Although governance systems play a crucial role in securing an accountable public sector, they can grow overly resource demanding, cause problematic distortion of welfare tasks and crowd out motivation among employees. This study contributes to existing literature by conceptualizing co-creation as a pathway for solving dysfunctionalities in governance systems and explores the prospects of such an approach. Based on a case study of the development of a municipal supervision system, the study outlines the characteristics of co-creating governance systems. The results points to co-creation as a promising, although resource demanding, pathway for finding robust solutions to dysfunctionalities in governance systems.
AggerA.TortzenA.RosenbergC. (2018). Hvilken værdi skaber vi med samskabelse. Aarhus.
2.
AnsellC.TorfingJ. (2020). Public governance as co-creation: A strategy for revitalizing public administration and rejuvenating democracy. Cambridge University Press.
3.
AnsellC.TorfingJ. (2021). Co-creation: The new kid on the block in public governance. Policy and Politics, 49(2), 211–230.
4.
ArnsteinS. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224.
5.
BasonC. (2018). Leading public sector innovation 2E. Policy press.
6.
BentzenT. Ø. (2019). The birdcage is open, but will the bird fly? How interactional and institutional trust interplay in public organisations. Journal of Trust Research, 9(2), 185–202.
7.
BentzenT. Ø. (2020a). Continuous co-creation: How ongoing involvement impacts outcomes of co-creation. Public Management Review, 1–21. Advance online publication.
8.
BentzenT. Ø. (2020b). Samskabt styring - nye veje til afbureaukratisering (Vol. 1). Samfundslitteratur.
9.
BovairdT.LoefflerE. (2012). From engagement to co-production: The contribution of users and communities to outcomes and public value. VOLUNTAS International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(4), 1119–1138.
10.
BovensM.GodwinR.SchillemansT. (2014). Oxford Handbook of public accountability. Oxford University Press.
11.
BozemanB.FeeneyM. K. (2015). Rules and red tape - A prism for public administration theory and research. Routledge.
12.
BrandsenT.HoninghM. (2016). Distinguishing different types of coproduction: A conceptual analysis based on the classical definitions. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 427–435.
13.
BrandsenT.VerschuereB.SteenT. (2018). Co-production and co-creation: Engaging citizens in public services. Taylor and Francis.
14.
BrixJ.KrogstrupH. K.MortensenN. M. (2020). Evaluating the outcomes of co-production in local government. Local Government Studies, 46(2), 169–185.
15.
BrysonJ.SancinoA.BeningtonJ.SørensenE. (2017). Towards a multi-actor theory of public value co-creation. Public Management Review, 19(5), 640–654.
16.
BurdenB. C.CanonD. T.MayerK. R.MoynihanD. P. (2012). The effect of administrative burden on bureaucratic perception of policies: Evidence from election administration. Public Administration Review, 72(5), 741–751.
17.
CigerB. (2001). Multi-organizational, multisector and multicommunity organizations: Setting the research agenda. In MandellM. P. (Ed.), Getting results through collaboration: Networks and network structures for public policy and management (pp. 71–85). Quorum Books.
18.
ColettiA. L.SedatoleK. L.TowryK. L. (2005). The effect of control systems on trust and cooperation in collaborative environments. The Accounting Review, 80(2), 477–500.
19.
Cristina CostaA.Bijlsma-FrankemaK. (2007). Trust and control interrelations. Group & Organization Management, 32(4), 392–406.
20.
de BruijnH. (2002). Performance measurement in the public sector: Strategies to cope with the risks of performance measurement. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 15(7), 578–594.
21.
DeHart-DavisL. (2017). Creating effective rules in public sector organizations. Georgetown University Press.
22.
de JonghJ. (2016). Dealing with dysfunction - innovative problem solving in the public sector. Brookings Institution Press.
23.
du GayP. (2000). In praise of bureaucracy: Weber, organization, ethics. SAGE Publications Ltd.
24.
DuitA.GalazV. (2008). Governance and complexity emerging issues for governance theory. Governance, 21(3), 311–335.
25.
EcheverriP.SkålénP. (2011). Co-creation and co-destruction: A practice-theory based study of interactive value formation. Marketing Theory, 11(3), 351–373.
26.
EdelenbosJ.EshuisJ. (2012). The interplay between trust and control in governance processes: A conceptual and empirical investigation. Administration & Society, 44(6), 647–674.
27.
EdvardssonB.GustafssonA.KristenssonP.TronvollB.WitellL. (2014). New service development from the perspective of value co-creation in a service system (pp. 346–369). In Handbook of Service Marketing Research. Edward Elgar Publishing.
28.
EisenhardtK. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.
29.
FarshchianB. A.ThomassenH. E. (2019). Co-creating platform governance models using boundary resources: A case study from dementia care services. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 28(3–4), 549–589.
30.
FledderusJ. (2018). The effect of co-production on trust. In BrandsenT.SteenT.VerschueB. (Eds.), Co-production and co-creation engaging citizens in public services (pp. 258–265). Routledge.
31.
FlyvbjergB. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.
GrayB. (1989). Collaboration: Finding common ground for multi-party problems. Jossey-Bass.
34.
HerdP.MoynihanD. P. (2018). Administrative burden: Policymaking by other means. Russell SAGE Foundation.
35.
HoodC.DixonR. (2015). A government that worked better and cost less? - Evaluating three decades of reform and change in UK central government (1st ed.). Oxford University Press.
36.
HoulbergK.EjersboN. (2020). Municipalities and regions - Approaching the limit of decentralization? In ChristiansenP. M.ElklitJ.NedergaardP. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Danish politics (pp. 141–159). Oxford University Press.
37.
HuxhamC.VangenS. (2000). Leadership in the shaping and implementation of collaboration agendas: How things happen in a (not quite) joined-up world. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1159–1175.
38.
KaufmannW.FeeneyM. K. (2012). Objective formalization, perceived formalization and perceived red tape: Sorting out concepts. Public Management Review, 14(8), 1195–1214.
39.
KeastR.BrownK.MandellM. (2007). Getting the right mix: Unpacking integration meanings and strategies. International Public Management Journal, 10(1), 9–33.
40.
KeastR.MandellM. (2014). The collaborative push: Moving beyond rhetoric and gaining evidence. Journal of Management & Governance, 18(1), 9–28.
41.
KlijnE. H.EdelenbosJ.SteijnB. (2010). Trust in governance networks: Its impacts on outcomes. Administration & Society, 42(2), 193–221.
42.
LadnerA.KeufferN.BaldersheimH. (2016). Measuring local autonomy in 39 countries (1990–2014). Regional & Federal Studies, 26(3), 321–357.
43.
LangleyJ.WolstenholmeD.CookeJ. (2018). ‘Collective making’ as knowledge mobilisation: The contribution of participatory design in the co-creation of knowledge in healthcare. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 585.
44.
Le GrandJ. (2003). Motivation, agency, and public policy. Oxford University Press.
45.
LipskyM. (2010). Street-level Bureaucracy:Dilemmas of the individual in public service (2nd ed.). Russel SAGE Foundation.
46.
MayP. J.WinterS. C. (2009). Politicians, managers, and street-level bureaucrats: Influences on policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(3), 453–476.
47.
MertonR. K. (1940). Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Forces, 18, 560–568.
48.
MoynihanD.HerdP.HarveyH. (2015). Administrative burden: Learning, psychological, and compliance costs in citizen-state interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 43–69.
49.
NabatchiT. (2012). Putting the “Public” back in public values research: Designing participation to identify and respond to values. Public Administration Review, 72(5), 699–708.
50.
NabatchiT.SancinoA.SiciliaM. (2017). Varieties of participation in public services: The who, when and what of coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766–776.
51.
NorrisP. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge University Press.
52.
PapadopoulosY. (2007). Problems of democratic accountability in network and multilevel governance. European Law Journal, 13(4), 469–486.
53.
PollittC.BouckaertG. (2011). Public management reform (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
54.
RittelH. W. J.WebberM. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
55.
RomzekB. S.LeRouxK.BlackmarJ. M. (2012). A preliminary theory of informal accountability among network organizational actors. Public Administration Review, 72(3), 442–453.
56.
SabatierP. A. (1998). Top down and bottom-up approaches to implementation reserach. In HillM. (Ed.), The policy proces (2nd ed., pp. 271–295). Prentice-Hall.
57.
SchillemansT. (2013). Moving beyond the clash of interests: On stewardship theory and the relationships between central government departments and public agencies. Public Management Review, 15(4), 541–562.
58.
SchillemansT.BjurstrømK. H. (2020). Trust and verification: Balancing agency and stewardship theory in the governance of agencies. International Public Management Journal, 23(5), 650–676.
59.
SchnedlerW.VadovicR. (2011). Legitimacy of control. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 20(4), 985–1009.
60.
SimonofskiA.SnoeckM.VanderoseB. (2019). Co-creating e-government services: An empirical analysis of participation methods in Belgium. In Rodriguez BolivarM. (Ed.), Setting foundations for the creation of public value in smart cities (pp. 225–245). Springer.
61.
SitkinS.CardinalL.Bijlsma-FrankemaK. (2010). Organizational control. Cambridge companions to management. Cambridge University Press.
62.
SmithG. (2009). Democratic innovations: Designing institutions for citizen participation (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
63.
SteenT.BrandsenT.VerschuereB. (2018). The dark side of co-creation and co-production seven evils. In BrandsenT.VerschuereB.SteenT. (Eds.), Co-production and co-creation (pp.279–296). Routledge.
64.
StickdornM.SchneiderJ. (2012). This is service design thinking: Basics, tools, cases (5th printing ed.). BIS.
65.
SunsteinC. R. (2019). Sludge audits (pp. 1–20). Behavioural Public Policy.
66.
SørensenE.TorfingJ. (2011). Enhancing collaborative innovation in the public sector. Administration & Society, 43, 842–868.
TorfingJ.SørensenE.BentzenT. O. (2019a). Institutional design for collective and holistic political leadership. International Journal of Public Leadership, 15(1), 58–76.
69.
TorfingJ.SørensenE.RøiselandA. (2019b). Transforming the public sector into an arena for co-creation: Barriers, drivers, benefits, and ways forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 795–825.
70.
TuurnasS.StenvallJ.RannistoP. H. (2016). The impact of co-production on frontline accountability: The case of the conciliation service. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82(1), 131–149.
71.
van BuerenE. M.KlijnE.KoppenjanJ. (2003). Dealing with wicked problems in networks: Analyzing an environmental debate from a network perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(2), 193–212.
72.
van ThielS.YesilkagitK. (2011). Good neighbours or distant friends?Public Management Review, 13(6), 783–802.
73.
VargoS. L.LuschR. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.
74.
VerhoestK.PetersB. G.BouckaertG.VerschuereB. (2004). The study of organisational autonomy: A conceptual review. Public Administration and Development, 24(2), 101–118.
75.
VoorbergW.BekkersJ. J. M.TummersL. G. (2014). Co-creation in social innovation. IRSPM.
76.
VoorbergW. H.BekkersV. J. J. M.TummersL. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357.
77.
WarrenM. E. (2009). Governance-driven democratization. Critical Policy Studies, 3(1), 3–13.
78.
WeberE. P.KhademianA. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 334–349.
79.
WeibelA.RostK.OsterlohM. (2010). Pay for performance in the public sector—benefits and (hidden) costs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(2), 387–412.
