Fiscal transparency and public participation are important elements of the democratic decision-making process. However, empirical evidence on their impact on local fiscal outcome is lacking. This study addresses two research questions: (1) How do municipal governments use social media to promote fiscal transparency and public participation? (2) Do fiscal transparency and public participation on social media affect municipal fiscal health? Using a sample of 174 California cities from 2016 to 2022, this study analyzes data from the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) and fiscal data of cities. Mixed research methods are used. The study finds that governments post budget-related information on social media and encourage different levels of public participation throughout the various stages of a budget cycle. The regression results also show that budget tweets have a positive impact on long-term obligations while the number of public responses to these tweets is negatively associated with long-term obligations. The study contributes to the literature and has practical implications for enhancing fiscal transparency and public participation in budgeting through social media.
AlesinaA.PerottiR. (1996). Fiscal discipline and the budget process. American Economic Review, 86(2), 401–407.
2.
Anessi-PessinaE.BarberaC.LangellaC.Manes-RossiF.SancinoA.SiciliaM.SteccoliniI. (2020). Reconsidering public budgeting after the COVID-19 outbreak: Key lessons and future challenges. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 32(5), 957–965. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-07-2020-0115
3.
BartocciL.GrossiG.MauroS. G.EbdonC. (2023). The journey of participatory budgeting: A systematic literature review and future research directions. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 89(3), 757–774. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523221078938
4.
BastidaF.BenitoB. (2007). Central government budget practices and transparency: An international comparison. Public Administration, 85(3), 667–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00664.x
5.
BauhrM.CarlitzR. (2021). When does transparency improve public services? Street-level discretion, information, and targeting. Public Administration, 99(3), 500–516. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12693
6.
BenitoB.BastidaF. (2009). Budget transparency, fiscal performance, and political turnout: An international approach. Public Administration Review, 69(3), 403–417. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.01988.x
7.
BerneR. (1992). The relationships between financial reporting and the measurement of financial condition (p. vii). Government Accounting Standards Board.
8.
BjörkmanM.SvenssonJ. (2009). Power to the people: Evidence from a randomized field experiment on community-based monitoring in Uganda. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(2), 735–769. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2009.124.2.735
9.
BoulianneS. (2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information Communication & Society, 18(5), 524–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542
10.
ChenC.NeshkovaM. I. (2020). The impact of fiscal transparency on government corruption: A panel cross-country analysis. Public Administration, 98(1), 226–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12620
11.
CriadoJ. I.Rojas-MartínF.Gil-GarciaJ. R. (2017). Enacting social media success in local public administrations. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 30(1), 31–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpsm-03-2016-0053
12.
De SimoneE.BonasiaM.GaetaG. L.CicatielloL. (2019). The effect of fiscal transparency on government spending efficiency. Journal of Economic Studies, 46(7), 1365–1379. https://doi.org/10.1108/JES-03-2019-0123
EbertsR. W.FoxW. F. (1992). The effects of fiscal policies on local infrastructure investment. Public Finance Review, 20(4), 557–571.
15.
FarinosiM.FortunatiL.O’SullivanJ.PapaniL. (2020). Capturing citizens’ opinions through a combination of survey and online social data. Journal ofInternational Communication, 14, 3655–3680.
16.
FeeneyM. K.PorumbescuG. (2021). The limits of social media for public administration research and practice. Public Administration Review, 81(4), 787–792. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13276
17.
FoxJ. A. (2015). Social accountability: What does the evidence really say?World Development, 72, 346–361.
18.
GiacominiD.SimonettoA. (2020). How mayors perceive the influence of social media on the policy cycle. Public Organization Review, 20(4), 735–752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-020-00466-5
19.
GlennersterR.ShinY. (2008). Does transparency pay?IMF Staff Papers, 55(1), 183–209.
20.
GordonE.ManosevitchE. (2011). Augmented deliberation: Merging physical and virtual interaction to engage communities in urban planning. New Media & Society, 13(1), 75–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365315
21.
GrovesS. M.GodseyW. M.ShulmanM. A. (1981). Financial indicators for local government. Public Budgeting & Finance, 1(2), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5850.00511
HelpapD. J. (2016). The importance and complexity of assessing urban fiscal health. State and Local Government Review, 48(3), 208–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X16659908
24.
HongS. (2015). Citizen participation in budgeting: A trade-off between knowledge and inclusiveness?Public Administration Review, 75(4), 572–582. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12377
25.
JimenezB. S. (2014). Raises taxes, cut services, or lay off staff: Citizen in fiscal retrenchment process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(4), 923–953. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mut018
26.
JoS.NabatchiT. (2021). Different processes, different outcomes? Assessing the individual-level impacts of public participation. Public Administration Review, 81(1), 137–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13272
27.
KaufmannD.BellverA. (2005). Transparenting transparency: Initial empirics and policy applications. World Bank.
28.
KhanM. L.IttefaqM.Martínez PantojaY. I.RaziqM. M.MalikA. (2021). Public engagement model to analyze digital diplomacy on Twitter: A social media analytics framework. Journal ofInternational Communication, 15, 1741–1769.
MontesG. C.BastosJ. C. A.de OliveiraA. J. (2019). Fiscal transparency, government effectiveness and government spending efficiency: Some international evidence based on panel data approach. Economic Modelling, 79, 211–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.10.013
34.
NabatchiT.LeighningerM. (2015). Public participation for 21st century democracy. John Wiley & Sons.
35.
PasekJ.MoreE.RomerD. (2009). Realizing the social internet? Online social networking meets offline civic engagement. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6(3–4), 197–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331680902996403
36.
PinningtonE.LernerJ.SchugurenskyD. (2009). Participatory budgeting in North America: The case of Guelph, Canada. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management, 21(3), 454–484.
37.
PiotrowskiS. J.Van RyzinG. G. (2007). Citizen attitudes toward transparency in local government. American Review of Public Administration, 37(3), 306–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074006296777
38.
RíosA.BenitoB.BastidaF. (2017). Factors explaining public participation in the central government budget process. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 76(1), 48–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12197
39.
RobbinsM. D.SimonsenB.FeldmanB. (2008). Citizen and resource allocation: Improving decision making with interactive web-based citizen participation. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 564–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00891.x
40.
SunR.WangJ. Q. (2023). Federal assistance and local actions: Have California municipalities maintained their fiscal health during the COVID-19 pandemic?Municipal Finance Journal, 44(2), 31–54.
41.
SuzukiK.HanY. (2019). Does citizen participation affect municipal performance? Electoral competition and fiscal performance in Japan. Public Money & Management, 39(4), 300–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2018.1558554
42.
Van RyzinG. G. (2015). Service quality, administrative process, and citizens’ evaluation of local government in the US. Public Management Review, 17(3), 425–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841456
WamplerB. (2012). Participatory budgeting: Core principles and key impacts. Journal of Public Deliberation, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.138
45.
WangX. (2015). Assessing public participation in U.S. cities. In RobertsN. C. (Ed.), The age of direct citizen participation (pp. 401–415). Routledge.
46.
WangX.HolbrookA. L.FeeneyM. (2022). The role of department type in public managers’ attitudes toward social media use. American Review of Public Administration, 52(6), 457–471. https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740221106158
47.
WukichC. (2022). Social media engagement forms in government: A structure-content framework. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2), 101684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101684
48.
YusufW.JordanM. M.SaitgalinaM.JonesP. A. (2023). Accessibility of state financial information: Analysis of state MD&A size, readability, and timeliness. Korean Public Administration Quarterly, 47(4), 429–455. https://doi.org/10.37808/paq.47.4.2
49.
ZwickR. R.MoreT. A.NunezT. (2008). Public attitudes about financing municipal recreation [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 2007 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium, Newtown Square, PA, USA.
