This is a list of votes held by major cities as part of a participatory budgeting process, where people living in the city are allowed to vote for a number of proposals, and the funded proposals are determined based on the votes. While not all participatory budgeting processes include a formal voting stage, it is a very common feature, particularly in Europe.[1] The list includes votes held in major cities with a population of at least and a total amount equivalent to at least being voted on. To be included, the vote must be open to the whole public (rather than limited to a jury) and its results must be de facto binding on the government. The list also includes votes held by states, provinces, or countries, if they meet these criteria (this includes Portugal and some Australian states).
Many cities divide their available budget among city districts and allow each voter to vote only on proposals located in their district.[2] In effect, these are several independent votes happening simultaneously, but in the list, these sub-elections are merged into one. Some cities additionally hold a vote about city-wide proposals, and some allow voters to vote in several or all districts.
Participatory budgeting processes typically go through several stages (usually including soliciting proposals, selecting proposals, voting on proposals, and implementation), and this can take several years. There are different conventions of which year to use in referring to a particular process (e.g. some cities use the year in which the vote occurs, and others the year in which project implementation starts).[3] In the table, the year refers to the year of the last day on which voters can cast their votes.
The list includes a brief description of the voting systems employed in the vote. This includes a choice of ballot format specifying how voters can indicate their preferences. The table uses the following terms to describe common choices:[4] [5]
Cities then use a system to decide on the winning proposals. Typically this is done by sorting proposals by the number of votes the proposal received, and then repeatedly selecting the proposals with the highest number until the available budget runs out. Some cities also impose additional constraints on the process (such as a maximum amount that can be spent in any single neighborhood, or a minimum amount that must be spent in a certain category of projects) or use a more complicated participatory budgeting rule (see Combinatorial participatory budgeting for detailed descriptions of common aggregation rules).
| City | Year | Population | Voters | Budget | Proposals (elected) | Voting system | Notes | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New South Wales | 2019 | [6] | data-sort-value="c00000024700000" | 1500 (248)[7] | Rank 3–5 projects. | Ranks get converted into points (10, 5, 3, 2, 1 points). Each electorate was allocated the same amount of funding, and voting and decisions were done separately in each electorate. | |||
| Victoria | 2018 | [8] | [9] | data-sort-value="c00000030000000" | 2300 (237) | 3-approval among projects near (5 km/50 km) living place.[10] | At most 50% of a region's budget can be spent in one locality. | ||
| Brussels | 2018 | [11] | data-sort-value="c00000000134070" | 18 (10) | Knapsack vote, city-wide.[12] | ||||
| Montreal | 2021 | [13] | data-sort-value="c00000025000000" | [14] | 35 (12) | 5-approval. | Budget was increased from 10 million to 25 million after the vote. | ||
| Helsinki | 2021 | [15] | data-sort-value="c00000008800000" | [16] | 396 (75)[17] | Knapsack vote, city-wide and 1 district.[18] | |||
| Helsinki | 2019 | [19] | data-sort-value="c00000004400000" | [20] | 296 (44)[21] | ||||
| Brest | 2022 | data-sort-value="c00000001300000" | [22] | 42 (19)[23] | Rank 3 projects (3 points to the first-ranked / 2 points to the second-ranked / 1 point to the third-ranked). | Select the highest ranking project in each district, then follow complicated rules for the remaining budget. | |||
| Grenoble | 2022 | [24] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | [25] | 27 (7) | Vote for 6 projects.[26] | |||
| Grenoble | 2020 | [27] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | 29 (12) | Vote for 6 projects.[28] | ||||
| Grenoble | 2019 | [29] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | 21 (9)[30] | Vote for 5 projects.[31] | ||||
| Grenoble | 2018 | [32] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | [33] | 23 (6) | Vote for 1 large project (> €200k) and 4 small projects (< €200k). | 1 large project wins, and as many small projects as the budget allows. | ||
| Grenoble | 2017 | [34] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | [35] | 25 (9)[36] | Vote for 1 large project (> €200k) and 6 small projects (< €200k). | 1 large project wins, and as many small projects as the budget allows. | ||
| Grenoble | 2016 | [37] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | 26 (13)[38] | Vote for 2 large projects (> €100k) and 5 small projects (< €100k).[39] | ||||
| Grenoble | 2015 | [40] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | [41] | 19 (9) | Rank 2 of the large projects (> €100k) and 4 of the small projects (< €100k). | |||
| Lille | 2022 | [42] | data-sort-value="c00000002000000" | [43] | 70 (20) | 5-approval.[44] | data-sort-value="c00000000500000" | reserved for projects proposed by minors. | |
| Lyon | 2022 | [45] | data-sort-value="c00000012500000" | [46] | 217 (110)[47] [48] | 10-approval.[49] | Voters have to vote for at least 3 projects. They can vote for projects in all districts, each of which has a separate maximum budget that can be spent on projects from that district.[50] | ||
| Paris | 2023 | data-sort-value="c00000075960000" | [51] | Grade projects on a 4-point scale.[52] | Majority judgment. | ||||
| Paris | 2022 | [53] | data-sort-value="c00000082000000" | 204 (62) | Grade projects on a 4-point scale. | Select a fixed number (2 or 3) of projects in each district with the highest median score (majority judgment). | |||
| Paris | 2021 | [54] | data-sort-value="c00000075000000" | 217 (62) | Grade projects on a 4-point scale. | Select a fixed number (2 or 3) of projects in each district with the highest median score (majority judgment). | |||
| Paris | 2019 | [55] | data-sort-value="c00000100000000" | [56] | 430 (192) | 4-approval for city-wide and 4-approval for district projects.[57] | |||
| Paris | 2018 | [58] | data-sort-value="c00000088000000" | [59] | 457 (180) | 4-approval for city-wide and 4-approval for district projects. | |||
| Paris | 2017 | [60] | data-sort-value="c00000092000000" | [61] | 484 (196) | 5-approval for city-wide and 5-approval for district projects. | |||
| Paris | 2016 | data-sort-value="c00000094100000" | [62] | 624 (219)[63] [64] | 5-approval for city-wide and 5-approval for district projects. | A minimum of 30 million euros must be allocated to projects in working-class neighborhoods. | |||
| Paris | 2015 | data-sort-value="c00000067700000" | 624 (188)[65] | 5-approval for city-wide and 5-approval for district projects. | |||||
| Paris | 2014 | data-sort-value="c00000017700000" | 15 (9)[66] | 5-approval for city-wide projects. | |||||
| Saint-Denis | 2021 | [67] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | [68] | 86 (24)[69] | Rank 3 projects in district and city-wide. | Gives 3/2/1 points to the ranked projects. | ||
| Strasbourg | 2021 | data-sort-value="c00000002000000" | [70] | 68 (19)[71] | Spread 5 points among projects.[72] | ||||
| Strasbourg | 2019 | [73] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | 68 (31) | Spread 5 points among projects. | Winner selection somewhat ad hoc.[74] | |||
| Toulouse | 2022 | [75] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | [76] | 200 (83) | 3-approval city-wide.[77] | Each district has a budget of . The remaining can be used for projects from any district. | ||
| Toulouse | 2019 | [78] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | 30 (14)[79] | Spread 7 points across projects, with each project getting at most 3 points.[80] | Budget was raised from after the vote ended to fund more projects. | |||
| Wuppertal | 2021 | [81] | data-sort-value="c00000000200000" | [82] | 31 (6) | 5-approval city-wide.[83] | The budget was partially contributed by private partners. of the budget was set aside for micro-projects with cost under . Shortlisting projects was partially achieved via a separate vote. | ||
| Budapest | 2022 | [84] | data-sort-value="c00001000000000" | [85] | 49 (18) | Projects come in three categories, vote for exactly 1 large project and 1 small project in each category.[86] | |||
| Budapest | 2021 | [87] | data-sort-value="c00001000000000" | 53 (15) | Projects come in three categories, vote for exactly 1 project in each category.[88] | ||||
| Reykjavík | 2021 | [89] | [90] | data-sort-value="c00000850000000" | 277 (111) | Knapsack vote with option to "star" one project, giving it 2 votes[91] | |||
| Reykjavík | 2019 | [92] | data-sort-value="c00000450000000" | 239 (91)[93] | Knapsack vote with option to "star" one project, giving it 2 votes[94] | ||||
| Reykjavík | 2018 | [95] | data-sort-value="c00000450000000" | [96] | 238 (88) | Knapsack vote with option to "star" one project, giving it 2 votes[97] | |||
| Reykjavík | 2017 | [98] | data-sort-value="c00000450000000" | 230 (76)[99] | Knapsack vote with option to "star" one project, giving it 2 votes[100] | ||||
| Reykjavík | 2016 | [101] | data-sort-value="c00000455700000" | [102] | 190 (112) | Knapsack vote[103] | |||
| Bologna | 2020 | [104] | data-sort-value="c00000002000000" | 79 (24)[105] | Choose 1 redevelopment (investment) project, and 1 neighborhood priority. | For redevelopment projects, the most voted proposal of each district is implemented. For neighborhood priorities, the top 3 of each district are implemented and are funded with 75,000, 55,000 and 28,000 euros, respectively. | |||
| Bologna | 2018 | [106] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | [107] | 33 (6) | Choose 1 project.[108] | For each district, the most voted project of each district is implemented. | ||
| Bologna | 2017 | [109] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | 27 (6) | Choose 1 project.[110] | For each district, the most voted project of each district is implemented.[111] | |||
| Milan | 2018 | [112] | data-sort-value="c00000004500000" | [113] | 47 (12) | 3-approval.[114] | 3 projects funded with reduced budget. | ||
| Rome | 2019 | [115] | data-sort-value="c00000020000000" | 111 (65) | 3-approval, city-wide.[116] | Focussed on urban decor.[117] Budget allocation to districts was partially based on district area. Bonus budget went to the district with highest turnout. | |||
| Riga | 2022 | [118] | data-sort-value="c00000000693000" | 30 (11) | Knapsack vote. | ||||
| Riga | 2021 | [119] | data-sort-value="c0000000606032" | 22 (10) | Knapsack vote. | ||||
| Riga | 2020 | [120] | data-sort-value="c00000000500000" | 15 (6) | Knapsack vote. | ||||
| Riga | 2019 | [121] | data-sort-value="c00000000494797" | 14 (6) | Knapsack vote. | ||||
| Gdańsk | 2022 | [122] | [123] | data-sort-value="c00000022063118" | [124] | 305 (117)[125] | Choose 1 city-wide project, 1 city-wide green project, 1 district green project, and spread 5 points across projects in any district.[126] | ||
| Gdańsk | 2021 | [127] | data-sort-value="c00000020830669" | [128] | 387 (121) | Choose 1 city-wide project, 1 city-wide green project, 1 district green project, and spread 5 points across projects in any district. | Projects need at least 200 points to win (400 points for city-wide projects).[129] | ||
| Gdańsk | 2020 | [130] | data-sort-value="c00000018428001" | 357 (115)[131] | Choose 1 city-wide project, 1 city-wide green project, 1 district green project, and spread 5 points across projects in any district.[132] | ||||
| Gdańsk | 2019 | [133] | data-sort-value="c00000018543609" | [134] | 331 (75) | Choose 1 city-wide project, and spread 5 points across projects in any district. | |||
| Gdańsk | 2018 | [135] | data-sort-value="c00000019549000" | [136] | 319 (82) | Choose 1 city-wide project, and spread 5 points across projects in any district.[137] | Projects must receive at least 100 votes to win. Unused funds are saved for the following year.[138] | ||
| Gdańsk | 2017 | [139] | data-sort-value="c00000014000000" | [140] | 297 (103) | Choose 1 city-wide project, and spread 5 points across projects in any district. | |||
| Gdańsk | 2016 | [141] | data-sort-value="c00000012500000" | 254 (91) | Choose 1 city-wide project, and spread 5 points across projects in any district.[142] | ||||
| Gdynia | 2021 | [143] | data-sort-value="c00000011148564" | 297 (123) | 3-approval for city, district (small projects), district (large projects)[144] | One project was partially funded by a donor who contributed | |||
| Gdynia | 2020 | [145] | data-sort-value="c00000010608600" | 281 (130) | 3-approval for city, district (small projects), district (large projects)[146] | ||||
| Gdynia | 2019 | [147] | data-sort-value="c00000010178864" | 275 (117) | Rank 5 projects in city and in district.[148] | City and district councils decided to fund some projects that did not fit in the available budget. | |||
| Gdynia | 2018 | [149] | data-sort-value="c00000005898400" | 97 (31) | Rank 5 projects in district.[150] | As incentive, the district with the highest turnout gets an extra "+1" project funded. | |||
| Gdynia | 2017 | [151] | data-sort-value="c00000005310198" | 132 (32) | Rank 5 projects in district.[152] | As incentive, the district with the highest turnout gets an extra "+1" project funded. | |||
| Gdynia | 2016 | [153] | data-sort-value="c00000005203543" | 141 (31) | Rank 5 projects in district (5 points for the top rank, 4 points for the second rank, etc).[154] | As incentive, the district with the highest turnout gets an extra "+1" project funded. | |||
| Gdynia | 2015 | [155] | data-sort-value="c00000004597796" | [156] | 177 (40)[157] | Knapsack vote. | |||
| Gdynia | 2014 | [158] | data-sort-value="c00000003000000" | 234 (41) | Knapsack vote.[159] | Unspent funds (in 2014,) carry over to the next year. 11 of the 41 winning projects concerned the development of outdoor gyms. | |||
| Kraków | 2021 | [160] | data-sort-value="c00000035000000" | 596 (180) | Rank 3 projects in city and in district.[161] | ||||
| Kraków | 2020 | [162] | data-sort-value="c00000032000000" | 574 (195) | Rank 3 projects in city and in district.[163] | ||||
| Kraków | 2019 | [164] | data-sort-value="c00000030000000" | 557 (171)[165] | Rank 3 projects in city and in district.[166] | Voters were entered into a lottery to win 100 tablet computers. | |||
| Poznań | 2021 | [167] | data-sort-value="c00000022000000" | [168] | 150 (35) | Choose 1 city-wide project, 1 green project, 2 district projects. | Separate district elections plus city-wide and green election. | ||
| Poznań | 2020 | [169] | data-sort-value="c00000021000000" | 175 (34) | Choose 1 city-wide project, 1 green project, 2 district projects.[170] | Separate district elections plus city-wide and green election. | |||
| Poznań | 2019 | [171] | data-sort-value="c00000021000000" | [172] | 239 (35) | Choose 1 city-wide project, and 2 district projects.[173] | Separate district elections plus city-wide election. | ||
| Poznań | 2018 | [174] | data-sort-value="c00000020000000" | 259 (30)[175] | Choose 1 city-wide project, and 2 district projects.[176] | Separate district elections plus city-wide election. | |||
| Warsaw | 2022 | [177] | [178] | data-sort-value="c00000093575094" | 1429 (349) | 15-approval in district, 10-approval city-wide.[179] | |||
| Warsaw | 2021 | [180] | data-sort-value="c00000083000000" | 1503 (359) | 15-approval in district, 10-approval city-wide.[181] | ||||
| Warsaw | 2020 | [182] | data-sort-value="c00000083000000" | 1425 (414) | 15-approval in district, 10-approval city-wide.[183] | ||||
| Warsaw | 2019 | [184] | data-sort-value="c00000064000000" | [185] | 1628 (850) | Knapsack vote. Vote for projects in a single neighborhood.[186] | In some districts, can vote (knapsack) for the district and vote (knapsack) for a neighborhood. | ||
| Warsaw | 2018 | [187] | data-sort-value="c00000061419912" | 1808 (881) | |||||
| Warsaw | 2017 | [188] | data-sort-value="c00000058588894" | 1749 (770) | Knapsack vote. Vote for projects in a single neighborhood.[189] | In some districts, can vote (knapsack) for the district and vote (knapsack) for a neighborhood. | |||
| Warsaw | 2016 | [190] | data-sort-value="c00000051000000" | 1464 (644) | Knapsack vote. Vote for projects in a single neighborhood.[191] | In some districts, can vote (knapsack) for the district and vote (knapsack) for a neighborhood. | |||
| Warsaw | 2015 | [192] | data-sort-value="c00000026000000" | [193] | 1390 (336) | 5-approval. Vote for projects in a single neighborhood.[194] | In some districts, can vote (5-approval) for the district and vote (5-approval) for a neighborhood. | ||
| Wrocław | 2022 | [195] | data-sort-value="c00000030000000" | [196] | 170 (17)[197] | Choose 1 local project and 1 global project. | Separate budget limit for local and global projects, but no separate elections per district. | ||
| Wrocław | 2021 | [198] | data-sort-value="c00000025000000" | [199] | 173 (20)[200] | Choose 1 local project and 1 global project. | Separate budget limit for local and global projects, but no separate elections per district. | ||
| Wrocław | 2020 | [201] | data-sort-value="c00000025000000" | [202] | 199 (20)[203] | Choose 1 local project and 1 global project. | Separate budget limit for local and global projects, but no separate elections per district. | ||
| Wrocław | 2019 | [204] | data-sort-value="c00000025000000" | [205] | 235 (20)[206] | Choose 1 local project and 1 global project. | Separate budget limit for local and global projects, but no separate elections per district. | ||
| Wrocław | 2018 | [207] | data-sort-value="c00000025250000" | [208] | 263 (63)[209] | Choose 1 small local project, 1 large local project, 2 city-wide projects, 1 monument project. | Each district is allocated the same budget. | ||
| Wrocław | 2017 | [210] | data-sort-value="c00000025000000" | [211] | 372 (64)[212] | Choose 1 small local project, 1 large local project, 2 city-wide projects. | Each district is allocated the same budget. | ||
| Łódź | 2021 | [213] | data-sort-value="c00000026000000" | 716 (257)[214] | 5-approval for local projects and 5-approval for global projects. | Separate district elections plus city-wide election. Voter can vote for local projects in two districts. | |||
| Łódź | 2020 | [215] | data-sort-value="c00000024000000" | [216] | 601 (242) | 5-approval for local projects and 5-approval for global projects. | Separate district elections plus city-wide election. Voter can vote for local projects in two districts. | ||
| Łódź | 2019 | [217] | data-sort-value="c00000050000000" | 1043 (261) | 5-approval.[218] | Separate district elections. Voter can vote for local projects in all districts. | |||
| Łódź | 2018 | [219] | data-sort-value="c00000040000000" | [220] | 837 (235)[221] | 5-approval for local projects and 5-approval for global projects.[222] | Separate district elections plus city-wide election. Voter can vote for local projects in one district. | ||
| Łódź | 2017 | [223] | data-sort-value="c00000040000000" | [224] | 730 (233) | 5-approval for local projects and 5-approval for global projects.[225] | Separate district elections plus city-wide election. Voter can vote for local projects in one district. | ||
| Portugal | 2018 | [226] | data-sort-value="c00000005000000" | [227] | 691 (22) | Choose 1 nation-wide project and 1 regional project.[228] | Could vote online or by SMS. | ||
| Portugal | 2017 | [229] | data-sort-value="c00000003000000" | [230] | 599 (38) | Choose 1 nation-wide project and 1 regional project.[231] | Could vote online or by SMS. | ||
| Barcelona | 2021 | [232] | data-sort-value="c00000030000000" | [233] | 184 (76) | Knapsack vote. Each voter can vote in their district of residence and a second freely chosen district. | |||
| Madrid | 2022 | [234] | data-sort-value="c00000050000000" | [235] | 209 (132)[236] | Knapsack vote with negative votes.[237] Negative votes subtract 0.33 points. | |||
| Madrid | 2019 | [238] | data-sort-value="c00000100000000" | [239] | 693 (369) | Knapsack vote.[240] | |||
| Madrid | 2018 | [241] | data-sort-value="c00000100000000" | [242] | 702 (328)[243] | Knapsack vote.[244] | |||
| Madrid | 2017 | [245] | data-sort-value="c00000100000000" | [246] | 720 (311)[247] | Knapsack vote. | |||
| Madrid | 2016 | [248] | data-sort-value="c00000060000000" | 623 (206)[249] | Knapsack vote. | ||||
| Valencia | 2021 | [250] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | [251] | 283 (139) | Knapsack vote.[252] | |||
| Valencia | 2019 | [253] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | 63 (21) | Knapsack vote. | Single city-wide election. | |||
| Valencia | 2018 | [254] | data-sort-value="c00000008000000" | 202 (103) | Knapsack vote. | ||||
| Valencia | 2017 | [255] | data-sort-value="c00000007000000" | 47 (7) | Knapsack vote. | Single city-wide election. | |||
| Valencia | 2017 | [256] | data-sort-value="c00000007000000" | 115 (71) | Knapsack vote. | ||||
| Lausanne | 2022 | [257] | data-sort-value="c00000000175000" | [258] | 21 (12) | Approval vote. | Need to vote for at least 3 projects, no maximum.[259] | ||
| Lausanne | 2021 | [260] | data-sort-value="c00000000175000" | 15 (11) | Knapsack vote. | data-sort-value="c00000000012928" | were left unspent. | ||
| Zürich | 2021 | [261] | data-sort-value="c00000000540000" | 135 (61) | Knapsack vote in one of 4 districts. | ||||
| Cambridge | 2021 | [262] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | 20 (7) | 5-approval.[263] | Budget overshot to fund 7th project. | |||
| Cambridge | 2020 | [264] | data-sort-value="c00000000500000" | [265] | 16 (7) | 5-approval. | Budget overshot to . | ||
| Cambridge | 2019 | [266] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | 20 (8) | 5-approval. | Budget overshot to . | |||
| Cambridge | 2018 | [267] | data-sort-value="c00000000900000" | 20 (6) | 5-approval. | Budget overshot to . | |||
| Cambridge | 2017 | [268] | data-sort-value="c00000000800000" | 20 (7) | 5-approval. | Budget overshot to . | |||
| Cambridge | 2016 | [269] | data-sort-value="c00000000700000" | [270] | 20 (7) | 5-approval. | Budget overshot to . | ||
| Cambridge | 2015 | [271] | data-sort-value="c00000000600000" | 23 (7) | 6-approval. | One project's budget was reduced to fit in the budget.[272] | |||
| Cambridge | 2015 | [273] | data-sort-value="c00000000500000" | [274] | 20 (6) | 5-approval. | Pilot. Budget overshot to . | ||
| Greensboro | 2019 | [275] | data-sort-value="c00000000500000" | [276] | 26 (20)[277] | Some projects received partial funding to fit within the budget. 5 separate district elections. | |||
| New York City | 2019 | [278] | data-sort-value="c00000039000000" | 346 (145)[279] | 5-approval. | Residents of 32 city council districts were able to vote on projects in their district. | |||
| New York City | 2018 | [280] | data-sort-value="c00000028500000" | 303 (122)[281] | 5-approval. | Residents of 27 city council districts were able to vote on projects in their district. | |||
| New York City | 2017 | [282] | data-sort-value="c00000040000000" | 394 (138) | 5-approval.[283] | Residents of 31 city council districts were able to vote on projects in their district. | |||
| New York City | 2016 | [284] | data-sort-value="c00000038295700" | 379 (132) | 5-approval. | Residents of 28 city council districts were able to vote on projects in their district. | |||
| New York City | 2015 | [285] | data-sort-value="c00000032459025" | 348 (114)[286] [287] | 5-approval. | Residents of 24 city council districts were able to vote on projects in their district. | |||
| Vallejo | 2021 | [288] | data-sort-value="c00000000500000" | [289] | 11 (8) | ||||
| Vallejo | 2019 | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | [290] | 12 (9) | 2-approval.[291] | ||||
| Vallejo | 2018 | [292] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | [293] | 10 (10) | 2-approval.[294] | 1 project received partial funding. | ||
| Vallejo | 2017 | [295] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | [296] | 19 (4)[297] | 4-approval.[298] | |||
| Vallejo | 2015 | [299] | data-sort-value="c00000001000000" | 25 (5) | Vote for 1 of 2 "people projects" and for 4 of 17 "infrastructure projects".[300] | ||||
| Vallejo | 2014 | [301] | data-sort-value="c00000002440000" | 42 (8) | 5-approval.[302] | ||||
| Vallejo | 2013 | [303] | data-sort-value="c00000003200000" | 33 (12) | 6-approval.[304] |