The Use of Level Based Weight Assessment (LBWA) for Evaluating Public Participation on the Example of Rural Municipalities in the Region of Warmia and Mazury

Abstract

Social participation is presently a legal requirement or a prerequisite for public policy decision-making both on the global and local scale. Therefore, both international (Agenda 21, Agenda 2030) and domestic documents (in Poland: Social Capital Development Strategy and Strategy for Responsible Development) emphasize the role of social participation for development. The co-participation of local residents and local authorities is thus an important factor that contributes to the success and well-being of local communities, improves local governments’ relations with the residents, and promotes a sense of belonging to a community and responsibility for the “common good”. The main aim of the present study was to evaluate public participation in rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury and to analyze the influence of various indicators on the level of public participation. The four categories of public participation were selected based on a review of the literature and an analysis of data availability: public action, public involvement, electoral participation, and obligatory participation. These categories were described with the use of fourteen indicators. Data for the study were obtained from publicly available statistical databases and a survey of local government representatives. Public participation was evaluated with the use of the Level Based Weight Assessment (LBWA) method, which revealed that public participation in rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury is moderate and is influenced mostly by social consultations, legislative initiatives, and local government elections.

1. Introduction

The term “participation” originates from the Latin word participare, and it means to enable active involvement, to share something with someone, or to become involved in something [1]. Participation always has a social dimension, which is defined as a form of activity undertaken by an individual or a group in the various areas of social life and is oriented towards other people or the products of their actions [2]. This definition of participation implies that individuals live and undertake various activities in the public domain, where communication and exchange with others are essential [3]. Public participation is one of the dimensions of participation. In the literature, public participation is also referred to as public involvement or social participation [4,5,6,7,8,9].

Public participation is a process where individuals become involved in the operations of democratic structures and institutions, namely public administration institutions and public sector organizations managed by the authorities [10,11,12]. At the local level, public participation denotes the residents’ active involvement in various areas of municipal life [13]. Therefore, it is not limited to participation in local elections but it also involves cooperation between community members and the local authorities, as well as public involvement in the local decision-making process [14]. Public participation requires effective and reliable communication between a self-government and community members to establish mutual trust [11,15]. Public involvement enables the local authorities to identify the most pressing needs and modify their decisions accordingly [16]. Therefore, the cooperation between the residents and local authorities is an important factor that contributes to the success and well-being of self-governing communities, improves the relations between local authorities and the residents [13], and promotes a sense of belonging to a community and responsibility for the “common good” [17].

The provisions of Agenda 21 [18] and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [19] emphasize the role and significance of participation for development at the global to the local level. These documents stress that social decision-making, independence and initiative taking are the preferred modes of self-governance. They also underline that local communities and their sectors (self-government, non-governmental organizations, businesses, local and regional leaders) create, operate, and maintain social and economic infrastructure, manage space, shape and protect the natural environment, create and implement development concepts, and participate in regional and domestic development [20,21]. Countries that have adopted the above documents implement them differently, depending on their administrative structure, legal regulations, and domestic guidelines [22]. The extent to which these provisions, including the individual components of sustainable development, are implemented in each country is very difficult to determine. Therefore, effective methods for assessing progress in the achievement of sustainable development goals in each country or region are needed. The present study focuses on the determinants of sustainable development in Poland.

The choice of methods for evaluating social participation, where different indicators are combined in a simple and non-ambiguous manner, poses a research challenge. These indicators are often expressed in various units, and they exert different effects on the analyzed phenomenon. Multi-dimensional problems should be analyzed with the use of methods such as AHP, DEMATEL, or other multi-criteria decision-making techniques. The main criticism of these approaches is the number of comparisons of the applied criteria (usually direct comparisons) that need to be performed to achieve the final result. Žižović and Pamučar [23] have commented on the imperfect character of these methods. Therefore, attempts were made to develop a new model where a small number of comparisons would be required to assign weights to criteria. These efforts gave rise to the Level Based Weight Assessment (LBWA) method. The LBWA model features a simple algorithm regardless of the complexity of the analyzed problem. This method can be used to calculate reliable values of weighting coefficients, which contributes to a rational assessment. The LBWA approach can also be easily explained to experts and decision makers, which ensures that it is correctly implemented in practice.

The LBWA model has the following advantages over other methods for assigning weights to criteria [23]:

• The number of comparisons of the applied criteria is reduced, which speeds up the evaluation and reduces subjectivity.
• Unlike in other multi-criteria methods, the complexity of the calculation procedure does not increase rapidly with an increase in the number of criteria. Therefore, the LBWA model is more resistant to changes in the number of criteria, and it can be effectively used in procedures where the required number of criteria becomes apparent only in the successive stages of research.
• In the process of sorting criteria, decision makers can present their preferences in the form of a logical algorithm. In the LBWA model, the optimal values of weighting coefficients are calculated with a simple mathematical apparatus that eliminates inconsistencies from expert preferences, which are tolerated in some subjective models (BWM and AHP).

The LBWA model is a relatively new method. To date, it has been used to evaluate transportation problems [23,24], sustainable reorganization of the health care system [25], and intelligent network strategies in logistics [26]. It was also applied to optimize the arms industry [27,28] and to select the location of windfarms [29]. The LBWA method has never been used to analyze public participation.

The aim of the present study was to evaluate public participation in rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury and to analyze the influence of various categories of social activities on the level of public participation.

2. Background Literature

Langton (1978) elaborated on the concept of public participation and identified four main categories of citizen involvement in public life: public action, public involvement, electoral participation, and obligatory participation [12,30].

Public action involves all types of activities that are organized and coordinated by the citizens to influence the decisions made by the authorities. Citizens who have an interest in public action are generally tasked with creating organized (formal or informal) social groups [12,31]. These include foundations, associations, and social organizations (non-governmental organizations) which are not a part of the public administration (central or local) and are established to support local communities, rather than to generate profits [32].

It should be noted that the decisions and measures that citizens hope to influence can be undertaken at various levels of public administration. The above implies that the activities undertaken by citizens can be addressed to the central government, as well as regional and local (municipal) authorities. Therefore, public action can affect both legislative and executive processes, namely the development and implementation of public policy [12]. Legislative initiatives are a special category of public action, where the residents place various matters on the agenda of municipal council meetings and propose solutions [33]. In Poland, the manner in which legislative initiatives can be submitted is regulated by the Act concerning municipal self-government [34], and detailed regulations are set forth by local government charters. These legal acts stipulate that legislative proposals can be lodged by groups of citizens who reside in a given administrative unit and are eligible to elect members of a municipal legislative body (municipal council). Therefore, these regulations address individuals who reside in a given self-governing community [35].

Public involvement is the second dimension of public participation which involves various measures that are initiated and coordinated by the public administration to perform its duties and responsibilities. The aim of public involvement is to obtain support for public measures, and it can contribute to effective conflict resolution by improving decision-making processes and, above all, the quality of local services [12,31]. Social consultations are one of the main instruments for establishing effective communication between local communities and territorial governments [36] and they enable the authorities to survey local opinions and obtain proposals and comments concerning matters that are important for community life [37]. Territorial governments aware of the importance of social consultations and they develop procedures that regulate social dialogue [38]. In Poland, community members can also express their opinions during municipal council meetings. Local residents who attend council meetings should abide by the applicable rules of order. This can be accomplished by introducing an item to the meeting agenda stating that at a given point during the council meeting and residents can speak on the public forum and present their opinions, proposals, and petitions [39,40]. The village fund is yet another instrument which supports the subsidiarity principle, empowers citizens, and engages them in public activities [41]. Village funds are allocated by the local authorities from the municipal budget to promote the achievement of territorial governments’ tasks and responsibilities and to improve the local standard of living. The residents decide on the disbursement of village funds [42]. The purpose of the village fund is to support rural residents’ initiatives. This is a very broad concept that encompasses all types of initiatives proposed by potential beneficiaries, such as the renovation of school sports fields, the construction or renovation of bus stop canopies, the renovation of local community centers, pedestrian walkways and playgrounds, the provision of waste containers in public spaces, the construction of meeting places and recreational facilities, and the integration of local community members [43].

The third dimension of public participation is electoral participation, which is a type of civic activity that is closely associated with participatory democracy. Electoral participation involves the nomination and election of community members who are invested with decision-making powers [12,44]. This type of public participation is fundamental for the democratic principle of equality. It should be noted that only fair and proportional representation in public elections can ensure that all social groups, strata, and classes wield equal political influence. In turn, political equality should ensure that the citizens have an equal voice in other areas of public life, and it should prevent discrimination and minimize social inequality. Therefore, electoral participation strengthens the political community and the government, aggregates citizens’ interests, leads to the establishment of a legally appointed government, and guarantees political accountability. Electoral participation should be regarded as the citizens’ contribution to legitimizing the relationship between the people and their government in a democracy [45]. Electoral participation is a measure of public involvement, and in Poland, it can be assessed based on voter turnout in local government elections, European Parliament elections, Polish parliamentary elections (Senate—the upper house of the Polish parliament; and Sejm—the lower house of the Polish parliament), and presidential elections [46].

Mandatory or obligatory participation is the last dimension of public participation. This category includes all civic activities that are mandated by the law, including payment of taxes, which are an obligatory contribution levied on individuals to finance government activities and public services [12,47]. This type of public participation is not optional, and non-compliance with civic duties is a legal offence [48].

Social participation is presently a legal requirement or a prerequisite for public policy decision-making in the majority of Western countries [11]. The measures promoting social participation are also increasingly regulated by the law in Poland. The most notable examples include the 2030 Social Capital Development Strategy (cooperation, culture, and creativity), which aims to increase public involvement in public life [49], and the 2020 Strategy for Responsible Development (with a 2030 perspective), which emphasizes greater social participation and public involvement in public life as the key development challenges for Poland [50].

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Study Area

The Region of Warmia and Mazury is situated in north-eastern Poland, and it borders the Polish regions of Kuyavia-Pomerania (to the south-west), Mazovia (to the south), Podlasie (to the east), Pomerania (to the west), as well as the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation (to the north) (Figure 1). Warmia and Mazury occupies an area of 24,173 km² and is the fourth largest Polish voivodeship. The region is divided into 116 territorial units, including 66 rural municipalities. In Warmia and Mazury, rural areas occupy a combined area of 23,557 km² (more than 97% of the voivodeship’s total area), and rural municipalities cover 62% of that area. Rural municipalities have a combined population of 408,499, which accounts for around 30% of the region’s population [51]. Citizens play a fundamental role in regional development, which is why measures aiming to promote social capital development are listed in the region’s social and economic development strategy. Therefore, the creation of an enabling environment for social action and the promotion of civic attitudes are among the key development goals in Warmia and Mazury [52].

3.2. Methods

Public participation is a multi-dimensional concept that cannot be measured or expressed with a single attribute. Therefore, the research methodology was developed on the assumption that complex phenomena are analyzed with the use of synthetic variables, where numerous indicators are expressed by a single synthetic variable [53,54,55]. The synthetic indicator of public participation was developed according to the following research procedure:

• The criteria characterizing the four types of public participation in the life of a municipality were identified and described with the use of fourteen indicators (Figure 2) based on a review of the literature [12,30,31,33,39,44,47,56]. Data for the study were obtained from the National Electoral Commission [57], Local Data Bank of Statistics Poland [51], and a survey of local self-government representatives in rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury.
• A system of weights was developed with the use of the Level Based Weight Assessment (LBWA) method. In this approach, the importance of various criteria is determined with the use of a multi-criteria model M containing a set of criteria S {C₁, C₂,…, C_n} with n number of elements [23,25,27,28,58]. The following procedure was applied to assign weights to the criteria for evaluating public participation in the LBWA method:

Step 1. The most important criterion in the set of public participation indicators, C_EX, was identified. Various approaches can be used in this step. Measurable criteria with corresponding values on the same comparative scale can be identified with the use of analytical methods. In turn, non-measurable (non-quantitative) criteria or sets of mixed criteria (measurable and non-measurable) cannot be identified by analytical techniques, and are usually determined with the use of social research methods, such public surveys or expert surveys [59,60]. The present study involved an expert survey.

Step 2. The importance k of the identified criteria was determined based on the following rules:

S₁—Criterion C_EX and criteria whose importance is equal to or up to two times smaller than the importance of C_EX.

C = C_EX ꓴ 2C < 2C_EX

(1)

S₂—Criteria whose importance is exactly two times smaller or up to three times smaller than the importance of C_EX.

2C = C_EX ꓴ 3C < C_EX

(2)

S₃—Criteria whose importance is exactly three times smaller or up to four times smaller than the importance of C_EX.

3C = C_EX ꓴ 4C < C_EX

(3)

S_k—Criteria whose importance is exactly k times smaller or up to k + 1 times smaller than the importance of C_EX.

kC = C_EX ꓴ k + 1C < C_EX.

(4)

The result is a preliminary classification of the importance of the analyzed criteria. If the importance of criterion C_j is described as s(C_j), where j ϵ {1, 2, …, n}, then S= S₁ ꓴ S₂ ꓴ…ꓴ S_k, where S_i ={C_i1, C_i2,…, C_is} = {C_j ϵ S: i ≤ s(C_j) ≤ i+1} applies to each level i ϵ {1,2,…, k},

At the same time, S_p ∩ S_q = Ø applies to each p, q ϵ {1, 2, …, k}, where p ≠ q. The result is a classification of the set of criteria S.

3.

The indicators for evaluating public participation were normalized. Real-world data from various sources were transformed to point values to facilitate a comparison of the results and perform statistical calculations. The result of the measurement was compared with the maximum and minimum values of the same category in the entire set. This comparison was performed on a scale of 0 (minimum value of the measurement in the entire set) to 100 points (maximum value). The number of points for the remaining results (between extreme values) was calculated with the use of the following formula [61]:

$$Y_j=100-\left[\frac{x_{j.max}-x_j}{\left(\frac{x_{j.max}-x_{j.min}}{100}\right)}\right],$$

(5)

where:

• Y_j—points assigned to a single measurement;
• x_j.max—maximum result;
• x_j.min—minimum result;
• x_j—result estimated in each measurement.

4.

Based on its importance, the influence of each criterion was evaluated in subsets (levels of influence) and its rank in the group was determined. If criterion C_ip ϵ S_i, where S_i ={C_i1, C_i2,…, C_is}, this criterion is assigned the value I_ip ϵ {0,1,…, r} in such a way that the most important criterion C₁ is assigned the value I₁ = 0. However, if criterion C_ip is more important than C_iq, then I_p < I_q. If criterion C_ip is equivalent to C_iq, then I_p = I_q. The maximum value on the importance scale was defined as r = max {│S₁│, │S₂│, …, │S_k│}.

5.

The elasticity coefficient r₀ ϵ N was calculated based on the defined value of max r. N is a set of real numbers which meet the condition r₀ > r.

6.

The function describing the influence of the analyzed criteria was expressed as f: S → R. An influence function stating that if C_ip ϵ S_i then:

$$f\left(C_{ip}\right)=\frac{r_0}{i{r}_0+I_{ip}},$$

(6)

where:

• i—level where the criterion was classified;
• r₀—elasticity coefficient;
• I_ip—value of importance assigned to criterion C_ip at level S_i,

was calculated for each criterion.

7.

The optimal weighting coefficients were calculated for each criterion. The weight for criterion C_EX was calculated as follows:

$$w_{EX}=\frac{1}{1+f\left(C_1\right)+\dots +f\left(C_n\right)}.$$

(7)

The weights for successive criteria were calculated as follows:

w_j = f(C_j) · w_EX,,

(8)

where:

• j = 2, 3,…, n;
• n–successive criteria.

8.

The synthetic indicator for each municipality was calculated with the below formula:

$$Y_{Gsynt }={{\displaystyle \sum }}_{j=1}^n{Y}_j\ast w_j,$$

(9)

where:

• j—number of indicators evaluated in the study area.

9.

The municipalities were ranked and classified. The Jenks natural breaks classification method was used for that purpose [62]. This method is applied to divide natural groups of data into classes. Data are classified by grouping similar values and maximizing differences between classes. The objects are divided into classes whose boundaries are determined based on relatively large differences in values [63]. Four typological classes describing different levels of importance were ultimately determined: class I—high, class II—medium-high, class III—medium-low, and class IV—low.

4. Results

4.1. Assigning Weights to Selected Indicators of Social Participation in Municipalities

In line with the LBWA method, fourteen indicators describing various criteria (C_j) were assigned weights to reflect their importance for social participation. Weights were assigned based on the opinions of 20 surveyed experts. Indicator C₈ (Local governments’ assessment of the residents’ participation in social consultations) was regarded as most important by more than 80% of the experts. This indicator was described as C_EX and allocated to importance group S₁. The remaining indicators were grouped based on the above choice. Ultimately, the indicators were allocated to four importance groups. The first group (S₁) comprised four indicators (C₂, C₄, C₈, and C₁₀). In line with the applied procedure, indicators whose importance was equal to or up to two times smaller than the importance of indicator C₈ (C_EX), as well as indicator C₈, were included in group S₁. Group S₂ contained four indicators (C₃, C₅, C₇, and C₉) whose importance was two times smaller or up to three times smaller than the importance of C₈. Group S₃ comprised five indicators (C₁, C₆, C₁₁, C₁₂, and C₁₃) whose importance was three times smaller or up to four times smaller than the importance of C₈. Group S₄ contained only one indicator (C₁₄) whose importance was four or more times smaller than the importance of C₈.

In each group, indicators were arranged from the most to the least important by assigning values of I_ip ϵ {0,1,…, r}. For the most important indicator in the group, I_i1 = 0. For the least important indicator in the group, I_ir was equal to the number of criteria included in the group minus 1. For example, in group S₁, r = 3, and in group S₃, r = 4.

A list of criteria with the corresponding levels of importance k and the hierarchy of importance in group r is presented in

Table 1. Criteria C_j with the corresponding importance groups S_i and the hierarchy of importance in group I_ip.

Cj	Indicator	I	Iip
1	Number of foundations, associations, and social organization per 10,000 inhabitants	3	0
2	Legislative initiatives proposed by the residents	1	1
3	Resolutions setting forth the principles of social consultations in a municipality	2	3
4	Number of conducted social consultations	1	2
5	Adoption of at least one resolution that was subjected to social consultations	2	1
6	Allocation of village funds	3	1
7	Permanent item on the agenda of municipal council meetings which enables the residents to speak on the public forum	2	2
8	Local governments’ assessment of the residents’ participation in social consultations	1	0
9	Local governments’ assessment of the residents’ participation in municipal council meetings	2	0
10	Voter turnout in local government elections in 2018	1	3
11	Voter turnout in European Parliament elections in 2019	3	2
12	Voter turnout in Polish parliamentary elections in 2019	3	3
13	Voter turnout in Polish presidential elections in 2020	3	4
14	Municipal tax revenues per capita	4	0

.

Coefficient r₀ was calculated in line with the adopted procedure. In the largest group, r = 4; therefore, r₀ could not be smaller than 4. It was assumed that r₀ = 5.

In the next step, function $f\left(C_{ip}\right)$ was calculated with the use of Formula (6), and it was used to determine the weighting coefficient for each criterion. The weight w_EX for the most important criterion was calculated with Formula (7). In the analyzed case, w_EX was determined at 0.150. The weights for the remaining criteria were determined with the use of Formula (8). The results are presented in

Table 2. Function f(C_j) and the weights w_j assigned to criteria C_j in importance groups S_i.

r0 = 5 wEX = 0.150
Criterion	f(Cj)	wj
C1	0.333	0.050
C2	0.833	0.125
C3	0.385	0.058
C4	0.714	0.107
C5	0.455	0.068
C6	0.313	0.047
C7	0.417	0.063
C8 = CEX	1.000	0.150
C9	0.500	0.075
C10	0.625	0.094
C11	0.294	0.044
C12	0.278	0.042
C13	0.263	0.040
C14	0.250	0.038
Total	6.659	1.000

.

4.2. Analysis of the Influence of Coefficient r₀ on Weight Values

The weights w_i were influenced by an arbitrarily calculated value of r₀; therefore, the impact of r₀ on weight values was analyzed. The value of r₀ was increased to 10 and the resulting changes in weight values were monitored. The results are presented in

Table 3. The influence of coefficient r₀ on weights w_i.

wEX	0.150	0.147	0.144	0.142	0.140	0.139
r0	5	6	7	8	9	10
C1	0.050	0.049	0.048	0.047	0.047	0.046
C2	0.125	0.126	0.126	0.126	0.126	0.126
C3	0.058	0.059	0.059	0.060	0.060	0.060
C4	0.107	0.110	0.112	0.114	0.115	0.116
C5	0.068	0.068	0.067	0.067	0.066	0.066
C6	0.047	0.046	0.046	0.045	0.045	0.045
C7	0.063	0.063	0.063	0.063	0.063	0.063
C8 = CEX	0.150	0.147	0.144	0.142	0.140	0.139
C9	0.075	0.073	0.072	0.071	0.070	0.070
C10	0.094	0.098	0.101	0.103	0.105	0.107
C11	0.044	0.044	0.044	0.044	0.044	0.043
C12	0.042	0.042	0.042	0.042	0.042	0.042
C13	0.040	0.040	0.040	0.041	0.041	0.041
C14	0.038	0.037	0.036	0.035	0.035	0.035
Total	1	1	1	1	1	1

.

An increase in the value of r₀ accentuated the differences between criteria weights and increased the distance between weights. This dependence is shown in Figure 3, which clearly demonstrates that the higher values of r₀ increased the difference between minimum and maximum weight values.

The value of r₀ was set at 5 for further calculations. The results were divided into four classes with the Jenks natural breaks classification method. Each class represents different levels of public participation in the analyzed municipalities. The results of the classification process are presented in a cartogram in Figure 4.

.

The resulting values of indicator $Y_{Gsynt }$were normally distributed, which implies that the studied phenomenon can be reliably assessed based on general statistical measures. The distribution of values is presented in Figure 5.

The basic statistical measures for indicator $Y_{Gsynt }$are presented in

Table 4. Basic statistical measures for indicator $Y_{Gsynt. }$

Max	Min	Mean	SD	Median
71.37	20.71	42.79	42.16	42.16

.

In theory, indicator $Y_{Gsynt. }$can range from 0 to 100. In the analyzed case, the maximum value of $Y_{Gsynt. }$was determined at 71.37, which could point to a relatively low level of public participation in the analyzed region. In the total number of 66 municipalities, 25 were allocated to class II and 18 to class III. Therefore, class II covered 38% municipalities, and class III covered 27% municipalities. Despite the above, class II and class III were characterized by the smallest range of values of the synthetic indicator. This difference reached 10.26 in class II (difference between the maximum and minimum values of indicator $Y_{Gsynt }$) and only 5.82 in class III. These results point to small differences between the studied municipalities, and they suggest that the values of indicator $Y_{Gsynt }$ were similar in all territorial units. Average public participation was similar in the studied municipalities, which implies that achieving a high level of participation for the remaining criteria is more difficult. Class I (high) comprised 12 municipalities (18%), many of which form a small cluster around Olsztyn (regional capital). A detailed analysis revealed that criterion C₂ (legislative initiatives proposed by the residents) contributed to high values of indicator $Y_{Gsynt. }$ Criterion C₂ was met by 33% of the municipalities in class I, but it was not fulfilled by municipalities in the remaining classes. Class IV comprised the smallest number of 11 municipalities (17%), most of which are situated in peripheral areas of the studied region. In this class, the values of public participation indicators were considerably lower and selected criteria were not fulfilled at all. In class IV, eight to twelve criteria received values higher than 0. By comparison, 11 to 13 criteria received values higher than 0 in class III.

5. Discussion

Public participation in rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury was evaluated with the use of fourteen indicators characterizing four types of social involvement in public affairs. The first dimension of public participation is public involvement, which was analyzed with the use of seven indicators. The rules of order during social consultations are the main instrument that regulates public involvement in the decision-making process. These regulations constitute an act of local law which prescribes the standards for conducting social dialogue. Therefore, each municipality should develop its own regulations and implement them in a separate resolution [38]. The study revealed that as of 31 December 2019, 82% of rural municipalities had implemented regulations for social consultations in the form of a resolution. The above significantly enhances the quality of cooperation between politicians, civil officers, residents, and non-governmental organizations and it builds mutual trust and a sense of community [64]. Social consultation is a tool that engages community members in the decision-making process (according to the surveyed experts, this indicator belongs to group S₁). The study demonstrated that social consultations, two per year on average, had been conducted by 83% of the evaluated municipalities. Consultations contribute to making optimal decisions on all issues that are important for local residents, i.e., influencing the quality of their lives or their way of living. Consultations enable every community member and organization to express their opinions on the measures planned by the local authorities or to propose own solutions to a problem [36,65]. The main problems addressed during social consultations in the rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury included municipal roads, streets, bridges, public squares, and traffic management (24%); spatial order and real estate management (22%); support for, popularization, and stimulation of public activity (21.6%); social welfare, family support, and family-friendly policies (19.6%). At least one resolution had been adopted as a result of social consultations in 68% of cases. It should be noted that successful consultations which respect the participants’ opinions encourage other residents and organizations to participate in the process, and positive outcomes also stimulate other types of public participation [66]. However, public involvement in social consultations, which was regarded as the key indicator of public participation (C_EX) by the surveyed experts, was generally low (52%) in the local authorities’ opinion. The above confirms that only the most dedicated residents participate in social consultations, and numerous positive experiences are required to instill the awareness that consultations have positive implications for the local community [66]. A low level of participation in social consultations could also be attributed to the residents’ conviction that they have little influence on local affairs. Despite a steady increase in civic awareness levels in Poland, a study conducted by the Center for Public Opinion Research–CBOS (data for 2022) revealed that most citizens still believe that they have little control over public affairs in their town or municipality [67]. A permanent item on the agenda of municipal council meetings which enables the residents to speak on the public forum promotes direct communication between citizens and the local authorities [56]. This solution has been adopted by 86% of the analyzed municipalities. Despite the above, local government representatives were of the opinion that public attendance at municipal council meetings was low (33%) or very low (31%). Village funds (which are similar to civic budgets in cities) are yet another solution that enables the residents to influence the decisions made by the local government. According to the literature, village funds play an important role by stimulating public participation and civic initiatives in rural areas [43]. Village funds had been established in 74% of the municipalities in the Region of Warmia and Mazury (and in 72% of all municipalities in Poland). The residents can vote on how these funds should be disbursed to support activities that make the greatest contribution to local development. In the evaluated municipalities, village funds were allocated mostly to the construction or modernization of playgrounds (61.5%), community centers (59.1%), street and public space lighting (53%), and outdoor gyms (48%).

Public action is the second dimension of public participation. An analysis of the relevant indicators revealed that each rural municipality in Warmia and Mazury had an average of 38 foundations, associations, and social organizations per 10,000 residents, which approximates the national average. The number of social organizations was highest in Milejewo (70) and lowest in Braniewo (17). It should be noted that local associations make a highly valuable contribution not only by activating citizens and encouraging them to express their opinions but also by strengthening social bonds, promoting trust, and building desirable civic attitudes. Participation in a social group empowers individuals and promotes democracy [68,69]. A CBOS survey also demonstrated that residents who belong to social organizations, associations, movements, clubs, and foundations are more convinced that they have a real influence on public affairs, in particular at the local level, because membership in social organizations enhances civic attitudes [70]. In turn, legislative initiatives, which were regarded as one of the most important indicators (group S₁) that influence public participation, integrate community members, and enable the residents to influence the legislative process, had been proposed in only 6% of the analyzed municipalities (Gietrzwałd, Purda, Braniewo, and Lubomino—all of which belong to class I). It should be noted that legislative initiatives are a relatively new instrument of social participation, which were introduced in Poland only in 2018 by an amendment to the Act concerning municipal self-government [71]. Despite the above, the present study demonstrated that legislative initiatives have an immense influence on the level of public participation.

The third dimension of public participation is electoral participation which was characterized with the use of four indicators. Voting in elections is a fundamental and the most popular type of political participation [72]. Electoral participation is a key prerequisite for participatory democracy [73] and it determines the political composition of public bodies elected for the next term of office. According to CBOS data, Polish citizens are rather reluctant to vote in elections and electoral participation is generally low in comparison with other countries [74]. There are four types of elections in the Polish political system, and local government elections tend to have the highest turnout [75]. It should be noted that a candidate’s personal characteristics tend to play a more important role than political endorsement, in particular in villages and small towns [76]. However, despite the perceived importance of local elections, voter turnout during the last elections was below 55%, which still marked a record-high result in Poland [77]. The surveyed experts classified voter turnout in local government elections in group S₁ as an indicator that significantly influences public participation. In the rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury, voter turnout in local elections ranged from 24.02% to 63.43% (approx. 52% on average). These results suggest that many citizens are oblivious of the fact that voting is often their only chance to participate in democratic processes [78]. Citizens justify their failure to cast a vote by random events, as well as a negative attitude towards politics in general and marginal interest in public affairs [77]. According to experts, the remaining indicators of electoral participation exert a smaller influence on public participation and were classified in group S₃. A CBOS study revealed that presidential elections were the second most important elections for Polish citizens [74]. When electing the head of the state, voters pay attention not only to the candidate’s preparedness for the office and previous achievements but also to their openness and understanding of social problems [79]. Despite the fact that the presidential elections of 2020 were negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, voter turnout was high and it exceeded 66% on average. In the rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury, voter turnout in the presidential elections ranged from 44.6% to 74.5% and was 11 percentage points below the national average. Voter turnout exceeded the national average only in the municipalities of Dywity (67.9%) and Stawiguda (74.5%). The parliamentary elections (to the Sejm—lower house, and the Senate—upper house of the Polish parliament) rank third in importance [74]. When electing members of parliament, Polish citizens’ tend to focus on the candidate’s affiliation with a political party or electoral committee [80]. The most recent parliamentary elections had a record high voter turnout, and 61.74% of eligible voters cast a ballot, marking a significant increase from previous years [81]. In the rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury, average voter turnout was much lower at around 47%, and the results marginally exceeded the national average in only one municipality (Stawiguda).

Polish citizens regard the elections to the European Parliament as less important than national elections [74]. Until recently, the European elections had attracted minor interest in Poland and voter turnout did not exceed 25%. The 2019 European Parliament elections attracted more voters than in previous years. Polish citizens have a growing awareness that their choice will influence Poland’s image in the international arena and will impact Polish interests in the European Union. In 2019, ballots were cast by 45.68% of eligible voters, marking more than a two-fold increase from 2014 (23.83%), 2009 (24.53%), and Poland’s first European elections of 2004 (20.9%). In the elections to the European Parliament, voters focus mainly on the candidates’ political affiliation, as well as their own political views. Therefore, the main reason for non-participation in elections was a lack of clear political orientation [82]. In the rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury, voter turnout was much lower in the range of 21.9% to 48.6% (31% on average), and once again, it exceeded the national average only in the municipalities of Dywity and Stawiguda. These results confirm CBOS findings that rural inhabitants are much less likely to participate in the European elections [82].

The last dimension of public participation is obligatory participation which was evaluated with the use of a single indicator describing municipal tax revenues per capita. According to the experts, this indicator exerts the smallest influence on public participation, and it was the only indicator that was classified in group S₄. In the analyzed rural municipalities, tax revenues per capita ranged from PLN 354.51 to PLN 1517.79 (PLN 754.38 on average). The national average in the corresponding period was PLN 713.64. Taxes are a form of obligatory participation, and the amount of collected taxes reflects on wealth accumulation in a society and, consequently, in a municipality, because tax payments are made directly to the municipal budget [83]. According to a CBOS study, the vast majority of Poles support universal taxation because it finances important social needs and goals (healthcare, education, public safety, etc.). They also believe that paying taxes is a patriotic duty, and they regard tax evasion as theft that negatively impacts other citizens rather than as an expression of resourcefulness [84].

Research into public participation is difficult due to the limited availability of data describing this phenomenon. Statistical databases that are accessible to the public contain limited data, in particular at the local level, where public participation plays a particularly important role. Researchers generally compensate for this deficiency by conducting surveys and eliciting information from local government agencies.

The presented procedure of evaluating public participation can be used to diagnose and monitor civic activity. The described approach is universal, and it can be applied at various levels of administrative division after the validation and the selection of the most suitable indicators for assessing public participation. The results can be used to plan measures that support civic activity, increase public involvement in decision-making, and promote responsibility for the common good.

The reliability and objectivity of the results can be improved by expanding the list of indicators describing public participation. In the future, the level of public participation will be assessed to explain the cause-and-effect relationships between citizen involvement in social life and the development of territorial governments.

6. Conclusions

The main aim of the present study was to evaluate public participation in the rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury and to analyze the influence of different participation categories, which describe local residents’ involvement in public affairs, on the level of public participation. Data for the study were obtained from publicly available statistical databases and a survey of local government representatives in rural municipalities. Four categories of public participation were selected based on a review of the literature and an analysis of data availability: public action, public involvement, electoral participation, and obligatory participation. These categories were described with the use of fourteen indicators. It should be noted that the choice of indicators was limited by the availability of literature, as well as access to databases and uniform data describing territorial units—in this case, rural municipalities. These factors also considerably influenced the number of indicators characterizing the various categories of public participation. The indicators were assigned weights to calculate synthetic indicator $Y_{Gsynt }$, which describes public participation levels in the rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury. Level Based Weight Assessment (LBWA), a relatively new method, was applied to assign weights and it supported an evaluation of each indicator’s importance despite an unequal number of indicators in the analyzed categories.

The study revealed moderate levels of public participation in the rural municipalities of Warmia and Mazury (classes II and III were predominant). However, most of the analyzed criteria (indicators) had low values or were not met at all. The only satisfactory results were obtained for the criteria associated with the number of foundations, associations, and social organizations; the number of municipalities that allocate village funds; and municipal tax revenues per capita (which exerts the smallest influence on the level of public participation).

Public involvement played the most important role in the evaluation of public participation due to the number of the assigned criteria (indicators). In this category, the final result was determined mostly by participation in social consultations and the number of conducted social consultations. Despite the fact that public action did not significantly affect the assessment of public participation (only two indicators), legislative initiatives were the second most important criterion that influenced the final result. However, legislative initiatives were proposed by the citizens in only 6% of the analyzed municipalities. Electoral participation did not constitute a particularly significant category (four indicators), but participation in local elections was the fourth most important criterion that influenced the final result. The study demonstrated that direct participation in community life, such as social consultations, voting in local elections, and submission of legislative initiatives, play a key role in evaluations of public participation. However, the study also revealed that these criteria pose a significant problem for the rural municipalities of the Region of Warmia and Mazury. Therefore, the analyzed territorial units should initiate effective measures to improve public participation. Above all, the local authorities should be encouraged to initiate activities that engage the public and the residents and promote the awareness that community members can influence local affairs by becoming involved in public action and voting in elections.