In this paper, I explore how different conceptions of public value influence the types of co-production that professionals undertake in delivering projects to reduce loneliness and isolation of older people. The analysis shows a preponderance of individual and group co-production by the case in England, driven by aims to create user and group value, whereas the French case emphasizes collective co-production linked to social and political value. The research contributes to the co-production literature by showing how types of co-production are prioritized to a different extent to address the same social problem, shaped in part by cultural and political context.
AberbachJ. D.ChristensenT. (2005). Citizens and consumers: An NPM dilemma. Public Management Review, 7(2), 225–246.
2.
AlfordJ. (2014). The multiple facets of co-production: Building on the work of Elinor Ostrom. Public Management Review, 16(3), 299–316.
3.
AlfordJ.O’FlynnJ. (2009). Making sense of public value: Concepts, critiques and emergent meanings. International Journal of Public Administration, 32(3–4), 171–191.
4.
AlfordJ.O’FlynnJ. (2012). Rethinking public service delivery: Managing with external providers. Macmillan International Higher Education.
BevirM.RhodesR. A. W.WellerP. (2003). Traditions of governance: Interpreting the changing role of the public sector. Public Administration, 81(1), 1–17.
7.
BouchardM.BourqueG. L.LévesqueB.DesjardinsÉ. (2001). L’évaluation de l’économie sociale dans la perspective des nouvelles formes de régulation socio-économique de l’intérêt général. Cahiers de recherche sociologique, (35), 31–53.
8.
BovairdT. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 846–860.
9.
BovairdT.FlemigS.LoefflerE.OsborneS. P. (2017). Debate: Co-production of public services and outcomes. Public Money & Management, 37(5), 363–364.
10.
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.
11.
BovairdT.StokerG.JonesT.LoefflerE.RoncancioM. P. (2016). Activating collective co-production of public services: Influencing citizens to participate in complex governance mechanisms in the UK. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82(1), 47–68.
12.
BoyleD.HarrisM. (2009). The challenge of co-production: How equal partnerships between professionals and the public are crucial to improving public services. New Economics Foundation.
13.
BrudneyJ. L.EnglandR. E. (1983). Toward a definition of the coproduction concept. Public Administration Review, 43(1), 59.
DudauA.GlennonR.VerschuereB. (2019). Following the yellow brick road? (Dis)enchantment with co-design, co-production and value co-creation in public services. Public Management Review, 21(11), 1577–1594. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1653604
19.
DuroseC.RichardsonL. (2016). Designing public policy for co-production: Theory, practice and change. Policy Press.
20.
FokkemaT.GierveldJ. D. J.DykstraP. A. (2012). Cross-national differences in older adult loneliness. The Journal of Psychology, 146(1–2), 201–228.
21.
JaspersS.SteenT. (2021). Does co-production lead to the creation of public value? Balancing the dimensions of public value creation in urban mobility planning. Administration & Society, 53(4), 619–646. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399720957613
22.
JoS.NabatchiT. (2018). Co-production, co-creation and citizen empowerment. In BrandsenT.SteenT.VerschuereB. (Eds.), Co-production and co-creation: Engaging citizens in public services (pp. 231–239). Routledge.
23.
LabordeC. (2000). The concept of the state in British and French political thought. Political Studies, 48(3), 540–557.
24.
LavilleJ-L. (2010). Politique de l’association. Seuil.
25.
LeadbeaterC. (2004). Personalisation through participation: A new script for public services. DEMOS.
26.
LoefflerE.BovairdT. (2021). User and community co-production of public value. In LoefflerE.BovairdT. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of co-production of public services and outcomes (pp. 31–57). Palgrave Macmillan.
27.
LoughlinJ.PetersB. G. (1997). State traditions, administrative reform and regionalization. In KeatingM.LoughlinJ. (Eds.), The political economy of regionalism (pp. 41–62). Routledge.
28.
McMullinC. (2019). Coproduction and the third sector in France: Governmental traditions and the French conceptualization of participation. Social Policy & Administration, 53(2), 295–310.
29.
McMullinC. (2021). Challenging the necessity of New Public Governance: Co-production by third sector organizations under different models of public management. Public Administration, 99(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12672
30.
McMullinC.NeedhamC. (2018). Co-production and healthcare. In BrandsenT.SteenT.VerschuereB. (Eds.), Co-production and Co-creation: Engaging citizens in public service delivery (pp. 151–160). Routledge.
31.
MooreM. (1995). Creating public value. Harvard University Press.
32.
NabatchiT.SancinoA.SiciliaM. (2017). Varieties of participation in public services: The who, when, and what of coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766–776.
33.
NeedhamC. (2008). Realising the potential of co-production: Negotiating improvements in public services. Social Policy and Society, 7(2), 221–231.
34.
OngaroE. (2009). Administrative traditions and models of reform: Napoleonic countries between global paradigms and the Neo-Weberian State. In E. Ongaro (Ed.), Public management reform and modernization: Trajectories of administrative change in Italy, France, Greece, Portugal and Spain (pp. 247–280). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
35.
OsborneS. P.RadnorZ.StrokoschK. (2016). Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: A suitable case for treatment?Public Management Review, 18(5), 639–653.
36.
OstromE. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1087.
37.
ParksR. B.BakerP. C.KiserL.OakersonR.OstromE.OstromV.PercyS. L.VandivortM. B.WhitakerG. P.WilsonR. (1981). Consumers as coproducers of public services: Some economic and institutional considerations. Policy Studies Journal, 9(7), 1001–1011.
38.
ParradoS.Van RyzinG. G.BovairdT.LöfflerE. (2013). Correlates of co-production: Evidence from a five-nation survey of citizens. International Public Management Journal, 16(1), 85–112.
39.
PestoffV. (2008). A democratic architecture for the welfare state. Routledge.
40.
PestoffV.BrandsenT.VerschuereB. (Eds.). (2012). New public governance, the third sector and co-production. Routledge.
41.
PetersB. G. (2008). The napoleonic tradition. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21(2), 118–132.
SeawrightJ.GerringJ. (2008). Case selection techniques in case study research: A menu of qualitative and quantitative options. Political Research Quarterly, 61(2), 294–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912907313077
44.
SharpE. B. (1980). Toward a new understanding of urban services and citizen participation: The coproduction concept. Midwest Review of Public Administration, 14(2), 105–118.
45.
SmithS. R. (2010). Nonprofits and public administration: Reconciling performance management and citizen engagement. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(2), 129–152.
46.
SundströmG.FranssonE.MalmbergB.DaveyA. (2009). Loneliness among older Europeans. European Journal of Ageing, 6(4), 267–275.
47.
SuzukiK.DolleryB. E.KorttM. A. (2020). Addressing loneliness and social isolation amongst elderly people through local co-production in Japan. Social Policy & Administration, 55(4), 674–686. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12650
48.
ThomasG. (2011). How to do your case study: A guide for students and researchers. Sage Publications.
49.
TuurnasS. (2015). Learning to co-produce? The perspective of public service professionals. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 28(7), 583–598.
50.
Van EijkC. J. A.SteenT. P. S. (2014). Why people co-produce: Analysing citizens’ perceptions on co-planning engagement in health care services. Public Management Review, 16(3), 358–382.
51.
Van EijkC.SteenT.VerschuereB. (2017). Co-producing safety in the local community: A Q-methodology study on the incentives of Belgian and Dutch members of neighbourhood watch schemes. Local Government Studies, 43(3), 323–343.
52.
VictorC. R.ScamblerS. J.BowlingA.BondJ. (2005). The prevalence of, and risk factors for, loneliness in later life: A survey of older people in Great Britain. Ageing & Society, 25(6), 357–375.
53.
VoorbergW.BekkersV.FlemigS.TimeusK.TonuristP.TummersL. (2017). Does co-creation impact public service delivery? The importance of state and governance traditions. Public Money & Management, 37(5), 365–372.
