 youth, observations of 8  meetings, and a review of relevant documents (e.g., demographic survey data, meeting minutes and agendas).  Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, including an initial review of the data, developing preliminary codes, expanding upon the codes, and identifying salient themes.  The themes were presented to select youth involved in the PB process for review, revision and approval.  Salient themes included: enhancing communication, access to city officials, time-constraints, and opportunities for youth empowerment.

Results:   Youth received sufficient information and training from adults at the start of the PB process (e.g., idea collection); however, they expressed a desire for more guidance throughout the entire PB process (e.g., proposal development and voting). Youth reported a need to have on-going access to city officials, including the Mayor, who can assist them in turning proposed ideas into capital projects. Youth also reported a need for more time allotted to developing and writing capital project proposals.  Although youth expressed frustration with certain aspects of the PB process, they overwhelmingly reported it provided them with a unique opportunity to learn about city government, develop leadership skills and expand their social networks.

Conclusions and Implications:  Results have important implications for policy, practice and research. Youth engagement in civic life can result in multiple benefits for youth and communities. Youth in the present study learned first hand about city government, developed leadership skills and enhanced their social capital.  Implementation of capital projects designed by youth have the opportunity to enhance community life for youth populations.  In order for youth to successfully engage in governmental projects,  they need ongoing training, support and communication from adult allies.  Future research should focus on determining effective strategies for engaging youth in democratic  processes.