Rank, Pack, or Approve: Voting Methods in Participatory Budgeting

Lodewijk Gelauff,Ashish Goel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v18i1.31326

2024-08-28

Abstract:Participatory budgeting is a popular method to engage residents in budgeting decisions by local governments. The Stanford Participatory Budgeting platform is an online platform that has been used to engage residents in more than 150 budgeting processes. We present a data set with anonymized budget opinions from these processes with K-approval, K-ranking or knapsack primary ballots. For a subset of the voters, it includes paired votes with a different elicitation method in the same process. This presents a unique data set, as the voters, projects and setting are all related to real-world decisions that the voters have an actual interest in. With data from primary ballots we find that while ballot complexity (number of projects to choose from, number of projects to select and ballot length) is correlated with a higher median time spent by voters, it is not correlated with a higher abandonment rate. We use vote pairs with different voting methods to analyze the effect of voting methods on the cost of selected projects, more comprehensively than was previously possible. In most elections, voters selected significantly more expensive projects using K-approval than using knapsack, although we also find a small number of examples with a significant effect in the opposite direction. This effect happens at the aggregate level as well as for individual voters, and is influenced both by the implicit constraints of the voting method and the explicit constraints of the voting interface. Finally, we validate the use of K-ranking elicitation to offer a paper alternative for knapsack voting.

Computers and Society

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is: How to optimize voters' choice behaviors and their results in the Participatory Budgeting (PB) process through different voting methods (such as K - approval, K - ranking and knapsack). Specifically, the authors hope to evaluate the impacts of different voting methods on aspects such as the cost of projects selected by voters, voting time and the rate of abstention by analyzing the Participatory Budgeting voting data in the real world, thereby providing suggestions for PB organizers to design more effective voting mechanisms.

### The main research questions of the paper include:

1. **The impact of voting methods on the cost of projects selected by voters**:
- The research finds that in most elections, voters using the K - approval voting method tend to choose more expensive projects, while voters using the knapsack voting method pay more attention to the total cost of projects. This difference appears not only at the overall level but also in the choices of individual voters.
- Formula representation:
\[
C_{\text{K - approval}}>C_{\text{knapsack}}
\]
where \( C_{\text{K - approval}} \) and \( C_{\text{knapsack}} \) respectively represent the total cost of projects selected when using the K - approval and knapsack voting methods.

2. **The impact of voting methods on voting time and the rate of abstention**:
- The data shows that although the voting complexity (for example, the number of projects available for selection, the number of projects to be selected and the length of the voting form) is positively correlated with the median time spent by voters, it has no relation to the rate of abstention.
- Formula representation:
\[
\text{Complexity}\propto\text{Median Time Spent}
\]
\[
\text{Complexity}\not\propto\text{Abandonment Rate}
\]

3. **Verifying the effectiveness of the K - ranking voting method**:
- The authors verify that K - ranking can be an alternative to the knapsack voting method by comparing the results of the K - ranking voting method with those of the knapsack voting method, especially being more practical in the paper - based voting environment.
- Formula representation:
\[
U_{\text{K - ranking}}\approx U_{\text{knapsack}}
\]
where \( U_{\text{K - ranking}} \) and \( U_{\text{knapsack}} \) respectively represent the utilities of voters (that is, the degree of overlap of selected projects) when using the K - ranking and knapsack voting methods.

### Summary

This paper explores the performance of different voting methods in practical applications by analyzing the anonymous voting data on the Stanford Participatory Budgeting platform and provides a reference for PB organizers to design voting mechanisms. The research results show that different voting methods will have a significant impact on voters' choice behaviors, so these factors should be fully considered when designing Participatory Budgeting voting mechanisms.