In this particular chapter of the study

In this particular chapter of the study, the researcher gathered quite few sample of related literatures and studies to analyze and reflect the different experiences and lessons learned from the subject matter. Both coming from the foreign and local studies that is found to be significantly associated on this particular study are presented in the following paragraphs. But first let us make a brief explanation on the different terms presented in the topic.
Bottom-Up Budgeting, from the word “budgeting” is the term “budget” that has been characterized as an organization plan of resources needed in achieving set of goals and objectives over a given period of time. It is composed of two components that includes of the revenue side that shows the source of funds and the expenditure side that shows how it will be spent. It has also of two types, the recurrent budget that focuses on general spending procedures and the development or capital budget that focuses on long term projects or investments (Kasozi-Mulindwa, 2013). Now when we put this budget into a process that involves planning, allocating resources and coordinating activities, it is now then called budgeting. According to Bihasa, C. (2015, p.11), budgeting is common to all organization and it explains the basic processes that are happening in any office including the government that will enable them to function effectively and efficiently. Meanwhile, budgeting that is included in this term, is a very important process in which any organization would not be able to perform its functions, as it serves as the fuel of government agencies to accomplish their plans. Nevertheless, budgeting is associated with so many different connotations and roles depending on its formulation in an organization, public or private. In public sector, it plays an essential role in a political perspective since it is an important control tool for them that reflect individual’s preferences when they allocate resources to different areas. Though conflicts can occur during budgeting season especially in the local government since their revenues are based on local taxes that either exceed or equal costs, it indicates of at least a balanced budget. And this kind of predicament must submit to the reception of a balanced budget and avoidance of tax increases (Moqvist ; Tangeberg, 2011).
There are many systems that can be used when it comes to budgeting, there is the Traditional Budgeting, Incremental Budgeting, Performance Budgeting, Zero Based Budgeting, the Kaizen Budgeting and so on, but this study will focus on BuB or commonly known as Participatory Budgeting. Participatory characterizes participation, participation of both citizens and the government that has been “the most studied dimension in the existing literature and current debate” (Cabannes, 2004). Participation is a wide array of activities composing of involvement in terms of decision making through a consultative processes, the provision of information and involvement in awareness raising activities and the formation of neighborhood committees (“A Conceptual Framework for Participatory Development”). Also, it is an essential component of democracy, increases and information for greater transparency and promotes citizens participation in economic policy as a way to make the government spending more pro-poor (Brautiga, 2004). According to Cabannes, Y. (2004), participation has three forms, the direct democracy, the intermediate and the least advanced form. In direct democracy the citizens had the direct control of the process and the right to directly participate in assemblies, either in thematic (issue-based) or in the neighborhood (district). The intermediate or indirect participation, discussions and decisions must take place first. Here the citizens were represented by their leader/s but does not act directly so therefore the process was not directly controlled by them. This form type is also called a community representative democracy, the present of representative and community based at the same time. Lastly is the least advanced form, the local or national government only accepted one single organizational model when participation happens.
Combining the terms described above, we can now define the famous name participatory budgeting. Participatory Budgeting (PB) is a rich but challenging field of study that no know-how is exactly like another (Cabannes, 2004). PB has been translated into dozens of languages that witness many success stories along with many issues in all part of the world. Issues because of, first in the alter-globalization movement and second, due to series of international awards given to the best practices of city management and democratic innovation, such as those created by UCLG-Africa in the Africities Forum, by the International Observatory of Participatory Democracy (OIDP) or by the Bertelsmann Foundation, especially the prestigious Rein¬hard Mohn Prize (Sintomer, Herzberg, ; Allegretti, 2013). “Participatory budgeting can serve an important public education function, combined with a strong auditor general, informed media, and civil society organizations with the capacity to deconstruct current spending patterns, it may yet be a novel pathway to making economic policy more pro-poor” (Brautiga, 2004, p. 667). Krenjova, J. and Raudla, R. (2013) stated PB that is capable of enhancing transparency and accountability in public administration by “opening the backdoors” of the budgeting process and involving citizens in learning and deciding about its trade-offs. PB also charges citizens with new responsibilities of “co-producers” of public services and in general “co-deciders” in political decisions. Another notable definition was made by a group called Transformative Social Innovation Theory (TRANSIT) in 2015 and they stated PB as a “a decision-making process made by inhabitants and part of a government team of one city that permits citizens to construct the public budget investments plan based on their realities and necessities, through a complex participatory procedure”.
Meanwhile, a new connotation was made to this particular budgeting system. It can be called as “participatory grant-making” since its fund are mostly instigated from the state or the national government and the power to control its process are handled by the representatives of the institutions. The principle behind this is that the local government can fit with different degrees of financial autonomy and in the rules of procedure on how to spend the said funds provided in the system (Krenjova ; Raudla, 2013). An explanation was supplied that some funds counterpart still has to come from the local government, so they have the judgment on how to provide mandatory services and goods on which the community projects were generated by its citizens.