Exploring the Fiscal Responsibility through Active Citizenship for Governance Quality

Abstract

Active citizenship emphasizes the importance of understanding its added value to fiscal responsibility and governance quality for economic and sustainable growth. Firstly, the paper aims to review issues in the literature pertinent to the debate on the role and the characterization of active citizenship. Secondly, using a linear regression model, we provide new evidence on the relationship between active citizenship, on the one hand, and fiscal responsibility, government quality, and economic growth, on the other hand, for the 27 European Union countries, over the period from 2006 to 2019. Our results highlight that active citizenship determines a more responsible and efficient activity of government based on fiscal responsibility, contributing to economic growth and sustainable development.

1. Introduction

Citizen participation in decision making or active citizenship is a public practice in a continuous process of development which aims to facilitate the involvement of society in government activity and decision making. Thus, active citizenship can be seen as an instrument of modern government, in which society has the role of helping policy makers understand the concerns, needs or values of the citizens to succeed in making the best decisions and to implement the most efficient public policies, achieving a qualitative governance. In this context, government mentality is concerned with the milieu of government [1], the cultural, environmental, economic, and geographic conditions through which humans conduct their lives [2].

The European citizen initiatives (ECI) emerged from the idea of reinforcing European democracy with significant steps towards a Europe of the citizen and for the citizen. Looking for precise means to improve the communication and cooperation among European citizens, without consideration to their country of origin, trans-European participatory democracy seems to be the solution to empower citizens with the means of action to make their voice heard and considered.

Being aware of the principles of modern governance and the role of society’s involvement in decision making, based on the principle of fiscal responsibility, state governments have an obligation to conduct fiscal policy prudently and to manage budgetary resources and obligations, as well as fiscal risks, to ensure the sustainability of the fiscal position in the medium and long term. The sustainability of public finances means that, in the medium and long term, governments could manage unforeseen risks or situations without having to make significant adjustments to expenditures, revenues, or budget deficits with economically or socially destabilizing effects.

The goal of this paper is twofold, theoretical and empirical. Firstly, at the theoretical level, we highlight the state of knowledge on active citizenship, starting from the definitions stipulated in the literature, then detailing its characteristics and forms, as well as the way in which it is measured through the indicators developed by the literature and their impact on sustainability. Secondly, considering the results of previous studies, we intend to develop an econometric model for evaluating the possible relationship between active citizenship and fiscal responsibility, government quality, and economic development for the 27 European Union countries, over the period from 2006 to 2019.

Our working hypothesis is that active citizenship is linked to the quality of government with impact on public policies and economic growth. The novelty of the study includes the way in which active citizenship is defined by quantitative variables, which are identified in the literature as defining the dimension of active participation of citizens in the act of government and economic development from the perspective of their relationship with public decision makers.

The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the characterization of active citizenship, identifying different points of view of defining active citizenship and different ways to measure active citizenship; Section 3 describes the method, variables, and data sources that help in developing the econometric analysis; Section 4 presents the regression results based on a linear regression model; Section 5 presents the discussion; Section 6 highlights the conclusions of the study and the implications for sustainable development and public policies; and Section 7 presents limitations and outlook of our paper.

2. The Characterization of Active Citizenship

The literature defines active citizenship through multiple definitions that support the field in which the research is conducted (political, social, economic, administrative science, etc.) but also identifies different ways of measuring it. Our research will include a number of reference approaches to active citizenship that are closest to the goal of our research.

In the research context, Hoskins and Mascherini [3] define active citizenship as: “participation in civil society, community and/or political life, characterized by mutual respect and non-violence and in accordance with human rights and democracy” [4]. The legal basis for active participation is created both nationally and internationally, as a result of the implementation of the principle of democracy. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [5] states in Article 25 that a citizen must have the right and opportunity to take part in the conduct of public affairs. These are also stipulated by the Lisbon Treaty and other European Union regulations.

Active citizens have as their main aim the promotion of life quality considering the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviours of people as part of the decision-making process (political and non-political) at all levels. Based on human rights and rule of law, active citizenship implies values and commitment to the real problems of society [6]. The relationship between states and citizens means a re-examination of how they might relate to each other: to increase the quality of the public services provided by the state and to empower people for being part of the solutions that could affect their lives and their communities [7]. The literature expresses the multifaced forms of active citizenships for responding to state efforts in assuring the respect of the welfare state values [8]. The trust of the citizens and the commitment in the decision making constitutes the modalities for active involvement in the “common good”. On the other hand, the state takes an active role to protect the citizens (for example, to protect the citizens against the unfair practices and taking the risk) and adopts different dynamic structures for offering public goods for its citizens.

The literature mentions some directions of the nature of citizenship, such as liberal, communitarian, and ecologist [9]. On the other perspectives, the nature of citizenship is seen as a direct participation in the decision-making process (instrumentalist), as a common voice of the people (communitarian), to learn about the public policy and their effects (educational), and as a possibility to express the individual political identity (expressive) [10].

Active citizenship implies being involved and having a contribution in debating public issues and finding solutions with the other community stakeholders. The active member of the community comes with the willingness and the commitment for the wellbeing of the people.

A proactive society is a society which gives to its people the possibility to fight for their rights and to define these rights themselves and to ask to be protected and respected. Participatory democracy promotes an active dialog between the decision makers and citizens. The citizens could influence the decision-making process by gaining the abilities to develop proposals for their communities and to influence, control, and coordinate the development of the decision-making process [11,12,13].

Active citizenship became necessary and a key tool for promoting good governance. Weymouth, Hartz-Karp, and Marinova [14] appreciate that in implementing sustainability initiatives, the participation of citizens in the public making-decision process is a partnership with the government. Active citizenship is capable of influencing social innovation, environmental change, and social resilience [15]. Good governance implies the respect for the democratic values stated by the European Convention of Human Rights [16] and the Treaty of Amsterdam [17]. The solidarity and the well-being of the society are values that respect the principles stated by the European norms and require the civic participation in building communities [18].

“Active citizenship is the glue that keeps society together” [19], which means if we want to develop a good society, we should understand sustainable development, which implies economic, social, and environmental aspects. Sustainable development has its origins in the constant struggles between the business (economic), environmental, and political environment, and is extremely complex through its contemporary approach and broad perspective [20]. The analysis of this link will follow aspects regarding the impact of active citizenship on the elements of economic growth and sustainable development, which are in total accord with the objectives of the United Nations’ Agenda for 2030 and the goals for sustainable development [21]. As stated above, active citizenship is logically linked to sustainable development and the objectives of the latter can be defined and ensured through the active participation of citizens.

The United Nations [21] notes that 767 million people are very poor and live on under USD 1.90 per day, which is the lowest level and considered the poverty line. In this context, with the slogan “Donate what you don’t use”, the people could help and be active. Green [22] considers that active citizenship is based on mixture of citizens’ rights and obligations in relationship with the state, based on their role of making the resource transfer to the state paying taxes, but having the full range of political, civil, and social rights. In this case, educated people could understand the effects of poverty and can impose a set of standards on governments to eliminate some of these effects. The success of these programs depends on the ability of people working together to create the favourable context their own lives [22].

Living conditions are in many cases difficult, and the most affected are children for this reason. O’Brien and Salonen [23] analyse the role of active citizenship in emphasizing that all children have rights and reducing rates of child poverty, even in developed countries.

In many cases, active citizenship can be involved in various forms to reduce poverty, and the Department for International Development identifies and describes the four most important ways, taking into consideration implications of citizens in policymaking at the national level, different associations between communities, development of mobilization capacity, and active participation of citizens in subnational governance [24].

The human rights approach has been a great ally of democracy, but this approach should be improved with the possibility of exercising their citizenship and civil society [25].

The first direction for sustainable development and one of the main goals of the United Nations’ agenda is investment in education. Many countries have programs in developing education, but if they do not have educated peoples to become involved voluntarily in solving the problems of the communities, the problems will be accentuated. According to Montenegro and Patrinos [26], education is an important determinant for economic growth and poverty reduction because expanding knowledge (through a qualitative educational infrastructure), the system produces the global economy’s smart workers.

The governments of many countries have understood the importance of investing in education as a determinant factor for economic growth and, therefore, for sustainability. The data provided by the United Nations [21] show that many countries allocate high budgets to this area. Although this investment has a great impact on the percentages of gross domestic product allocated in the short term, its value recovers quickly and, in many cases, brings a lot of added value because an amount offered to a project for 3–5 years to a child of 15 years transforms it from a negative landmark for society into a positive one able to contribute to the general well-being through the results of its activities. Depending on the interest and level of development, the states of the globe develop programs to solve the problems of society by involving both those responsible and the citizens, and our opinion is that each country has specific situations to solve according to the national interest.

The second direction is volunteering, which contributes to sustainable development in the following ways: inclusion, innovation, ownership, participation, and inspiration [27]. The volunteering role in sustainable development is not only in fundraising but also in other activities stipulated by the literature [28,29].

The third direction for sustainability is the involvement of the business environment by providing support to social responsibility programs, identifying efficient and effective methods to reduce waste, pollution, and chemical discharges but also reducing the consumption of raw materials and materials with a long regeneration time that affects the environment. We consider a relevant aspect to be the understanding of previous directions and the involvement of companies in the development of jobs specific to the area, hiring people with difficult situations, learning through training programs, and supporting the transfer of knowledge to young people and people with special needs. Responsible business contributes to ensuring that stakeholder rights are respected when determining value creation. Otherwise, irresponsible business practices erode the quality of the business environment and result in economic loss [30]. Sustainable development goals present an opportunity for business organizations to reinvent their own business and to became more sustainable on the market [31].

The active citizenship needs to be developed from schools and should “include the nature and practices of participation in democracy; the duties, responsibilities and rights of individuals as citizens; and the value to individuals and society of community activity” [32].

Based on the active role given to the citizens, Marshall [33] introduced a tripartite distinction of citizenship, namely, civil, political, and social. Empirical citizenship literature compares countries by building citizenship indicators (

Table 1. Literature approach regarding building citizenship indicators.

Literature	Indicator Name	Applied for	Methodology
Waldrauch and Hofinger [34]	Index of Legal Obstacles to Integration (LOI)	8 Western European countries for the year 1995	Approximately 80 different items were included concerning the legal regulation of integration, which were aggregated into five dimensions. There were used two kinds of indicators: binary and temporal. Authors standardised these time measures on the scale [0, 1] by relating them to minimum and maximum standards.
Hoskins et al. [4]	Active Citizenship Composite Indicator (ACCI)	19 European countries	Based on a list of 63 basic indicators for which the data have been principally drawn from the European Social Survey of 2002.
Banting and Kymlicka [35]	Multiculturalism Policy Index (MCP)	21 OECD countries and three time periods (1980, 2000, 2010)	Measure multiculturalism policies
Hoskins and Mascherini [3]	Active Citizenship Composite Indicator (ACCI)	19 European countries	based on 61 basic indicators.
Howard [36]	Citizenship Policy Indicator (CPI)	The EU-15 for the years 1980 and 2008	A composite index based on three indicators: ‘‘jus soli’’; ‘‘naturalization; ‘‘access to dual citizenship’’.
Goodman [37]	Civic Integration Index (CIVIX)	The EU-15 for two periods in time (1997 and 2009)	Index—measures language, country-knowledge, and value commitment requirements.
Zaff et al. [38]	construct of civic involvement, active and engaged citizenship (AEC)	909 adolescents	Included behavioural, cognitive, and socio-emotional aspects.

Source: computed by authors.

).

Active citizenship is considered in literature [39] to be strategy and a service-orientated approach to local governance if it is a selective, dual, and elitist version. According to the author [39], education should be accompanied by process of ‘double democratization’ involving the transformation of state and civil society at the same time. Active citizenship can also be considered an instrument to attenuate the ‘shadow state’. Other authors see citizenship as a a technology of governance [40,41]. Weger and Herbig [42], based on a study of the relationship between active citizenship and scientific research over 11 months, identify at the level of the citizens two facets of their identity, firstly, a local and, secondly, a global form of “active” or “contemporary” citizenship. Zaff et al. [38] concluded for the 909 adolescents under analysis a strong invariance of AEC in time and gender.

Active citizenship is, from our point of view, the keystone of democracy, being based on the leadership of the people, and of the government in conditions of efficiency, from the perspective of electing the governors from among the people, which presents a sustainable government program from the perspective of economic, social, and environmental measures. Any slippage of the governors can come to the attention of the citizens who, through an active attitude, can determine the decision makers to adopt the sustainable measures. The passive attitude of the citizens can be considered a generating element of the inefficiency of the governing act, which implies the adoption of measures in disagreement with the social needs and, thus, the creation of economic and social imbalances. The literature insists on the role of the active participation of the citizens in the development of the state and on the increase in the quality of the act of governing through public policies precisely because nothing can be achieved without the contribution of each citizen.

3. Materials and Methods

The paper provides empirical evidence firstly on the relationship between active citizenship and fiscal responsibility, secondly, on the relationship between active citizenship and governance quality, and, thirdly, considering active citizenship as contributor to economic growth and sustainable development for the 27 European Union countries over the 2006–2019 period. For empirical evidence, we used a Fixed Effects Model. Our choice for EU-27 countries is due to the total membership of the European Union of the countries under analysis. The chosen period (2006–2019) is justified by the availability of official databases such as the United Nations Development Programme [43], Gapminder World Data [44], the World Bank’s World Development Indicators database [45], and the European Commission [46].

The novelty of the research is justified by the relationships under studies and the choice of the determinants of active citizenship, too. Our econometric model is in accord with the literature [47] and is presented below in Equation (1):

$$y_{i,t}={\beta }_1{}_{i,t}+{\beta }_2{X}_{2i,t}+{\beta }_3{X}_{3i,t}+{\beta }_4{X}_{4i,t}+u_{i,t}$$

(1)

where i refers to the country ($i=\overline{1.27}$); t refers to the year ($t=\overline{1.13}$); y is the dependent variable; X is the independent variable; ${\beta }_1,{\beta }_2, \dots and {\beta }_4$are the coefficients of the explanatory variables; and $u_{i,t}$ are the observation-specific errors.

For the first model, the dependent variable is the fiscal rules index (FRI), as the most representative indicator for fiscal responsibility. Literature [48] establishes this composite index based on five criteria presented in

Table 2. The variables included in the analysis.

Variable	Definition	Data Source
FRI	Fiscal Rules Index—composite index based on five criteria, such as: (1) legal base, (2) binding character, (3) bodies monitoring compliance and the correction mechanism, (4) correction mechanisms, and (5) resilience to shocks	European Commission [46]
Gov_eff	Government effectiveness—perceptions of the quality of public provisions, quality of bureaucracy, competence of civil servants and their independence from political pressure, and the credibility of government decisions	World Bank [45]
lGDPPC	GDP per capita (current USD)	World Bank [45]
Democracy	Democracy Index—based on five categories: electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, the functioning of government, political participation, and political culture. The countries are assigned by the Economist Intelligence Unit	Gapminder World [44]
Contr_corr	Control of corruption—perceptions of the exercise of public power for private gain	World Bank [45]
HDI	Human Development Index—emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone	United Nations Development Programme [43]
Soc_dev	Social Development—Labour force participation rate, total (% of total population ages 15–64) (modelled ILO estimate)	World Bank [45]

Source: computed by authors, based on sources indicated inside the table.

. The second model will use Government effectiveness (Gov_eff) as the dependent variable, taking into consideration four important aspects [49] developed in Table 2. The third model uses GDP per capita (GDPPC) as the dependent variable, representing the main indicator for economic growth, and is considered an indicator of sustainable development associated to goal eight, decent work and economic growth, of the Sustainable Development Goals adopted by all United Nations member states [50]. Few authors used GDP per capita (expressed in logs) as the main indicator for sustainable development [51] and to control for the effect of convergence [52,53]. GDP per capita is a relevant quantitative indicator, although the spectrum of sustainable development is much higher, but this indicator reflects the fact that an economic development favourable to every citizen automatically incubates the development of other aspects of sustainable development. What is certain is that the literature accepts this indicator as representative, and thus, we use it in our model.

We use in our paper four variables for representing active citizenship which are the most common in the literature [4], namely: (a) Democracy Index (Democracy), (b) Control of corruption (Contr_corr), (c) Human Development Index (HDI), and (d) Social Development (Soc_dev). Through these variables, we create the broad spectrum of active citizenship that can be analyzed in correlation with various societal variables that determine sustainability.

Table 3. Pairwise correlations.

Variables	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)
(1) lGDPPC	1.000
(2) Democracy	0.847 *	1.000
(3) Gov_eff	0.820 *	0.852 *	1.000
(4) Contr_corr	0.845 *	0.875 *	0.938 *	1.000
(5) HDI	0.860 *	0.783 *	0.788 *	0.795 *	1.000
(6) FRI	0.069	0.060	0.066	0.102 *	0.246 *	1.000
(7) Soc_dev	0.435 *	0.562 *	0.647 *	0.616 *	0.607 *	0.398 *	1.000

* shows significance at the 0.05 level.

and

Table 4. Summary statistics.

	N	St. Dev	Min	Max	Kurtosis	Skewness	t-Value
(1) lGDPPC	378	0.651	8.417	11.685	2.423	−0.039	304.693
(2) Democracy	378	0.821	6.38	9.88	2.271	0.291	188.906
(3) Gov_eff	378	0.583	−0.36	2.354	2.524	−0.201	36.658
(4) Contr_corr	378	0.794	−0.267	2.47	1.779	0.207	24.227
(5) HDI	378	0.041	0.765	0.955	2.269	−0.236	414.823
(6) FRI	378	1.051	−0.986	3.069	2.389	0.168	11.203
(7) Soc_dev	378	5.047	57.87	83.13	2.478	−0.167	275.569

Source: authors’ calculation using Stata 15.1.

provide descriptive statistics for the variables included in the model for the EU-27 countries regarding the relationship between active citizenship and fiscal responsibility over the 2006–2019 period.

4. Results

The results of the regression analysis represent empirical evidence which justifies the purpose of the research, firstly, on the relationship between active citizenship and fiscal responsibility and, secondly, on the relationship between active citizenship and governance quality, considering active citizenship is contributor to economic growth and sustainable development.

We used a fixed effects model (FEM) for panel data, as can be seen in

Table 5. The results of the regression analysis.

	(1)	(2)	(3)
	FRI	Gov_eff	lGDPPC
Democracy	−0.390 **	0.0737 **	0.230 ***
	(0.126)	(0.0272)	(0.0318)
Contr_corr	−0.293	0.543 ***	0.271 ***
	(0.163)	(0.0252)	(0.0381)
HDI	9.405 ***	0.873 *	8.236 ***
	(1.992)	(0.419)	(0.539)
Soc_dev	0.101 ***	0.0111 ***	−0.0319 ***
	(0.0114)	(0.00263)	(0.00404)
_cons	−11.42 ***	−1.581 ***	3.161 ***
	(1.767)	(0.355)	(0.503)
N	378	378	378
R2	0.242	0.892	0.865

Standard errors in parentheses. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. Source: authors’ calculation using Stata 15.1.

. For estimate the Equation (1) and structured the results for the baseline growth model, we first solve the problems of spurious regression. We use variance inflation factor (VIF) to check for multicollinearity, showing values of 3.68 for regressions (1), (2), and (3). Taking into account the number of cross-sectional units, namely, the 27 countries of the European Union, and the issue of heterogeneity, the fixed effects estimation technique for panel data models was selected. The results of the Hausman test confirmed that the fixed effects estimation technique is to be preferred to random effects. As the results of the modified Wald test for groupwise heteroskedasticity in fixed effects regression models rejected the null hypothesis of homoscedasticity, we used Huber/White (sandwich) estimators to control for heteroskedasticity.

The economic controls perform reasonably well in the model and check the robustness [54,55]. We ran three regressions separately, each of the regression showing the implication of active citizenship defined with variables presented in previous section in relation with main elements of the society based on which the economic growth and a sustainable development are achieved.

Our results show, according to the OLS model provided in Table 5, that the coefficients of all variables defining the active citizenship, such as democracy index (Democracy), control of corruption (Contr_corr), human development index (HDI), and social development (Soc_dev) are, in general, positive and statistically significant as predicted by our hypothesis.

The first model, where the dependent variable is fiscal rules index (FRI) that is considered the most representative indicator for fiscal responsibility, has as determinants the human development index (HDI) and social development (Soc_dev). The rigidity of fiscal rules and fiscal responsibility determines a significantly negative relationship between the fiscal rules index (FRI) and democracy (Democracy). In general, the tendency of the citizen is to reject the fiscal rule which, in the end, requires a responsible fiscal discipline, a transfer of income from the citizen to the disposal of the state, and the use of resources by the state in a sustainable way. However, fiscal rules discipline determines the sustainability of the system because, depending on the economic status, such as the overheating of the economy or economic recession, the state can use economic leverage to alleviate economic imbalances.

For the second model, where the dependent variable is government effectiveness (Gov_eff), the democracy index based on its dimensions (electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, the functioning of government, political participation, and political culture) has a significant positive impact on government quality. Our results are in accordance with Rangel [56], who considers that citizen participation constitutes an element inherent to democracy and, in this context, implies the intervention of citizens in government contributes to advanced democratic governance environments. Control of corruption (Contr_corr), as the exercise of public authorities for private gain, is statistically significant and positive. The human development index (HDI) is statistically significant at the level of 0.05. Social development (Soc_dev) is statistically significant and positive.

The third model, where the dependent variable is the GDP per capita, the democracy index (Democracy), based on its dimensions (electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, the functioning of government, political participation, and political culture), has a significant positive impact. Control of corruption is positive and significant, and the human development index is statistically significant at the level of 0.001. Social development is statistically significant and negative, being explained by other studies [57,58], which conclude that labour force participation has a negative significant relationship with economic growth in the short run.

For the third model, we want to identify the status of each state in the analysis, as can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1 plots the prediction from a quadratic regression, and it adds a confidence interval for the 27 countries under analysis. The outlier is Luxembourg, where the GDP per capita is very high. The situation of Luxembourg is special because the economic activity is very intense in terms of companies and the labor force of the companies is also provided by the residents, but most of workers are from outside the city (non-residents). Thus, a very high GDP per capita is justified. According to Figure 1, fitted values or very low deviation are for the other 26 countries of the European Union, where a low level of GDP per capita is associated with a low democracy index in Romania, and a high GDP per capita is associated with a high democracy index. Indeed, civic engagement is higher in Nordic countries and is very low especially in Eastern and Central European Countries, such as Romania and Bulgaria.

5. Discussion

The obtained results are in accordance with the literature [14], emphasizing that active citizenship determines a more responsible and efficient act of government, being a responsible contributor to the economic growth as a variable of sustainable development. The connection between citizenship and good governance is given by the capabilities of the parts to be involved in designing the communication process and to develop the tools for investigating the common problems. Good governance is seen as the capability of the state to exert its power and to assure the quality of life for its citizens. The normative establishment of participatory democracy in the EU is considered an important step because it made clear that representation, the pillar of liberal democracy, cannot be the sole means to a legitimate regime in the EU [59].

However, given that the rigidity of fiscal policy applied simultaneously with a high fiscal pressure on citizens, there is a tendency of non-acceptance of fiscal policy by citizens, highlighted by the significant negative impact of the democracy index. Often, the state is in a position to intervene depending on the economic status of the country in conditions of recession or the overheating of the economy with various fiscal levers. Thus, in a situation of economic overheating, the state must reduce public spending and increase taxes and fees as rules of fiscal policy, which leads to a high reluctance of citizens because there is less income available to them to save or invest. However, the measures are justified precisely by the situation of economic overheating and the state’s intention to maintain an economic balance and create savings for the period of economic recession, which is inevitable, the two stages (overheating of the economy and economic recession) being natural stages of the economic cycle. The adhesion of the citizens appears finally through the prism of the economic sustainability of the state in general. It is the duty of the decision makers to explain to the citizens the role and place of each fiscal measure so as to meet as wide a support as possible. It is recommended to consult with the citizens on the development of fiscal policy for a wider accession.

The literature invokes [60] that the participation of citizens and civil society organizations in the European Union’s governance is very much focused on providing guidelines for the behaviour of EU institutions and less so on empowering the citizens.

Participation by means of civil dialogue (art. 11.2 TEU) and consultation (art. 11.3 TEU) mentioned in the Treaty on European Union [61] is mainly reserved for collective actors and normally depends on the possession of some quality or resources [62]. Consultation and civil dialogue could strengthen the contribution of functional interest representation to supranational governance, but there are no guarantees for the progress of enlightened understanding in the citizenry at large [63]. Hence, the model of participation is not considered a definitive answer to the changing democratic challenge facing the European Union.

What is certain is that these correlations are natural, precisely through the system of representation of citizens by decision makers, through the involvement of the inclusive citizen to consciously choose public authorities, and based on knowledge of the political program and development strategy that ultimately define good governance. Good governance starts with a responsible citizen involvement that understands the measures of economic, social, and environmental development, which contribute to sustainable development. Active citizenship is the keystone of the comprehensive development of society because by raising the awareness of every citizen and his involvement in the act of governing, in identifying needs and covering them, in fact ensures sustainable development.

From the perspective of public policies, the governors are challenged to develop systems for involving citizens in the decision-making process by developing the entire typology of public policies. Educational policies lead to an awareness of the citizen’s role in society, understanding of economic, social, and environmental phenomena, and involvement in the decision-making process. In practice, projects are implemented by European Universities that develop students’ civic engagement and participation in public life through learning by doing, being funded by the European Union, where the legal basis of the European Citizens’ initiative being established by the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Public policies on labour productivity aim at greater coverage of respect for the rights and obligations of citizens at all levels of society. Fiscal policy should be harmonized with the real needs (efficient public services) and real possibilities of the citizens (to pay taxes) in order to ensure the concomitant development of the country, the promotion of social inclusion, and the reduction of poverty without affecting financial stability. The phenomenon of participatory budgeting occurs as a result of the decentralization process, which means that the quality of the governing act is identified even at the local level, through local public authorities. Decentralization allows citizens to be involved in the development of their communities, and active citizenship acquires a real dimension of existence. Of course, according to the authors, the local government should develop a citizen-oriented strategy that allows all citizens to get involved in local democracy and self-government [39].

In theory, the European Union and all states involved in the analysis have legally regulated initiatives and citizen participation in public decision making in various forms, but in practice, citizen involvement is lower at the national level, requiring a concerted effort of citizens across the country. From this perspective, it would be necessary for these voluntary Citizens’ Associations to acquire legal status for a greater identity with the objectives and purpose for which the association was created, at least in some countries. At the municipal level, citizen participation has a very important role and is a powerful tool used in the strategic development of local communities. In Germany, in some communities, no real estate process is implemented without the consent of the citizens of that community through a referendum. In Romania, the local budget is approved by the deliberative authority after being subjected to the analysis of the citizens, and they can bring amendments. Participatory budgeting is encouraged in all states of the European Union, which is the best way for authorities to understand the needs of citizens, on the one hand, and to use their imagination in the act of local government, on the other.

6. Conclusions

This study has successfully answered to the research paper aims, namely, to highlight the status of active citizenship in a more responsible and efficient act of government, contributing to the economic growth and sustainable development for the 27 countries of the European Union using a linear regression model. From the path analysis results, it was found that the active citizenship confirms their implication in the effort to raise the quality of government, including public policies, and economic growth as a component of sustainable development. Active citizenship is thus considered a determining factor of integrated societal development, having a concrete impact on the quality of the governing act and economic development.

In conclusion, the people influence the political process and, through their active involvement, have the power to develop and negotiate the public policies and we encourage this practice. This participatory mechanism implies not only the involvement of citizens but also of different actors, such as governments and the business sector, being a manner to create a framework for debating and finding solutions for a better life quality. The increases in social needs and the necessity of the state to provide qualitative public services make governments think about new ways to cooperate with the citizens and civil society. In this context, all public policies should have a wide support of the citizens through their permanent involvement.

7. Limitations and Outlook

The limitation of this study is considered that although there are several composite active participation indices developed by the authors [3,4,22,36], these indicators were not calculated by time periods and by states so that they can be used in econometric analyses.

The future research directions that we will follow are to extend the analysis outside the European Union level and to develop a composite index for active citizenship, calculated by time periods and by states, to be used in time series or panel data.