Cherry-picking participation: explaining the fate of proposals from participatory processes

What happens to the proposals generated by participatory processes? One of the key aspects of research on public participation that has been the subject of rare systematic analysis and comparison is the fate of the output from participatory processes: their proposals. Which specific factors explain whether proposals are accepted, rejected or transformed by public authorities? This paper contributes to this gap in our understanding in two steps. First, we identify contextual, process and proposal related factors that are likely to affect the prospect of proposals being implemented, generating a set of testable hypotheses. Second, we test the explanatory power of these hypotheses through multilevel analysis on a diverse set of 571 policy proposals. Our findings offer evidence that while there is no effect for contextual factors, both process and proposal related variables have significant explanatory power. The design of participatory processes affects the degree of implementation, with participatory budgeting and higher quality processes being particularly effective. But most significant for explaining implementation are proposal level economic and political factors: a proposal's cost, the extent to which it challenges existing policy and the degree of support it has within the municipality all strongly affect the chance of implementation.