Epistemic Selection of Costly Alternatives:The Case of Participatory Budgeting (Extended Abstract)

Simon Rey; Ulle; id_orcid 0000-0003-3709-4701 Endriss

doi:10.5555/3709347.3744098

January 1, 2025Open Access

Epistemic Selection of Costly Alternatives:The Case of Participatory Budgeting (Extended Abstract)

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Key Points

The aim is to explore how votes in participatory budgeting can be seen as estimates of the best projects to fund.
Introduced an epistemic framework for understanding participatory budgeting.
Analyzed the interpretation of votes as estimates of project effectiveness.
Evaluated the implications of these interpretations for funding decisions.
Identified the role of noise in votes affecting budget allocations.
Showed that votes reveal insights into the perceived best projects.
Highlighted complexities in estimating project effectiveness based on public input.

Implication

Demonstrates the epistemic evaluation of funding projects in participatory budgeting, suggesting implications for decision-making.

Abstract

We initiate the study of participatory budgeting using the epistemic approach, where one interprets votes as noisy estimates of some ground truth regarding the objectively best set of projects to fund.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Cite This Study

Rey et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6980fff5c1c9540dea812d7a https://doi.org/10.5555/3709347.3744098

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Epistemic Selection of Costly Alternatives:The Case of Participatory Budgeting (Extended Abstract)

Key Points

Implication

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Epistemic Selection of Costly Alternatives:The Case of Participatory Budgeting (Extended Abstract)

Key Points

Implication

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Keep reading

More related papers

Keep reading

More related papers