Political Awareness and Participation in the Participatory Budget of Cachoeiro de Itapemirim in the 2009-2012 Period
Name: LEANDRO VIANNA SILVA SOUZA
Publication date: 27/06/2012
Summary: This work aim to understand the political consciousness and the participation of the members in the Board of Participatory Budgeting in Cachoeiro de Itapemirim ES Brazil, during 2009-2012. The theoretical is the Model of Political Consciousness to Understand the Participation in Collective Actions from Sandoval (2001). It‟s a qualitative approach of collected data on twenty-eight semi-structured interviews with the counselors of Participatory Budgeting (PB), documents from city hall and reports. To do data‟s organize and analyze, we use the content analysis priori (BARDIN, 2004), with the analytical categories from the Sandoval‟s model (2001). The results show collective identity feelings of union and social belonging, mainly on neighborhoods. Social expectations and beliefs contribute to the participation on OP due to the presence of collective values to answer the needs of all; because they believe in political changes in the city giving voice to the expectations and popular chooses; and by the hope that the choices made on OP will be done. When they don‟t see that, it demobilizes them. The identification of collective interests and adversaries make some counselors face the situation and others don‟t involve anymore. The idea that they can change the reality through OP is present on political efficacy. Feelings of injustice lead to the fight for more resources to do the works and against the injustices and favors perceived in its configuration. Despite the costs of time and money, the interviewers see the collective action to help everybody like a privilege. The OP‟s proposals are good, but your actions are lengthy and insufficient. Then, we can conclude that different types of political consciousness‟s motivate the participation on PB: popular democratic, restrictive, of confronting, reflective and of social justice. So, twenty-three interviewers approve it as an important mechanism of democratic and participative public management; and, because they trust that by means of collective public mobilization can face and overcome the obstacles, changing their life‟s realities. On the other hand, five disapprove it, including three that don‟t participate anymore. The main failures are: don‟t grant equals opportunities for everybody; don‟t give enough resources to answer the requested demands; don‟t actually include all the communities; and don‟t make some chosen works.
