This study investigates the extent to which individuals exhibit consistency in their preferences during sequential budget simulation exercises, as well as the factors that shape these preferences. Grounded in behavioral and citizen participation frameworks, the analysis demonstrates that the simultaneous use of priority-setting and budget-balancing modules encourages participants to allocate resources in ways that reflect their previously articulated priorities. While instances of inconsistency remain common, preference consistency is associated with participants’ sustained support for their favored programs, their commitment to ensuring adequate resource allocation, and, to some extent, their willingness to finance these programs. The findings suggest that the integrated use of simulation modules effectively promotes the consistent preferences between public priorities and budgetary allocations. This study should encourage practitioners to utilize simulation modules not merely for surface-level assessments of citizen preferences, but as tools for fostering consensus by illustrating how citizens translate their stated priorities into concrete fiscal decisions.
Frankline Muthomi (Sat,) studied this question.