SYSTEM OF QUALIFICATION IN PARTICIPATIVE LOCAL PLANNING AND
MANAGEMENT
PORTO ALEGRE CITY HALL
MODULE
Practicing Participatory Democracy in Porto Alegre: Participatory Budgeting and Local
Government Solidarity
Collaboration: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (Federal University of Rio
Grande do Sul – UFRGS
August 2009
1. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
INTRODUCTION
A new paradigm for the city of Porto Alegre
Democratic expansion along with scientific and technological advances and the
increased awareness of the role that citizens have in conducting their own destinies has
brought to the forefront a new way to live in society. The society of the 21st century reflects
the empowerment of more aware citizens, the spread of non-governmental organizations,
and the growth of socially responsible companies – all social participants that bring
synchronized movements and a civil awareness that is more and more connected, alert, and
articulate. Between the shadows and the lights of globalization comes a new vision of
progress and civilization: that the sustainability of the planet and of humanity depends on
greater ties of trust, solidarity, cooperation, and civic spirit among the communities.
Governments based on archaic and outdated concepts, models, and structures need
to adjust in order to meet this new era; one that is favorable to opening new spaces for
democratic participation.
The Brazilian Context
- The formation of the Brazilian society
The urban population of Brazil increased to more than 60 million people (29
million just during the 1980’s) due to changes that turned the country from an agrarian
exporter to an urban industrial nation (with the 8th largest GDP). Urban areas today account
for more than 80% of the population (Brazilian Institute for Statistics and Geography- IBGE,
2000).
Despite improvements of some social indicators (reduction in infant mortality,
increase in life expectancy, and higher levels of schooling), this “modernization” occurred in a
context of highly concentrated levels of wealth and land, as well as selective access to public
services and equipment. This led many of the development centers in Brazil, especially state
capitals and the Metropolitan areas surrounding them, into becoming landscapes that are
representative of social inequality.
After the return in 1985 of direct elections for the mayors of state capitals, the
democratic constitution of 1988 established a new federative agreement promoting the
decentralization of both resources and administration, through transferring power to the local
level. For the first time, municipalities were considered entities of the Federation and
resources were decentralized, and public policy was simultaneously transferred to local
bodies. This occurred gradually with the fiscal adjustments in the 1990s, which begun in the
government of Fernando Henrique Cardoso (Social Democratic Party of Brazil – PSDB) and
was maintained during the administration of President Lula (Workers Party – PT) since 2002.
These structural changes were accompanied by the arrival of new participants,
new urban social movements, and new political-cultural practices during the 70’s and early
80’s. These occurred within a context of broadening and revitalizing the civil society during
re-democratization, indicating that despite the social crisis, a fertile scenario for the
construction of a public democratic sphere had been developing in the country. These
participants from a diverse background and from the working class, embraced collective
actions anchored in the ideas of the rights of the citizenship (universal access to public
goods and services)1 and coping with state organizations and with sectors of the
marketplace, partially overcoming the relationships of paternalist subordination (a culture of
debt and of favors) and patron/client exchange, as seen abundantly in literature2
Porto Alegre:
- Unequal urban growth and the rise of new participants
Despite being considered one of the Brazilian metropolitan areas with the best quality
3
of life , the capital of the state of Rio Grande do Sul was not immune to the model of
“conservative modernization.” The migration from rural areas and inland cities in search of
jobs and income significantly increased the city’s population and that of the Metropolitan area
(MAPA). During the period that the country became urban-industrial (1960’s – 1970’s) the
demographic growth of the city and the MAPA were 27.1% and 45.8% above the state’s
average rate of 16.6%4. The number of inhabitants went from 635 thousand in the 1960’s to
1.125 million in the 1980’s5. Its current population is about 1.4 million.
Porto Alegre however, also suffered an astounding growth of slum dwellings in illegal
or clandestine locations, both public and private - a phenomenon that represents the social
inequalities in Brazilian urban centers. In the 1980’s the “illegal and informal city” grew at an
1
The expression citizenship gained unprecedented attention in Brazilian society. Its appropriation for ideologically antagonistic political speeches emphasizes the
polysemic character of the term and established the historical dispute to establish limits and meaning (Telles, 1994; Dagnino, 1994).
The new methods of collective action included street barricades, assemblies at personal residences, signed petitions, demonstrations in front of city hall, declarations to
the general public, complaints via mass media, and collective efforts of residents to complete projects on their own.
3
In 2000 the Municipal Human Development Index elaborated by PNUD/IPEA/FJP was 0.865, reducing the human development gap by 23.3% between 1991-2000.
Today the city is in first place according to the MHDI among metropolises greater than one million inhabitants. (www.observapoa.com.br) (2006).
4
IBGE, 1980
5
IBGE, 2000
2
annual rate of 9%, while the legal and registered portion, provided with infrastructure and
public services, grew at a mere 1.9%6. The removal of slums through eradication programs,
sending them to the city outskirts without any urban infrastructure, was initially done using
the force of police power. During the dictatorship (1964-1985), patron/client programs based
on personal relationships between power mongers and community leaders was the typical
relationship between the local government and the low income population.
Despite the fact that, for an extended period, the relationship between the State and
society was one of ties based on authoritarianism and/or dependence, the history of Porto
Alegre is full of events played out by associations, clubs, federations, and groups of various
stripes – some were community groups, athletic associations, and defenders of some cause
or even political groups. The first neighborhood association of Porto Alegre (called the
Association of Friends of district four) was established in 1945, and in 1959 the Federation of
Neighborhood Associations of Porto Alegre was created, later called FRACAB. In 1983,
when the Porto Alegre Resident Associations Union (UAMPA) was founded, there were
already 170 resident associations in the state capital7.
The Organic Law in effect in the 1930s foresaw the existence of Deliberative Councils
of the Master Plan (1939), of Taxpayers (1948), and of Public Services (1951), all
established and active. Today, Porto Alegre has 18 active Municipal Councils. Later – just
like with the expansion of the autonomous Popular Councils in the 1980’s and the
Neighborhood Unions – the implementation of the advances brought about by the 1988
Constitution, as well as the implementation and consolidation of the Participatory Budgeting
(PB) in Porto Alegre in the following years, brought progress as well as insufficiencies in the
interaction between the Sate and the society. On the other hand, while the PB was being
consolidated, city conferences were established during the late 1990’s and early 2000 that
marked, by their resolutions, the need for renewal and integration of the various existing
participatory tools. The consequence of this is that the city started to discuss new
participatory models.
-The Return of Direct Elections and the Development of the Participatory Budgeting (PB):
As the result of traditions from the beginning of the twentieth century, Porto Alegre
developed, over time, an enviable citizen and social network. This organization supported
numerous popular demonstrations that, at certain times, were decisive in Brazilian history.
During the military regime (Brazil was under the rule of a military dictatorship from 1964 until
6
SPM/PMPA, 1991
7
Relatório preliminar: Mapa do Associativismo em Porto Alegre – A Trajetória da Organização Popular em Porto Alegre: da década de 40 aos anos 80, Marcelo Kunrath
Silva, Departamento de Sociologia UFRGS, outubro de 2006.
Formatado: Inglês (EUA)
Formatado: Inglês (EUA)
1985) Porto Alegre’s social organizations made their mark. They were also present during
the strikes in the 1970’s and 1980’s and in the street demonstrations such as “Diretas Já”
(Direct Elections Now – 1984/1985) and the “Constituinte” (Constituent) that guaranteed the
return of the Legal Democratic State to Brazil (1988).
With the return of direct elections to the state capitals in 1985, the historic
labor movement, represented by the PDT (Democratic Worker’s Party) came to power at City
Hall. After this election, a new relationship was consolidated between the local government
and the city’s popular movements. The community organizations demanded the ability to
participate in government decisions. In 1988, Popular Councils were created through a
Municipal Law, allowing and institutionalizing direct participation channels for the Porto
Alegre communities. The new law combined two distinct concepts: autonomous popular
councils and institutional councils that participated in public administration. The creation of 17
“Popular Councils” was reconsidered by the government administration in 1989.
The Popular Front (alliance between the PT – Workers Party – and the PCB –
Communist Workers Party) won the elections in 1988 and implemented the PB as the
participatory model. Upon taking office in the state capital for the first time, both the
government as well as the members of community movements were forced to rethink their
reasons and reevaluate their strategies and actions in light of the complex reality that was
resistant to preconceived formulas8. The PB should not be understood as merely a planned
conclusion by those that took over city hall. To the contrary, it required collective learning
from the government leaders as well as the community representative of civil society.
The PB consists of a decision making process by the population regarding the
priorities of City Hall’s budget investments. It is a policy tool that assures the participation of
the population in the process of defining the priorities of the Public Budget. It arises as an
answer to the limits of representative democracy, combining its characteristics with those
from a direct democracy system, thus modernizing the relationship between the State and
the society by means of a new model for democratic management of public resources.
The creation of the PB resulted in a synergy between at least five variables: 1)
the political will determined by the new government to democratize the social-state
management; 2) the effectiveness of shared decision making, adding credibility among those
who participate; 3) the effective political-administrative management of general demands; 4)
the financial leeway to respond to the demands and allow for the emergence of a virtuous
cycle; 5) the previous existence of a critical association fabric that was a necessary condition
to exert the “outsider-in” pressure on the State to make things happen.
8
The history of the social origins found in the rise of collective actions by urban popular movements at the end of the 1970’s, such as the difficult process of developing the
PB in its first stage (1989-92), are dealt with in the book O Poder da Aldeia. Gênese e História do Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre (Fedozzi, 2000ª)..
Based on the experience of the PB in Porto Alegre, society’s participation
takes on new shapes. Organized civil society and the public administration begin to share
budged decisions. As a result, there was a redirection of public policy, expanding the access
of basic services and encouraging communities to be organized and participatory, especially
those on the city outskirts. The PB became a national and international reference point when
the UN chose it as on of the 40 best experiments in local management during the Habitat
Conference II (Istanbul, 1995). The idea of the PBs has inspired several forms of
participation in Brazil an in several other countries, though at times only a mechanical
replication.
Simultaneously, during this period an administrative decentralization process
was begun through RACs (Regional Administrative Centers) that represent the presence of
City Hall in an organized and institutional fashion in various regions of the city.
The legitimacy of the PBs was earned in a study by the World Bank: 65.8%
“completely agree” that PB is very important; 57.2% that it expands democracy; 51.7% that it
increased government efficiency; 53.6% that it favors the poor; 56.9% that it improves quality
of life. Around 20% said they had participated in PB meetings9.
There are dilemmas that are challenging the ability of the participants involved
to maintain the qualitative sustainability that the innovative and long-term processes require.
The city has attempted to deal with these challenges.
Throughout this journey there has been progress regarding the organization of
portions of the population around the battle for universal rights to access urban infrastructure,
public policies and services, as well as advances against prejudice. However, as with any
process under construction, shortcomings can be identified in the quest to create awareness
among huge unorganized groups that are disperse and indifferent toward the richness of the
democratic process.
During their campaign, the victorious alliance for the 2005/2008 administration
(PPS – Popular Socialist Party and PTB – Brazilian Workers Party) fully accepted the
commitment to keep the PB and the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, and to change the
unsatisfactory policies.
With the change in government in 2005, the new administration added to the
PB the establishment of the Local Government Solidarity Program with a new mechanism for
participatory democracy. The Participatory budgeting and the Local Government Solidarity
Programs are not the only tools that make the Porto Alegre Social Participation Network
relevant to the city.
9
SMP/PMPA, 1991
Regional Planning Forums, Thematic Forums, Municipal Sectors
Councils and their roles in Regional Administrative Centers, and the countless autonomous
social and community organizations that form social networks and constant renewal of the
city, are all relevant actions as well. These diverse interaction channels between the society
and the local government are the reason Porto Alegre is known as the Participation Capital.
Formatado: Inglês (EUA)
- Local Government Solidarity (LGS)
As of 2005, Porto Alegre City Hall has put into practice a profound reformulation of its
management model toward the society. This was done after municipal elections that brought
change to the executive office after 16 years of being under the same political framework.
The city’s democratic tradition inspired a rethinking regarding new participatory
models that would be capable of producing results not necessarily linked to public resources.
Structured along the values of plurality10, dialogue11, and consensus12, the
major demonstration of these changes is summarized by what the new administration calls
Local Government Solidarity (LGS). The meaning of this way of governing has expanded the
debate surrounding the viability of social and democratic transformations committed to local
sustainable development. Popular participation is not limited to demanding ones rights from
the State with the government’s budget as the only focus. Rather, it should seek to develop
its own assets and to activate its own potential. The LGS is a standard for the production of
public goods and the development that comes from the action of the individual and collective
participants.
The
Local
Government
Solidarity
Program
is
responsible
for
the
implementation of the concept of government. It seeks to unify community forces, the
marketplace and the local government around collective development projects, social
inclusion projects, and sustainability as well as promoting the understanding that the practice
of citizenship requires cooperation and a responsible and purposeful attitude. The Program
acts as an interdepartmental and interdisciplinary network that organizes territorially to
promote living spaces capable of fostering a culture of solidarity and cooperation between
the government and the local communities. Therefore, the LGS seeks to connect democratic
and community participation networks with the collective goals of the 17 regions of the city,
and in the future between the 82 neighborhoods and 360 boroughs.
This new view of popular participation, that seeks to integrate the diverse
social participants to find solutions to common problems and encourage the development of
10
11
12
Recognize that society is made up of multiple differences.
Contribute so that society will be a system of connections that are always open.
Promote the formation of a community of collaborative social projects and agreements for the sake of local development.
Formatado: Inglês (EUA)
each community’s social capital, was the reason why the municipality of Porto Alegre won an
award for best urban policies worldwide at the Shanghai World Expo Bureau 2010. Porto
Alegre was one of 22 chosen cities.
ObservaPoa – Observatory for the City of Porto Alegre
ObservaPoa – Observatory for the city of Porto Alegre offers various detailed
studies, research projects and information about the city’s regions and neighborhoods,
supplying social, economic and management indicators. This information supports the
decision making process of Participatory Budgeting, the Local Government Solidarity project,
and the city’s Participation Network.
The information regarding neighborhoods and regions is geo-references for political
and pedagogical purposes. It seeks to reinforce local identities, promoting a sense of
community among people and families.
New Management Model
The Porto Alegre administration has historically executed its policies via departments,
as it is commonly done in most Brazilian municipalities. This system generates limited
management mechanisms as well as barriers that prevent more effective problem resolution.
In this renewal process, City Hall embraced a new management model and began to
define its priorities through the budgeting-program, managing its actions with goals, and
evaluation and monitoring indicators. With the budgeting-program both projects and funds
are directed in an integrated, cross sectional, and interdisciplinary fashion.
The 12 programs are designed to be implemented throughout the cross sections of
each region of the municipality.
2. MODULE OBJECTIVES
As foreseen in the Intercity Training System for Local Participation Planning and
Management, the specific modules developed by each member city has as its general
objective to socialize the experiences that stood out among the various cities or regions as
good examples of planning and participatory democracy in public management. The
objective of the expected content of Porto Alegre’s module is listed in the following main
points:
1. Acquire a critical and theoretical understanding about Participatory Budgeting, the
Local Government Solidarity program, the city’s current participation network, and
its support tools.
2. Understand the main concepts used by participating institutions and frameworks
that make up the module’s content.
3. Understand the procedural nature of the democratic innovations that lead to
emancipatory potential and strengths but also to limits (intrinsic or not),
challenges, risks, and weaknesses in their historical configurations;
4. Provide for understanding of the origin of Participatory Budgeting and the variables
that most influenced the development process f the city’s participatory democratic
network;
5. Identify the connection points and the cross-sectional nature of Participatory
Budgeting, the Local Government Solidarity Project, and the City Observatory with
the other themes of global character regarding participatory democracy and the
formulation of a cross-sectional Management Model that takes the plurality of the
daily administrative representation into account.
3. EXPECTED PEDAGOGICAL RESULTS
a) Understanding of participation as a process, not just a tool. In other words, it’s
simultaneously a means and an end that are in a dialectical relationship of
permanent development of democratic innovations– non-instrumental participation.
b) Theoretical-conceptual learning about the participation model carried out in Porto
Alegre.
c) The ability to identify the improvements, the potential, the limits, the challenges,
and the risks that exist in the city’s Participatory Democratic journey;
d) The ability to think about the addressed content through comparisons and analysis
of the local realities of the participants.
Formatado: Inglês (EUA)
e) Contribute toward the development of a new awareness regarding the complexity
and multidimensionality of the participatory process and to discard attempts to
copy or replicate them in a mechanical fashion.
4. COURSE DURATION
The module lasts six weeks with twelve in-class sessions, each one and a half hours
long (18 hours). Each week there will be two sessions, preferably on the same day (3 hours).
5. COURSE WORK LOAD
The total course work load is 18 hours. The complimentary work load is made up of
activities outside the classroom, including mandatory reading and either individual or group
final projects.
6. END OF MODULE PROJECT
The end of course Project can be either an individual or group Project. The options
will depend on the profile of the participants and any evaluation before or during the
development of the course. Basically, one can chose from among the following formats:
a) an analytical Project based on the listed bibliography and the material and
discussion during the course;
b) an analytical or critical account of a participatory experience that occurs or
occurred in your city or region. The purpose should be to examine the potential,
the main challenges, the strengths, and the limits (intrinsic or not) of the
experience.
7. PEDAGOGICAL FORMATS OF EACH SESSION
Each session, by teleconference or in person, will begin with a lecture regarding the
expected contents lasting about 45 minutes. Each session requires previous reading of
specific material (manuals) and/or the indicated reading in the bibliography. After the lecture,
the rest of the time is reserved for discussion between the educator, the participants, and the
facilitator or local monitor. The sessions can also include group work during the times
scheduled for this purpose. There will also be case studies of real situations, problems,
dilemmas, and solutions in each session. At the end, a content summary will be developed
from the criticisms that arise.
8. EVALUATION OR CERTIFICATION OF THE STUDENTS
Participants will be evaluated on the basis of three criteria:
1. Active participation during class sessions and projects (20%);
2. 80% attendance in class sessions unless excused by extraordinary reasons (40%)
3. Final Project (40%)
4. A student who achieves a 70% average when the three criteria are added will be
given a passing grade. If this average is not achieved the student will not receive a
certificate, however they may take the course again.
9. DESCRIPTION FOR EACH SESSION
Session 1 – The context of the emergence of participation in Porto Alegre and the
development of the Participatory Democratic Network
Work Load: 2 hours. (18 h)
Contents:
•
•
•
Historical contextualization, both national and local, where the Participatory Democracy
arose and, more specifically, Participatory budgeting and the Local Government
Solidarity project.
Context and fundamentals in developing a cross-sectional Management Model in light of
contemporary challenges.
Information as the key tool for social participation: ObservaPOA
Required Reading
•
•
FEDOZZI, Luciano. Participação popular no governo municipal de Porto Alegre (Capítulo
I) In: O poder da aldeia. Gênese e história do Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre.
Tomo Editorial, 2000a.
Manual Modelo de Gestão da Prefeitura de Porto Alegre.
Session 2 – Participatory budgeting in Porto Alegre
Work Load: 8 hours. (18 h)
Contents:
•
The configuration of the PB “model” based on its undefined characteristics and the
synergy between the government and the civil society.
•
A critical evaluation of the “institutionalistic” interpretations of the origins of PB, noting the
importance of collective action, of associations, and of the social capital active in the
sphere of local government since the 1970s.
•
The main variables that led to the development of PB as the way participatory democracy
is practiced in Porto Alegre.
•
Ideals and concepts of the Participatory budgeting of Porto Alegre.
•
The structure, organizational chart, and the social participants in the process.
•
The budget cycle of PB.
•
The participation process: steps and format.
•
Dynamic group discussions about the budget.
•
Methods for distributing municipal resources.
•
The Investment Plan as a product and a shared commitment.
•
Socioeconomic and associative profile as well as the evaluation of the members of PB.
Required Reading
•
Manual O que é e como funciona o Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre (PMPA e
UFRGS).
•
FEDOZZI, Luciano. Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre. Elementos para um debate
conceitual. In: FISCHER, Nilton e MOLL, Jaqueline (orgs.) Por uma nova esfera pública.
Rio de Janeiro: Vozes, 2000b.
Session 3 – Local Government Solidarity
Work Load: 4 hours. (18 h)
Contents:
•
Concepts of Local Government Solidarity: territorial, cross-sectional, intersecting, and
decentralized.
•
Project development methodology
•
Decision agreement monitoring mechanism.
•
Impact and result evaluation tools
Required Reading:
•
Manual O que é e como funciona a Governança Solidária Local (PMPA)
•
BUSATO, C. e VARGAS, P.. Governança Solidária Local. Fundamentos políticos da
mudança em Porto Alegre, 2004 (brochura)
Session 4 – Participatory democracy support tools
Work Load: 2 hours. (18 h)
Contents:
•
The importance of information in participatory action
•
What is the Observatory of Porto Alegre and how does it work?
•
Potential, limits, and challenges of the City Observatory
•
The strategic management model: guiding concepts
•
Public management, governmental participation and effectiveness: the new local
government management structure, the development of goals for equitable and
sustainable local development; evaluation indicators for the quality of public services and
accountability.
Required Reading:
•
Texts:
•
FURTADO, Adriana. Observatório da Cidade de Porto Alegre - democratizando a
informação. Jornada Avaliando a Participação Cidadã, IGOP, Barcelona, 2007.
•
DOWBOR, Ladislau. Sistema Local de Informação e Cidadania. Rede RTS. Set.
2004.
•
FEDOZZI, Luciano. Observando o Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre. Análise
histórica de dados: perfil social e associativo, avaliação e expectativas. Tomo
Editorial, 2007.
Session 5 – Results, strengths, limits, criticisms, challenges and the possibilities of
participation networks
Work Load: 2 hours. (18 h)
Contents:
•
Main results from participation: social, political, and cultural.
•
Main limits, weaknesses, and challenges of the experience up till now
•
Possibilities for improvements and changes in the participatory network
Required Reading:
•
FEDOZZI, Luciano. Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre: Potencialidades, limites
e principais dilemas dessa invenção democrática contemporânea. Rio de
Janeiro:Revista do CEBES, 2009.
•
BANCO INTERNACIONAL DE RECONSTRUÇÃO E DESENVOLVIMENTO. Rumo a
um Orçamento Participativo mais inclusivo e efetivo em Porto Alegre. Washington,
DC, 2008. (versão completa http://www-wds.worldbank.org)
10. BIBLIOGRAPHY
CABANNES, Yves. Perguntas freqüentes sobre OP.
BANCO INTERNACIONAL DE RECONSTRUÇÃO E DESENVOLVIMENTO. Rumo a um
Orçamento Participativo mais inclusivo e efetivo em Porto Alegre. Washington, DC, 2008.
(versão completa http://www-wds.worldbank.org )
BUSATO, C. e VARGAS, P.. Governança Solidária Local. Fundamentos políticos da
mudança em Porto Alegre, 2004 (brochura)
DOWBOR, Ladislau. Sistema Local de Informação e Cidadania. Rede RTS. Set. 2004.
FEDOZZI, Luciano. Participação popular no governo municipal de Porto Alegre (Capítulo I) e
1989 - Iniciando a experiência do OP: a prática como critério da verdade? (Capítulo II). In: O
poder da aldeia. Gênese e história do Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre. Tomo
Editorial, 2000a.
___. Observando o Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre. Análise histórica de dados:
perfil social e associativo, avaliação e expectativas. Porto Alegre: Tomo Editorial, 2007.
___.Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre. Elementos para um debate conceitual. In:
FISCHER, Nilton e MOLL, Jaqueline (orgs.) Por uma nova esfera pública. Rio de Janeiro:
Vozes, 2000b.
___. Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre: Potencialidades, limites e principais dilemas
dessa invenção democrática contemporânea. Rio de Janeiro:Revista do CEBES, 2009.
FURTADO, Adriana. Observatório da Cidade de Porto Alegre - democratizando a
informação. Jornada Avaliando a Participação Cidadã, IGOP, Barcelona, 2007.
RIBEIRO, A. C. E GRAZIA, G. Experiências de Orçamentos Participativos no Brasil. FNPP.
Vozes, 2003
RIBEIRO, L. C. Q. e SANTOS JUNIOR, O. A. (orgs). Globalização, fragmentação e reforma
urbana: o futuro das cidades brasileiras na crise. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 1994.
SINTOMER, Y.; HERZBERG, C.; RÖCKE, A. Participatory Budgeting in Europe: Potentials and
Challenges. Berlin: International Journal of Urban Regional Research. v. 32, n. 1, p. 164-178,
2008.
URB-AL - Seminário Financiamento Local e Orçamento Participativo. Rede 9. Documento
Base, 2006 (mimeo)
VERLE, J e BRUNET, L. Um novo mundo em construção. Porto Alegre:Guayí, 2002.
BUSATTO, Cezar, FEIJÓ, Jandira (2006). A era dos vagalumes: o florescer de uma nova
cultura política. Porto Alegre: Editora ULBRA, 2006
FEIJÓ, Jandira e FRANCO, Augusto (orgs.) (2008): “Olhares sobre a experiência da
Governança
Solidária
Local
de
Porto
Alegre”.
Porto
Alegre: ediPUCRS / CMDC, 2008.
CASTELLS, Manuel. (1999). A Sociedade em Rede: A era da informação: economia,
sociedade e cultura, v.1 São Paulo: Editora Paz e Terra.
LEVY, Pierre (1998). A inteligência coletiva: Por uma antropologia do ciberespaço, Edições
Loyola
UGARTE, David (2007). El poder de las redes: manual ilustrado para personas, colectivos y
empresas abocados al ciberactivismo. Já existe tradução brasileira (editada como livro, em
papel, com apresentação de Augusto de Franco): O poder das redes. Porto Alegre:
CMDC/ediPUCRS,2008.
FRANCO, Augusto (2004): O lugar mais desenvolvido do mundo (WORD)
http://www.4shared.com/get/95288723/af15161/_2__O_lugar_mais_desenvolvido_do_mund
o_-_reeditado1.html
FRANCO, Augusto (2008). “A independência das cidades”. Disponível para
download
em
=
http://www.4shared.com/get/83400425/6d33ff9a/A_INDEPENDNCIA_DAS_CIDADES_25jan
09.html