Happy to Decide? Populist Attitudes Among Citizens and Participatory Budgeting

Populism is on the rise, and many populist citizens feel politicians do not listen to them. One response to this trend would be to give citizens more options to make their voice heard via participatory budgeting, a decision-making procedure where citizen themselves influence the specific budget allocation. So far only very few studies examine how citizens with a high degree of populist attitudes experience actual democratic innovation processes. The few studies that link populist attitudes and democratic innovations mainly study referendums. However, little is known about other types of democratic innovations, specifically ones including elements of deliberation whereby compromise and consensus are essential. One can expect that citizens with a high degree of populist attitudes are wary of compromise, and therefore are more likely to feel dissatisfied with the process. However, one could also argue the opposite: populist citizens tend to consider compromise by politicians as a betrayal by these politicians, but compromise by and among citizens can be seen as a signal that ‘the good people’ are able to sort things out ‘quickly and effectively’. This study will examine to what extent populist attitudes influence the effects that participation in such a decision-making tool has. It does so by using panel data on three Dutch cases of participatory budgeting (Amsterdam, Maastricht and Heeten). We analyse to what extent populist attitudes of the participants influence satisfaction with the process, the decision acceptance and, ultimately, to what extent citizens with a high degree of populist attitudes become more or less supportive of compromise in general after the process.