Description
This study explores how the interplay of habitus and capital shapes the resource distribution within the Participatory Budgeting (PB) process in a Sri Lankan local government, focusing on Bourdieu's relational approach. Through an analysis of the functions of political and administrative leaders, the study illustrates the manner in which various forms of capital and habitus are deliberately exploited during the phases of proposal identification, selection, and implementation. This qualitative case study employs semi-structured interviews, informal discussions, and document analysis. The data was gathered over six months, spanning from late 2023 to early 2024. While PB aims to promote citizen engagement and equitable resource allocation, the study's findings demonstrate that political elites frequently use the PB process to sustain their power and domination in distributing resources. Furthermore, they prioritise symbolic, social, and economic capital, wherein citizen engagement transforms into a symbolic movement. This PB approach engenders clientelism and patronage in resource allocation, so subverting the PB democratic values. In contrast, administrative leadership is generally characterised by a professional habitus that presumes transparency, accountability, and adherence to compliance with regulations over participatory decision-making procedures. Thus, the PB approach limits citizen engagement. Consequently, under administrative oversight, PB is likely to exhibit a conservative and centralised decision-making approach. This study, therefore, urges policymakers to adopt a hybrid approach that integrates the resource mobilisation capabilities of political actors with the administrators' focus on transparency and accountability, which could considerably improve PB practices.
