تحلیل استراتژیک طرح بودجه‏‌ریزی مشارکتی «من شهردارم» با استفاده از تکنیک SWOT- QSPM

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت تکنولوژی، دانشکدۀ مدیریت، اقتصاد و مهندسی پیشرفت، دانشگاه علم و صنعت، تهران، ایران‌

2 استادیار گروه اقتصاد، دانشکدۀ مدیریت، اقتصاد و مهندسی پیشرفت، دانشگاه علم و صنعت، تهران، ایران

چکیده

مقدمه
حکمرانی مشارکتی رویکرد مهمی است که در چند سال گذشته مورد توجه دولتمردان قرار گرفته و از آن برای همراه‌سازی مردم با سیاست‌ها و به‌کارگیری ظرفیت آن‌ها در اجرا و نظارت استفاده می‌شود. مدیریت شهری نیز از این رویکرد در زمینۀ بودجه‌ریزی، اجرا و نظارت بر پروژه‌های شهرداری استفاده می‌کند. یکی از طرح‌های مهمی که در این راستا در شهرداری تهران در سال 1401 انجام شد، طرح «من شهردارم» است که هدف آن نظرسنجی از شهروندان برای بودجه‌ریزی و اولویت‌بندی پروژه‌های جدید شهرداری است. 
مواد و روش‌ها
این مقاله قصد دارد با تکنیک تجزیه‌وتحلیل SWOT به بررسی و ارزیابی قوت‌ها، ضعف‌ها، فرصت‌ها و تهدیدهای این طرح بپردازد و سپس با استفاده از تکنیک QSPM راهبردهای استخراج‌شده را اولویت‌بندی کند. این پژوهش به روش کیفی (توصیفی – تحلیلی) انجام شده است. جمع‌آوری اطلاعات در قالب مصاحبه‌های عمیق و نیمه‌ساختاریافته صورت گرفته و در این خصوص از 24 نفر از خبرگان حوزۀ مدیریت شهری و حکمرانی مشارکتی نظرسنجی شده است.
یافته‌ها
نتایج این تحلیل نشان می‌دهد (دسترس‌پذیری مناسب، اطلاع‌رسانی مناسب، در نظر گرفتن نظام تشویقی و بررسی سریع پیشنهادها) ‌قوت‌های طرح، (زمان کم اجرای طرح، امکان ثبت نمایشی نظرات، تجمیع ترجیحات متنوع و طرح سؤال‌های غیرحرفه‌ای) ضعف‌های طرح، (افزایش سرمایۀ اجتماعی، تقویت عدالت اجتماعی، کاهش معضلات اجتماعی و بهره‌وری بیشتر) فرصت‌های طرح و (محدودیت منابع، تحمیل نظرات به همۀ مردم، ایجاد توقع در شهروندان و عدم آگاهی کافی شهروندان) از جمله تهدیدهای این طرح هستند. بر اساس تحلیل صورت‌گرفته، 8 راهبرد مهم در قالب ماتریس SWOT ارائه شده است. 
نتیجه‌گیری
نتایج به‌دست‌آمده از تحلیل QSPM نشان می‌دهد از بین راهبردهای تدوین‌شده، «راهبرد اطلاع‌رسانی نتایج اجرای طرح به مردم» و «راهبرد استفاده از ابزارها و روش‌های گوناگون برای مشارکت» از بیشترین اهمیت برخوردار‌ند. انتخاب «راهبرد اطلاع‌رسانی نتایج اجرای طرح به مردم» به عنوان مهم‌ترین راهبرد نشان‌دهندۀ این است که شهروندان دوست دارند از نتایج مشارکت خود، آگاهی پیدا کنند و به نوعی آثار مشارکت را در زندگی خود ببینند. با توجه به نتایج به‌دست آمده، در پایان مقاله پیشنهادهای کاربردی برای استفادۀ بیشتر از قوت‌ها و فرصت‌ها و همچنین، کاهش ضعف‌ها و تهدیدها ارائه شده و راهکارهایی برای اجرای بهتر طرح‌های بودجه‌ریزی مشارکتی توصیه شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Strategic Analysis of the Participatory Budgeting Plan “I am the mayor” Using SWOT-QSPM Technique

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyed Mohsen Mirbagheri 1
  • Ata Ollah Rafii Atani 2
1 Ph.D. Candidate of Technology Management, School of Management, Economics and Engineering, University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, School of Management, Economics and Advancement Engineering, University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction 
Participatory governance is an important approach that has attracted the attention of statesmen in the past few years, and it is used to bring people together with policies and use their capacity in implementation and monitoring. Urban management also uses this approach in the field of budgeting, implementing, and monitoring municipal projects. In this regard, one of the important plans that were carried out in Tehran municipality in 1401 is the “I am the mayor” plan, which aims to survey citizens for budgeting and prioritization of new municipal projects. 
Materials and Methods
This article aims to investigate and evaluate this plan’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats with the SWOT analysis method and then prioritize the extracted strategies using QSPM technique. This research was conducted using a qualitative (descriptive-analytical) method. Information was collected in the form of in-depth and semi-structured interviews. In this regard, 24 experts in the field of urban management and participatory governance were surveyed.
Findings
The results of this analysis show that proper accessibility, proper notification, considering the incentive system, and a quick review of proposals are the strengths of the plan; short plan implementation time, the possibility of registering fake comments, aggregating various preferences, and asking unprofessional questions are weak points of the plan; increasing social capital, strengthening social justice, reducing social problems, and greater productivity are plan opportunities; and limitation of resources, imposing opinions on all people, creating expectations in citizens, and lack of sufficient awareness of citizens are the threats of this plan. Based on the analysis, 8 important strategies have been presented in the form of a SWOT matrix. 
Conclusion
The results obtained from the QSPM analysis also show that among the developed strategies, the “Strategy of informing people about the results of plan implementation” and “the strategy of using various tools and methods for participation” are the most important. The selection of “Strategy of informing people about the results of plan implementation” as the most important strategy shows that people like to be aware of the results of their participation and to see the effects of participation in their lives. In the end, practical suggestions are provided for making more use of strengths and opportunities, as well as reducing weaknesses and threats. Finally, solutions for better implementation of participatory budgeting plans are recommended.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Citizen Participation
  • “I Am the Mayor” Plan
  • Participatory Governance
  • SWOT Analysis
  • Urban Management
[1] Mohammadi J, Bagheri K, Heydari S. Measuring and investigating the level of citizens’ participation in urban affairs and factors affecting it (case study: Sanandaj city). Social analysis of social order and inequality. 2014;7(2):179–209. [In Persian]
[2] Shiani M, Razavi B, Delpasand AK. Investigating the social factors affecting citizens’ participation in the management of urban affairs in Tehran. Quarterly Journal of Urban Sociological Studies. 2011;2(4):215. [In Persian]
[3] Razavi Al-Hashem B, Musaei M. (SWOT) analysis of citizen participation in the design of urban management planning patterns (case study of Tehran city). Social Science  Quarterly. 2018;(47):161-95. https://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/browse.php?a_id=715&slc_lang=en&sid=1&printcase=1&hbnr=1&hmb=1 [In Persian]
[4] Ardanaz M, Otálvaro-Ramirez S, Scartascini C. Does information about citizen participation initiatives increase political trust? World Dev. 2023;162:106132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.106132
[5] Bilge S. A New Approach in Public Budgeting: Citizens’ Budget. J Int Educ Leadersh. 2015;5(1):n1. 
[6] Gordon V, Osgood Jr JL, Boden D. The role of citizen participation and the use of social media platforms in the participatory budgeting process. Int J Public Adm. 2017;40(1):65–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2015.1072215
[7] Hosseinpour B, Fathi S. Investigating the performance of neighborhood councils in attracting the participation of citizens of Tehran. Environment preparation. 2018;12(44 #g00660):157–78. dor: 20.1001.1.2676783.1398.12.44.8.2 [In Persian]
[8] Ghazinoory S, Esmail Zadeh A, Memariani A. Fuzzy SWOT analysis. J Intell & Fuzzy Syst. 2007;18(1):99–108. [In Persian]
[9] Phadermrod B, Crowder RM, Wills GB. Importance-performance analysis based SWOT analysis. Int J Inf Manage. 2019;44:194–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.03.009 
[10] Musaei M, Shiani M. Participation in urban affairs and its requirements in Tehran. Social Welfare. 2011;10(38):245-68. http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-364-fa.html [In Persian]
[11] Jacquet V. Explaining non-participation in deliberative mini-publics. Eur J Polit Res. 2017;56(3):640–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12195 
[12] Altschuler D, Corrales J. The promise of participation: Experiments in participatory governance in Honduras and Guatemala. Springer; 2013. 
[13] Ganji M, Niazi M, Ehsani Rad F. Participation in charity and endowment is a precursor to sustainable development. Socio-cultural development studies. 2014;3(4):25-45. http://journals.sabz.ac.ir/scds/article-1-212-fa.html [In Persian]
[14] Mohammadi N, Danaeefard H. A Model of Collaborative Governance for Renewable Energy Development in Iran: an Institutional Perspective. Q J Energy Policy Plan Res. 2019;5(3). [In Persian]
[15] Camba AA. Participatory Governance in the EU Enhancing or Endangering Democracy and Efficiency? GOVERNANCE-AN Int J POLICY Adm INSTITUTIONS. 2014 Jul;27(3):536–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12097
[16] Halim R. COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE MODEL IN THE VILLAGE FUND MANAGEMENT AT BANGGAI REGENCY (MODEL GOVERNANS KERJASAMA DALAM PENGURUSAN DANA KAMPUNG DI KABUPATEN BANGGAI). ASIAN J Environ Hist Herit. 2018;2(2):257–68. 
[17] Emerson K, Nabatchi T. Evaluating the productivity of collaborative governance regimes: A performance matrix. Public Perform & Manag Rev. 2015; 38(4):717–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2015.1031016 
[18] Batory A, Svensson S. The use and abuse of participatory governance by populist governments. POLICY Polit. 2019 Apr;47(2):227–44. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557319X15487805848586
[19] Waheduzzaman W, Van Gramberg B, Ferrer J. Bureaucratic Readiness in Managing Local Level Participatory Governance: A Developing Country Context. Aust J PUBLIC Adm. 2018 Jun; 77(2, SI):309–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12256
[20] Mirbagheri S.M., Rafiei Atani A., Parsanjad M. Designing a conceptual model of participatory governance in Iran: the Foundation’s data approach. Strategic scientific quarterly. 2022; 32. https://doi.org/10.22034/rahbord.2022.157936 [In Persian]
[21] Quick KS, Bryson JM. Public participation. In: Handbook on theories of governance. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2022. p. 158–68. 
[22] Coenen F, Coenen F. Public participation and better environmental decisions. promise limits Particip Process Qual Environ Relat Decis. 2009; 209. 
[23] Burton P. Conceptual, theoretical and practical issues in measuring the benefits of public participation. Evaluation. 2009;15(3):263–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389009105881 
[24] Kandil S. Public participation guide: Introduction to public participation. 2020. 
[25] Ianniello M, Iacuzzi S, Fedele P, Brusati L. Obstacles and solutions on the ladder of citizen participation: a systematic review. Public Manag Rev. 2019; 21(1): 21–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1438499 
[26] Grisez Kweit M, Kweit RW. Participation, perception of participation, and citizen support. Am Polit Res. 2007;35(3):407–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X06296206 
[27] Sarzynski A. Public participation, civic capacity, and climate change adaptation in cities. Urban Clim. 2015;14:52–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2015.08.002 
[28] Hafer JA, Ran B. Developing a citizen perspective of public participation: identity construction as citizen motivation to participate. Adm Theory & Prax. 2016; 38(3): 206–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2016.1202080
[31] Voukkali I, Zorpas AA. Evaluation of urban metabolism assessment methods through SWOT analysis and analytical hierocracy process. Sci Total Environ. 2022; 807:150700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150700
[32] Amiri N, Habibzade A. Analysis of the Virtual Social Networks (Based on SWOT). Social and Cultural Strategy Quarterly. 2016;5(17):7. [In Persian]
[34] Hatami K. The role of SWOT analysis in urban management excellence (case study of Tehran’s 22nd district). Urban management studies. 2011;2(4):145-64. [In Persian]
[35] Karim Pourrihan M, Sharif Jahed SH. Organization of the worn-out fabric of the 12th district of Tehran using SWOT technique. New attitudes in human geography (human geography). 2016;9(3 #H009):215-26. 
[36] Kharghani K, Habib Pourgtabi K, Berandgi B. The role of the participation of Tehrani citizens in the implementation of the project “Tehran is a smoke-free city. Health education and health promotion in Iran. 2019; 8(1 #f001242):82–92. [In Persian]
[37] Shir Ali, A. The concept of popularization of governance. Supreme governance. 2022;8(2):11–30. [In Persian]
[38] Rauf F, Motamedi M, Pourahmad A. The role of citizens’ participation in improving the social health of Shirvan citizens (comparative study: Palestinian neighborhoods, three one waters, country lands, twenty meters). Quarterly Journal of Geography and Environmental Studies. 2023;11(44):192–205. [In Persian]
[39] Hirsch S, Shulman LC. PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE - MODEL FOR SHARED DECISION-MAKING. Soc Work Health Care. 1976; 1(4):433–46. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J010v01n04_04
[40] Horsley JP. Public participation in the people’s republic: developing a more participatory governance model in China. Retrieved July. 2009;30:1–19. 
[41] Forde C. Participatory governance in Ireland: Institutional innovation and the quest for joined-up thinking. ADMINISTRATION. 2020 Aug;68(3):1–20. https://doi.org/10.2478/admin-2020-0013
[42] Bussu S, Bua A, Dean R, Smith G. Embedding participatory governance. Crit Policy Stud. 2022;1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2022.2053179 
[43] Menendez-Blanco, M., & Bjørn, P. (2022). Designing Digital Participatory Budgeting Platforms: Urban Biking Activism in Madrid. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 1-35.
[44] Coleman AF, Eisenman TS, Locke DH, Harper RW. Exploring links between resident satisfaction and participation in an urban tree planting initiative. Cities. 2023;134:104195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2023.104195 
[45] Manes-Rossi, F., Brusca, I., Orelli, R. L., Lorson, P. C., & Haustein, E. (2023). Features and drivers of citizen participation: Insights from participatory budgeting in three European cities. Public Management Review, 25(2), 201-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1963821
[46] Vincent K, Thompson S. Estimating the size and distribution of networked populations with snowball sampling. J Surv Stat Methodol. 2022; 10(2):397–418. https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smaa042 
[47] Nitzan S, Paroush J. Collective decision making: an economic outlook. CUP Archive; 1985. 
[48] Castillo L, Dorao CA. Consensual decision-making model based on game theory for LNG processes. ENERGY Convers Manag. 2012 Dec;64:387–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2012.06.014
[49] Jansen RJG, Curcseu PL, Vermeulen PAM, Geurts JLA, Gibcus P. Social capital as a decision aid in strategic decision-making in service organizations. Manag Decis. 2011. 
[50] Novella-Garcia C, Cloquell-Lozano A. The ethics of maxima and minima combined with social justice as a form of public corruption prevention. Crime, Law Soc Chang. 2021;75(3):281–95. 
[51] Barnard RT, Turnbull DJ. Discrimination and Social Justice: Questions of Diversity, Plurality, Representativeness, Measurability, and Doublespeak. Int J Interdiscip Civ Polit Stud. 2019;14(2):21–34. 
[52] Schmitter PC, Grote J, Gbikpi B. Participatory Governance. Political and societal implications. Leske & Budrich, Opladen; 2002. 
[53] McHugh KA, Yammarino FJ, Dionne SD, Serban A, Sayama H, Chatterjee S. Collective decision making, leadership, and collective intelligence: Tests with agent-based simulations and a Field study. Leadersh Q. 2016 Apr;27(2, SI):218–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.01.001
[54] Zarabi, A., & Mahboubfar, M. (2014). Application of SWOT- QSPM Model in Codifying Tourism Development Strategy of the City of Kashan, Iran. Spatial Planning, 3(4), 37-58. dor: 20.1001.1.22287485.1392.3.4.5.8 [In Persian]