Title: Participatory Democracy in Urban Public Policies and Participatory Budgeting in Brazil
Session organizer: Natacha Rena
Session Theme Abstract:
The session will address under diverse aspects the role of popular participation in urban public policies and territorial transformation of Brazilian metropolises, especially through participatory budgeting processes.
Participatory Budgets (PBs) are part of a series of participatory mechanisms established in Brazil by municipal and state governments of leftist parties after the country’s redemocratization. PBs have become a landmark of participatory experiences in urban planning history, considered by some authors as a transdisciplinary political-pedagogical instrument (SOUZA, 2013, p. 342-343). Its pioneering experience took place in Porto Alegre in 1989, and gradually the mechanism spread to more than 140 municipalities in Brazil, as well as in a number of other countries, being considered as a best practice for urban development by UN Habitat in the 1996 Istanbul Conference.
The debate on popular participation in urban public policies seems increasingly urgent, given the growing dismantling of citizen participation arenas and the consequent loss of hard-won rights in the redemocratization of the country.
The presentations will be conducted by the professors and PhD candidates of the research project Cartography of the Popular Perception of Participatory Budgeting in Belo Horizonte, currently under development by UFMG’s Indisciplinar research group (Federal University of Minas Gerais).
Keywords: Participatory Budgeting; Public Policies for Urban Development; Brazilian redemocratization; Citizen Participation.
References:
SHAH, A. (Ed.). (2007). Participatory budgeting. The World Bank.
SOUZA, Marcelo Lopes de. Mudar a cidade: uma introdução crítica ao planejamento e à gestão urbanos. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 2013.
Authors:
Ana Isabel de Sá (IFMG / NPGAU-UFMG), Gisela Barcelos (UFMG), Philippe (UFMG) and Natacha Rena (UFMG) – CV’s below, after
Panel Presentation Abstracts:
Presentation 1: The Urban Agenda of Participatory Process in Belo Horizonte between the 1990s and 2019.
Abstract:
This work aims to investigate the development of (i) redemocratization in Brazil in the 1980s, (ii) the agenda of Participatory Budget (PB) and (iii) the Specific Global Plan (PGE) for villages and favelas in Belo Horizonte between the 1990s and 2019. After more than two decades of dictatorship, the scenario of the country was of intense social inequality, urban and housing precarization, mainly in regions of socioeconomic vulnerability such as the favelas. The process of redemocratization in Brazil in the 1980s brings to the agenda the struggle for housing in the country raised by the National Movement for Urban Reform (MNRU), an important actor in the conduct of the population’s demands for social public policies in the brazilian Constitution of 1988. This process of struggle culminated in a Federal Constitution that embraces aspects related to the social function of property, the right to the city and popular participation in decisions related to the urban development of the brazilian metropolises. From this, the political condition and the organizational tradition of civil society in certain Brazilian capitals contributed for pioneering actions to be promoted in the implementation of popular instruments and policies, such as the Participatory Budget (PB), which allows popular participation in the decisions within municipal plans and policies. In 1993 Patrus Ananias (PT) was elected for Belo Horizonte`s City Hall and pursued the implementation of the PB and the urban and housing development of historically marginalized territories as central policy. Belo Horizonte developed many public policies to include vulnerable and poor communities as protagonists in the achievements of PBs for the elaboration of the first PGE – a technical instrument to diagnose the socio-spatial demands and propose interventions – which proposed construction of the first housing projects of social interest, services such as the first vocational school and urbanization projects in favelas. And since 1990’s? What happened with this innovative process of participatory public policies that used to be an example for the rest of the world? The communities of villages and favelas in Brazil have a history of social organization, struggle and resistance against segregatory planning processes articulated between State and Capital. In this moment that the country is passing through a crisis of democracy, what could be done for rearticulate movements, community groups, university, parties, syndicates, to resist against this cycle of a neoliberal dictatorship in a new model for all Latin America, including Brazil. Rescue and reorganize the participatory process for urban improvement for spatial justice would be an important popular political issue.
Keywords: democracy; urban public policies; urban agenda; participatory budget; Belo Horizonte; villages and favelas; spatial justice.
References:
AVRITZER, L. O orçamento participativo e a teoria democrática: um balanço crítico. In: NAVARRO, Zander (Orgs.). A inovação democrática no Brasil. São Paulo: Cortez, 2003. p. 13-60.
MARICATO, E. Reforma Urbana: Limites e Possiblidades. Uma Trajetória Incompleta. Ribeiro, Luiz César de Queiroz e Orlando Alves dos Santos Jr. (orgs.). Globalização, Fragmentação e Reforma Urbana. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 1997. p. 309-325.
Author: Natacha Rena
PhD and Associate Professor at the Architecture School at Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG); leader of the Indisciplinar Research Group, linked to CNPq – National Council for Scientific and Technological Development. Coordinator of the IndLab Extension Program and coordinator of the INCT Technopolitics: urban territories and digital networks.
Postdoctoral (researcher at CNPq – National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) at Universidad de Sevilla; PhD in Communication and Semiotics at PUC – SP. Master’s degree in Architecture (UFMG). Bachelor in Architecture (UFMG). Editor-in-Chief of the UFMG Interfaces Extension Academic Journal. Counselor of the Latin American Studies Center (CELA) linked to the UFMG Directorate of Foreign Relations. The main themes of her research are: urban struggles; socio-spatial inequalities, social urbanism, neoliberalism, geopolitics and sovereignty, urban technopolitics, collaborative digital platforms. Coordinator of the research project Cartography of the Popular Perception of the Participatory Budget in Belo Horizonte.
Address: R. Paraíba, 697 – Savassi, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil. CEP: 30130-141
Phone: (31) 3409-8801 + 55 31 9 98117595
E-mail: natacharena@gmail.com
On-line CV: http://lattes.cnpq.br/5202973767095132
Presentation 2: The Favela Planning Instruments in Brazil: renovation and interfaces between state and civil society.
Abstract:
The aim of this paper is to address Brazilian favela planning instruments from the second half of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first, focusing on the city of Belo Horizonte. In this context, three specific instruments stand out: PROFAVELA law, Participatory Budget (PB) and Specific Global Plan (PGE), all paradigmatic initiatives in urban planning and citizen participation.
Brazilian urbanization is, from its beginning, markedly unequal. The very formation of metropolises in the country, driven, above all, by the early twentieth century industrialization, had been effectively in accordance with the country’s social structure. Thus, the progress of noble and central areas of Brazilian cities has always been accompanied by settlements of poverty concentration and degrading living conditions, such as workers villages or irregular settlements – favelas or tenements (CAMARGO , et al., 1976). This growth model had, during the 1960s, 70s and 80s, a significant impetus, through the economic-industrial policy of the military regime, causing a huge growth of urban population. At that time, urban development took place in a disorderly manner, and irregular settlements increased progressively: in the early 1990s, about 25% of Belo Horizonte’s population lived in favelas (COSTA, 1994).
Still, during much of this period, favelas were ignored by planning instances. Until the mid-1980s, there was no zoning category for their designation, so the areas they occupied in cities were zoned as voids. Thus, the very emergence of policies that promoted the improvement and planning of these areas was impossible.
However, in the 1980s, the end of the military regime inaugurated new possibilities and, gradually, the State began to recognize demands from social movements and socially oppressed populations. A logic of “democratic experimentalism” arises (SANTOS, 2016), allowing the conception of means for transforming social structures from the State, with increasing social participation. It is in this context that favela planning begins, and the instruments to be addressed in this paper are instituted.
PROFAVELA, established in 1983, was the first legislation in Belo Horizonte (and one of the first in Brazil) to establish a favela zoning category, as well as to create mechanisms for the urbanization and resettlement of dwellers of risk areas. The approval and application of this law were the result of the mobilization of housing movements and various civil society organizations. In 1993, Belo Horizonte’s Participatory Budget (PB) was instituted. The PB was an important participatory planning initiative, which delegates to the population the right to define the allocation of part of the municipal budget, being able to make viable a series of projects for favelas` re-urbanization. Finally, as a “complement” to the PB, the Specific Global Plan (PGE) emerges in 1998, which constitutes a general diagnosis of the physical, environmental, legal and socio-organizational conditions of a favela, from which structuring interventions are proposed. The PGE is carried out in a participatory manner, and was instituted as a condition for a favela to receive works from the PB in order to associate planning and social mobilization.
Keywords: Urban planning instruments in favelas; Participatory Budget; PROFAVELA; Citizen Participation, PGEs
References:
CAMARGO, Cândido Procópio Ferreira de, et al. São Paulo 1975: Crescimento e Pobreza. São Paulo, Edições Loyola. v.4, 1976.
COSTA, Heloisa Soares de Moura. 1994. Habitação e produção do espaço em Belo Horizonte. In: MONTE-MÓR, R.L. (Coord.). Belo Horizonte: espaços e tempos em construção. Belo Horizonte: PBH/CEDEPLAR.
SANTOS, Boaventura. A difícil democracia. Reinventar as esquerdas. 1a ed. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2016.
Author: Gisela Barcellos
Professor at the Urbanism Department of the Architectural School of the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG, Brazil), architect and urban designer from Federal University of Santa Catarina (Brazil, 2002) with a master degree in Projet Architetural et Urbain from Université Paris 8 Vincennes-Saint-Denis (PARIS VIII, France, 2004) and doctorate in Architecture and Urbanism History from University of São Paulo (USP, Brazil, 2013). Her Ph.D. thesis has received two national awards: the Honorable Mention in the CAPES Thesis Award 2014 and the First Prize at the 28th Museu da Casa Brasileira Award (2014). Autor of the book “Tessitura Híbridas: Encontros latino-americanos em arquitetura e o Retorno à Cidade” (UFMG/Incipt, 2019) and serveral papers published in magazines and events. Her main domain of research are: Urbanism history in Latin America, circulation of ideas in Urbanism history and Urbanism of Architetcs. Coordinator with the research project Cartography of the Popular Perception of the Participatory Budget in Belo Horizonte.
Address: R. Paraíba, 697 – Savassi, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil. CEP: 30130-141
Phone: +55 (31) 3409-8884 + 55 31 9 97222500
e-mail: gisela.barcellosdesouza@gmail.com
On-line CV: http://lattes.cnpq.br/5633239020563548
Presentation 3: Participatory Budgeting as a Citizen Participation Instrument in Public Urban Policies: an evaluation of participatory designs through Belo Horizonte’s experience
Abstract:
Inaugurated in the redemocratization period Brazil, participatory budgets (PBs) have become an important instrument for participatory urban planning and management in several Brazilian cities, constituting one of the country’s main contributions to the debate on planning history. Its experience, however, assumes different formats in the different places it was implemented, granting the population diverse levels of decision-making power and, consequently, presenting heterogeneous results from the point of view of democratic intensification. Participatory design is considered to be a decisive variable for the success of PB policies. It is proposed, thus, to verify the role of participatory design and characteristics that impact on this variable from a comparison between two PB models implemented in the Brazilian city of Belo Horizonte: the Regional PB (RPBBH), based on a face-to-face participatory process composed of multiple stages and arenas, and the Digital PB (DPBBH), based on online deliberation and voting. The analysis will be based on the bibliographic review of related works, on data from the Belo Horizonte City Hall (PBH) and on statements collected in fieldwork. It is intended to demonstrate that the design adopted by RPBBH provides better conditions for collective debate, negotiation and decision making, providing intenser degrees of civic engagement.
Keywords: Participatory Budgeting; Institutional design of urban public policies; Best practices for urban development; Citizen Participation
References:
AVRITZER, Leonardo. O Orçamento Participativo e a Teoria Democrática: um balanço crítico. A inovação democrática no Brasil. São Paulo: Cortez, p. 13-60, 2003.
COLEMAN, S.; CARDOSO SAMPAIO, R. Sustaining a democratic innovation: a study of three e-participatory budgets in Belo Horizonte. Information Communication and Society, v. 20, n. 5, p. 754–769, 2017.
CUNHA, M. A. V. C. DA; COELHO, T. R.; POZZEBON, M. Internet e participação: o caso do orçamento participativo digital de Belo Horizonte. Revista de Administração de Empresas, v. 54, n. 3, p. 296–308, 2014.
SAMPAIO, R. C. [1]. Instituições Participativas Online: um estudo de caso do Orçamento Participativo Digital. Revista Política Hoje, p. 467–512, 2011.
SAMPAIO, R. C. [2]. Orçamentos Participativos Digitais: um mapeamento mundial das experiências já realizadas e suas contribuições para e- participação e e-democracia. Salvador: UFBA, 2014.
SAMPAIO, R. C.; MAIA, R. C. M.; MARQUES, F. P. J. A. Participação e deliberação na internet: Um estudo de caso do Orçamento participativo digital de belo horizonte. Opinião Pública, v. 16, n. 2, p. 446–477, 2010.
SOUZA, Celina. Construção e Consolidação de Instituições Democráticas: papel do orçamento participativo. São Paulo em Perspectiva, vol.15, n. 4, p. 84-97, 2001.
Author: Ana Isabel de Sá
EBTT Professor at IFMG (Instituto Federal de Minas Gerais), Campus Santa Luzia. Coordinator of the research project Cartography of the Popular Perception of the Participatory Budget in Belo Horizonte, along with professors Natacha Rena and Gisela Barcelos. PHD candidate at NPGAU/UFMG (Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais). Master degree in Architecture and Urbanism from NPGAU/UFMG in 2015. Bachelor in Architecture and Urbanism at Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais – UFMG (2008). Member of the research groups INDISCIPLINAR / UFMG; GEOPROEA / UFMG and Laboratório Integrado de Tecnologia Social (LITS), IFMG Campus Santa Luzia. Professional experience with architectural design and project coordination of diverse scales and typologies between 2008 and 2015.
Address: R. Paraíba, 697 – Savassi, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil. CEP: 30130-141
Emails: isabelanastasia@gmail.com – ana.sa@ifmg.edu.br
Phone: +55 31 9 9391 1150
Online CV: http://lattes.cnpq.br/8980353765450232
Presentation 4: Participatory budgeting in Belo Horizonte: an experience of decentralization and the search for territorial equity
Abstract:
The implementation of Participatory Budgeting (PB) in Brazilian cities is linked to the formulation of the Federal Constitution (1988) and seeks to address three fundamental elements: participation, decentralization, and territorial equity. Conceptually intertwined elements, of which only the last two will be presented in this analysis.
Regarding decentralization, PB can be understood as a “decentralization within decentralization”. That is, since Brazil is a Federation, there is a dual autonomy of government (central government and subnational entities: states and municipalities), taken by decentralization and centralization relations that vary in time, space and theme. The creation of the PB represents, therefore, an extension of this decentralization to a fourth entity, the citizens, who act in an even more specific sphere, the local. In this experience the municipality occupies the central government space that distributes competencies and resources to its territories (in the case of Belo Horizonte the Regional, TGCs and UPs), but without leaving its centrality, linked to the screening and execution of works. What is observed is a complex structure that mixes two different scales of representative democracy (the government and elected representatives of the community and members of the Comforca) with deliberative moments of participatory democracy, exercised through voting.
The equity character of the PB acts in line with decentralization. Since the proposal’s inception, there has been a concern to reduce territorial inequalities incorporated into the policy design that directed resources to vulnerable territories. As Patrus Ananias (2019) recalls, in the Caravans this was even clearer. It was not just a vertical movement from City Hall, but a horizontal arrangement whereby delegates often gave up works on their territories so that less favored places could be contemplated. That is, the concern with equity was not only in the model or institution, but reached the citizens involved in the process.
In addition, the incorporation of the Urban Quality of Life Index (IQVU) as an indication of the communities in which PB should be undertaken was an important step toward territorial equity. This is because the index seeks to reach a significant range of data that reflects the quality of life in each of the Planning Units (UP). That is, from this value it is possible to understand, in a more concrete way, which are the most vulnerable Belo Horizonte localities, directing investments towards them.
However, it is observed that through the creation of the digital PB in 2005, both participation and the pursuit of equity were reduced, although decentralization was somewhat expanded. The end of assemblies and caravans, according to Patrus (2019) eventually led to a break with the territorial and community bond, which weakened the PB. It is also understood that other elements from different directions and scales influenced this process, such as changes in municipal, state and federal management.
Keywords: Participatory Budget; Decentralization; Territorial Equity
Author: Maíra Ramirez
PHD candidate at PACPS/UFMG (Programa de Pós-graduação em Ambiente Construído e Patrimônio Sustentável – Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais). Master in built environment and sustainable heritage PACPS/UFMG (2019). Bachelor of Architecture and Urbanism at the Universidade Federal de São João del Rei (2016) with an exchange period at Technische Universität von München by the CsF – Programa Ciência sem Fronteiras (2013-2015). Member of the research group INDISCIPLINAR/UFMG and researcher in the project Cartography of the Popular Perception of the Participatory Budget in Belo Horizonte.
Address: R. Paraíba, 697 – Savassi, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil. CEP: 30130-141
Emails: mairaramirez@gmail.com
Phone: +55 31 9 9710-5717
Online CV: http://lattes.cnpq.br/1860774904699615
