Top 93%
dans ce catalogue (1043 pratiques notées)
Les scores se concentrent dans le haut de l’échelle ; la position au sein du catalogue est donc souvent plus parlante que le chiffre seul.
Evidence of impact / measured results1/3
Participation figures (≈15,000 voters, 2025) are documented, but delivery is thin — only 0.4% of 2,595 proposals fully implemented per an academic review — and no outcome evaluation exists.
Transferability / demonstrated replication2/3
Online proposal-and-vote participatory budgets are widely replicated, and Budapest's five-category structure is simple to copy, though the delivery weaknesses would travel too.
Scalability2/3
The scheme already runs city-wide at HUF 1bn a year with paper and online voting, but the implementation pipeline has not kept pace with proposal volume.
Sustainability / continuity1/3
Five annual cycles (2020–2025) show continuity, but the reported implementation deficit is flagged by researchers as a threat to long-term legitimacy.
Innovation1/3
A conventional participatory-budget design with an online platform; its novelty lies in city-wide scale rather than in method.
Inclusiveness / equity1/3
Paper voting (745 participants in 2025) widens access, but no equity data was verified and the review raises spatial-justice concerns.
Multi-stakeholder collaboration1/3
Resident ideas are screened by municipal professionals and voted on by the public, giving a two-party city–resident process without documented wider partnerships.
Evidoria. Budget participatif de Budapest (Közösségi Költségvetés) — Un vote annuel de 1 milliard de HUF, une exécution fragile. ID persistant: d54f2d3a-ac1a-433d-b05f-b704ca36efbb.