Urban democracy in post-Maidan Ukraine: conflict and cooperation between citizens and local governments in participatory budgeting

References

• Aasland, A. and Lyska, O. (2020) ‘Signs of progress: local democracy developments in Ukrainian cities’, in H. Shelest and M. Rabinovych (eds.), Decentralization, Regional Diversity, and Conflict: The Case of Ukraine, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 283–310.
   Google Scholar
• Bader, M. (2020) ‘Decentralization and a risk of local elite capture in Ukraine’, in H. Shelest and M. Rabinovych (eds.), Decentralization, Regional Diversity, and Conflict: The Case of Ukraine, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 259–82.
   Google Scholar
• Baiocchi, G. (2005) Militants and Citizens: The Politics of Participatory Democracy in Porto Alegre, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baiocchi, G. and Ganuza, E. (2017) Popular Democracy: The Paradox of Participation, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baiocchi, G., Silva, M. K. and Heller, P. (2011) Bootstrapping Democracy: Transforming Local Governance and Civil Society in Brazil, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baiocchi, G. and Summers, N. (2017) ‘Controversies, authority, and the limits of participation: Chicago's 49th Ward’, PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review 40: 311–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bherer, L., Fernández-Martínez, J. L., García Espín, P. and Jiménez Sánchez, M. (2016) ‘The promise for democratic deepening: the effects of participatory processes in the interaction between civil society and local governments’, Journal of Civil Society 12: 344–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boulianne, S. (2019) ‘Building faith in democracy: deliberative events, political trust and efficacy’, Political Studies 67: 4–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brik, T. and Brick Murtazashvili, J. (2022) ‘The source of Ukraine’s resilience: how decentralized government brought the country together’, Foreign Affairs, 28 June, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/2022-06-28/source-ukraines-resilience?utm_campaign=tw_daily_soc&utm_source=twitter_posts&utm_medium=social
   Google Scholar
• Chorna-Bokhniak, N. and Lepyoshkin, I. (2020) Implementation and Improvement of Participatory Budgeting: Experiences of Ukrainian Cities and Recommendations, Canada: Federation of Canadian Municipalities, http://pleddg.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/PLEDDG_Casestudy_Participatory_Budgeting_2020-eng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. (1967) ‘The city in the future of democracy’, American Political Science Review 61: 953–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deakin, H. and Wakefield, K. (2014) ‘Skype interviewing: reflections of two PhD researchers’, Qualitative Research 14: 603–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dias, N. (2021) Participatory Budgeting World Atlas 2020-2021, Municipality of Cascais, https://www.oficina.org.pt/participatory-budgeting-world-atlas-2019.html.
   Google Scholar
• Donos, L. and Ploskyi, K. (2019) Uprovadzhennia ta vdoskonalennia Hromadskoho biudzhetu: praktychni rekomendatsii, Kyiv: PROMIS.
   Google Scholar
• Dudley, W. (2019) Ukraine’s Decentralization Reform, Berlin: SWP, Working Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Font, J. and Blanco, I. (2007) ‘Procedural legitimacy and political trust: the case of citizen juries in Spain’, European Journal of Political Research 46: 557–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fung, A. (2011) ‘Reinventing democracy in Latin America’, Perspectives on Politics 9: 857–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fung, A. (2015) ‘Putting the public back into governance: the challenges of citizen participation and its future’, Public Administration Review 75: 513–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geissel, B. (2012) ‘Impacts of democratic innovations in Europe: findings and desiderata’, in B. Geissel and K. Newton (eds.), Evaluating Democratic Innovations: Curing the Democratic Malaise?, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 163–83.
   Google Scholar
• Gherghina, S. (2017) ‘Direct democracy and subjective regime legitimacy in Europe’, Democratization 24: 613–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M. (2022) ‘Looking at the ‘field’ through a zoom lens: methodological reflections on conducting online research during a global pandemic’, Qualitative Research 22: 387–402.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenner, B. M. and Myers, K. C. (2019) ‘Intimacy, rapport, and exceptional disclosure: a comparison of in-person and mediated interview contexts’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology 22: 165–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keudel, O. (2022) How Patronal Networks Shape Opportunities for Local Citizen Participation in a Hybrid Regime: A Comparative Analysis of Five Cities in Ukraine, Stuttgart: Ibidem Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Khutkyy, D. and Avramchenko, K. (2019) Impact Evaluation of Participatory Budgeting in Ukraine, Kyiv.
   Google Scholar
• Kozinets, R. V., Dolbec, P.-Y. and Earley, A. (2014) ‘Netnographic analysis: understanding culture through social media data’, in U. Flick (ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis, London: SAGE Publications, pp. 262–76.
   Google Scholar
• Montambeault, F. (2016) The Politics of Local Participatory Democracy in Latin America: Institutions, Actors, and Interactions, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nez, H. (2016) ‘Does participation mean reciprocal learning? The relationships between diverse stakeholders during participatory budgeting in Paris’, Journal of Civil Society 12: 266–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oleinik, A. (2018) ‘Volunteers in Ukraine: from provision of services to state- and nation-building’, Journal of Civil Society 14: 364–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pateman, C. (1970) Participation and Democratic Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, 2nd edn, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Pauci and GIZ (eds.) (2019) Participatory Budgeting: Practical Experiences from Cities and Amalgamated Communities in Eastern Ukraine, Kyiv.
   Google Scholar
• Pisano, J. (2022) ‘How Zelensky has changed Ukraine’, Journal of Democracy 33: 5–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ploskyi, K. (2016) Analitychnyi zvit: Partytsypatornyi Biudzhet, Kyiv: PAUCI.
   Google Scholar
• Postill, J. (2017) ‘Remote ethnography: studying culture from afar’, in L. Hjorth, H. A. Horst, A. Galloway and G. Bell (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Digital Ethnography, London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 61–9.
   Google Scholar
• Puglisi, R. (2015) A People’s Army: Civil Society as a Security Actor in Post-Maidan Ukraine, IAI Working Papers 15.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, S. and Fisun, O. (2014) Local Governance and decentralisation assesment: Implications of Proposed reforms in Ukraine, Technical Report.
   Google Scholar
• Romanova, V. (2022) Ukraine’s Resilience to Russa’s Military Invasion in the Context of the Decentralisation Reform, Warsaw: Stefan Batory Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Shapovalova, N. and Burlyuk, O., eds. (2018). Civil Society in Post-Euromaidan Ukraine: From Revolution to Consolidation, Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Stepaniuk, N. (2021) ‘Limited statehood, collective action, and reconfiguration of citizenship in wartime’, in D. R. Marples (ed.), The War in Ukraine’s Donbas: Origins, Contexts, and the Future, Budapest: Central European University Press, pp. 83–108.
   Google Scholar
• Stepaniuk, N. (2022) ‘Wartime civilian mobilization: demographic profile, motivations, and pathways to volunteer engagement amidst the donbas war in Ukraine’, Nationalities Papers, pp. 1–18. [online first].
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sydorchuk, O. and Chabanna, M. (2017) ‘Decentralization of power in Ukraine: achievements and challenges’, in O. V. Haran and M. Yakovlyev (eds.), Constructing a Political Nation: Changes in the Attitudes of Ukrainians During the War in the Donbas, Kyiv: Stylos Publishing, pp. 133–58.
   Google Scholar
• Tilly, C. (2007) Democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Volodin, D. (2019) ‘Deliberative democracy and trust in political institutions at the local level: evidence from participatory budgeting experiment in Ukraine’, Contemporary Politics 25: 78–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren, M. E. (2014) ‘Governance-driven democratization’, in A. J. Norval, H. Wagenaar and S. Griggs (eds.), Practices of Freedom: Decentred Governance, Conflict and Democratic Participation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 38–59.
   Google Scholar
• Werner, H. and Marien, S. (2020) ‘Process vs. outcome? How to evaluate the effects of participatory processes on legitimacy perceptions’, British Journal of Political Science 52:429–436.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitmore, S. (2019a) ‘Performing protest and representation?: exploring citizens’ perceptions of parliament in Ukraine’, East European Politics 24: 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Whitmore, S. (2019b) Supreme Betrayal: What Ukrainians Think About Their Parliament, https://voxukraine.org/en/supreme-betrayer-what-ukrainians-think-about-their-parliament/.
   Google Scholar
• Worschech, S. (2017) ‘New civic activism in Ukraine: building society from scratch?’, Kyiv-Mohyla Law and Politics Journal 3: 23–45.
   Google Scholar
• Zakhour, S. (2020) ‘The democratic legitimacy of public participation in planning: contrasting optimistic, critical, and agnostic understandings’, Planning Theory 19: 349–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zarembo, K. (2017) ‘Substituting for the state: the role of volunteers in defense reform in post-Euromaidan Ukraine’, Kyiv-Mohyla Law and Politics Journal 3: 47–70.
   Google Scholar
• Zelinska, O. (2018) ‘Local Maidan across Ukraine: democratic aspirations in the revolution of dignity’, in T. Geelan, M. González Hernando and P. W. Walsh (eds.), From Financial Crisis to Social Change: Towards Alternative Horizons, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 89–113.
   Google Scholar