Zagreb distributes money to neighborhoods: why are citizens not participating?

The City of Zagreb has launched the program ‘Submit a proposal for a better neighborhood’, a pilot project of participatory budgeting that allows citizens to propose and choose projects they want/need in their neighborhood. A portion of public funds is thus directly made available to citizens – they propose projects, city services evaluate them, citizens then vote, and the City of Zagreb is obliged to implement those that receive the most votes.

The project is currently being implemented in nine city districts (Črnomerec, Donji grad, Gornji grad – Medveščak, Maksimir, Peščenica – Žitnjak, Podsused – Vrapče, Trešnjevka – jug, Trešnjevka – sjever, and Trnje). The participatory budgeting process began back in 2024 as a pilot project in four city districts (Peščenica – Žitnjak, Podsused – Vrapče, Trešnjevka – jug, and Trnje) with a budget of around 363 thousand euros, and in 2025 it was expanded to nine city districts, with the budget increasing to 775 thousand euros.

Funding for 13 projects is planned, while more than 370 proposals received and nearly 2,800 participants indicate a growth in participation and the development of a decentralized model of investment in smaller communal projects. However, the Economic Institute of Zagreb raises a key question: how do citizens perceive this process, do they believe that their voice in proposing and choosing projects carries real weight, and would they participate in the participatory budgeting process if the initiative were expanded to all city districts?

To these and other questions, a group of authors from the Institute (Ivan-Damir Anić, Dubravka Jurlina Alibegović, and Ivana Rašić) sought answers in a survey research that focused on two main questions: to what extent do citizens perceive participatory budgeting as a real tool for influencing decisions, rather than just a formal mechanism for participation, and does participation in participatory budgeting affect the level of citizens’ trust in local government in the City of Zagreb?

Although a minority knows, the perception is solid

Statements were rated on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The survey results show that a large portion of citizens is not familiar with the initiative nor have they actively participated in it. Of the total 501 respondents, only 165 citizens (32.9 percent) reported that they have heard of the participatory budgeting initiative, while the majority, 336 (67.1 percent), have never heard of it. Among those who are familiar with the initiative, only 37 respondents participated in it, while 128 had no direct experience of participation.

Despite this, the perception of the possibility of participation and influence of citizens on participatory budgeting is rated relatively well, close to 4. The perception of the quality of the decision-making process is rated slightly lower – respondents rate the appropriateness of the process, i.e., the clarity and meaningfulness of the rules and procedures (3.46) as the highest; followed by the perception of transparency, where respondents believe that the information is accessible and understandable (3.38); satisfaction with the process itself is rated slightly lower (3.28) while the perception of fairness, i.e., the fact that decisions are made correctly and without favoritism during the process, is rated the lowest (3.23), indicating certain doubts about the impartiality of decision-making.

The perception of achieving the goals of participatory budgeting was assessed using six statements, and the results indicate a high level of perception of goal achievement, with respondents believing that projects funded through this model significantly contribute to achieving key goals at the local level. They rate the contribution to solving specific problems in the neighborhood (4.11) as the highest, as well as the improvement of quality of life and development of local infrastructure (both 4.09), indicating a strong perception of achieving immediate and visible goals.

Somewhat lower, but still high, they assess the contribution to increasing the attractiveness and value of the neighborhood (3.98) and more rational use of public funds (3.95), while the contribution to the development of local services and activities is rated the lowest (3.89). Despite these differences, all values are in a high range, indicating that citizens perceive participatory budgeting as an effective mechanism for achieving local development goals, conclude the authors.

Positive, but reserved attitudes

The authors were also interested in how much citizens trust local government and how their attitudes towards participatory budgeting affect trust in local government. The results show a moderate level of trust, with all assessments close to the neutral value (around three). The highest-rated statements are that local government acts in the interest of citizens (3.14) and that it seeks to help citizens when they need assistance (3.11).

On the other hand, the lowest-rated statements concern effectiveness in work (2.92) and keeping promises (2.94), indicating a certain level of distrust in the operational efficiency and consistency of local government. Overall, respondents express slightly positive but reserved attitudes, while relatively high values of standard deviation indicate differing opinions among respondents.

To examine the extent to which different aspects of participatory budgeting affect citizens’ trust in local government, the authors conducted a regression analysis based on previously constructed indices (ratings). The index of the level of trust in city government was used as the dependent variable, while the indices of perception of the possibility of participation and influence of citizens, perception of the quality of the decision-making process, acceptance of decisions on project funding, and achievement of participatory budgeting goals were included as independent variables.

The results show that only the index of perception of the quality of the decision-making process is statistically significantly and positively related to trust in local government. Other variables did not prove to be statistically significant. Therefore, the authors conclude that increasing citizens’ positive perception of the quality of the decision-making process also leads to an increase in trust in city government (controlling for all other variables in the model). In other words, the perception of decision-making quality acts as a key mechanism shaping citizens’ trust.

Faith and reserve

The empirical results of the survey research show a significant gap between positive attitudes towards participatory budgeting and actual participation of the population in this initiative. Namely, the survey shows that only 32.9 percent of citizens are familiar with this initiative, while only about 7.4 percent of respondents have participated in it, indicating a problem of insufficient awareness.

Despite this, if we analyze a scenario in which participatory budgeting is accessible to a broader group of citizens and they actively participate in it, citizens have relatively high and positive levels of perception. They perceive a relatively high possibility of participation and influence on decisions (3.91). At the same time, citizens rate the acceptance of decisions made highly (3.77) and especially the achievement of goals (4.01), emphasizing that this initiative contributes to solving specific problems, developing infrastructure, and improving quality of life.

Despite the positive perception of effects and relatively high acceptance of decisions, the level of trust in local government remains moderate (3.04). Citizens are more inclined to believe that local government acts in their interest, but at the same time express reservations regarding its effectiveness and consistency in fulfilling promises. This result indicates that positive outcomes of individual policies are not sufficient to build overall trust in institutions, which is conditioned by a broader social and political context.

A key challenge for the further development of participatory budgeting in the City of Zagreb is to increase citizens’ awareness and participation, as well as to strengthen the perception of fairness and transparency in the decision-making process, as it is precisely at this level that trust in local government is built.

Key measures

Improvement is possible through several key measures. By increasing funds in the city budget, citizens would be enabled to decide on larger and more visible projects. It is necessary to systematically strengthen citizens’ awareness through continuous communication campaigns and activities at the local level.

Particular attention should be paid to including young people, the elderly, and vulnerable groups to make participation as inclusive as possible. It is important to simplify the participation process itself and reduce administrative barriers, for example, by enabling simpler ways of registration and voting, as existing requirements, such as verification through the e-Citizens system, can discourage some citizens and negatively affect perception levels.

Fourth, citizens expect faster and more transparent implementation of projects, with clearly defined deadlines and publicly available information on the progress of their realization. Finally, it is necessary to ensure a balanced distribution of projects by introducing criteria that prevent the dominance of certain interests or parts of the city – conclude the authors.