University-Community Engagement: Formation of New Collaboration Patterns in Participatory Budgeting Process

Promoting public participation in urban processes has long been a critical issue in discussions about urban governance. However, despite the advantages of more progressive and inclusive city governance, participatory budgeting (PB) often faces challenges in ensuring collaboration between different s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inArchitecture and urban planning Vol. 18; no. 1; pp. 156 - 165
Main Authors Treija, Sandra, Bratuškins, Uģis, Koroļova, Alisa
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Riga Sciendo 01.01.2022
Riga Technical University
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Promoting public participation in urban processes has long been a critical issue in discussions about urban governance. However, despite the advantages of more progressive and inclusive city governance, participatory budgeting (PB) often faces challenges in ensuring collaboration between different stakeholders involved. Not always do the involved parties have adequate resources to lead the brainstormed ideas to a tangible project application. In recent decades universities are supporting partnerships, grassroots projects and media conversations to take an active part in the development of cities. In addition to the wish of making research results available to a wider public and increasing the chances of making use of them, universities are also interested in the co-production of knowledge with non-academic groups. This makes universities an important stakeholder with a potential of supporting community engagement processeses. Thus, through the analysis of participatory budgeting processes in the cities of the Eastern Baltic Sea region and a detailed case study of participatory budgeting in Riga, this research explores the limits of current PB programs, motivations and advantages of involving university in this process.
ISSN:2255-8764
1691-4333
2255-8764
DOI:10.2478/aup-2022-0016