The involvement of users in the co-production of public services is of increasing importance as fiscal and financial crises put pressure on public spending in many countries around the world. The role of co-production in public policy is also important as it creates opportunities for users’ empowerment through their greater involvement in the key aspects of services on which they rely. However, there are practical and conceptual limitations to co-production. Citizens normally lack the training and experience to perform specialized services, and the substitution of paid personnel with voluntary efforts means that some of the costs are transferred to co-producers themselves . Co-production and users taking over public services under the financial crisis and austerity, might usher in a new era of democratizing public services or instigate a race to the bottom. This short article highlights the need for broadening and deepening our knowledge of the various forms of co-production, in order to understand the conditions for potentially transformative effects of co-production on the participants and policy environment. In conclusion, I argue that examining the new emerging forms of co-production, including those that promote different social goals and alternative ways of organizing, might provide an answer to questions about the future of public services.
AlfordJ. (2002). Why do public-sector clients co-produce? Toward a contingency theory. Administration & Society, 34, 32-56.
2.
AlfordJ. (2009). Engaging public sector clients: From service-delivery to co-production. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
3.
AlfordJ. (2014). The multiple facets of co-production Baker. Public Administration Review, 16, 3, 299-316.
4.
BakerJ. (2010). Co-production of local services. London, England: Local Government and Research Councils.
5.
BauwensM. (2005). The political economy of peer production. In ArthurKrokerMarilouise (Eds.), 1000 Days of theory. Victoria, Canada: CTHEORY. Retrieved from http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=449
6.
BauwensM. (2012). Evolving towards a partner state in an ethical economy. In BoteroA.PatersonA. G.Saad-SulonenJ. (Eds.), Towards peer production in public services: Cases from Finland (pp. 34-49). Helsinki, Finland: Alto University.
7.
BettencourtL. A.ÖstromA. L.BrownS. W. (2002). Client co-production in knowledge intensive service firms. California Management Review, 44, 100-128.
8.
BoteroA.PatersonA. G.Saad-SulonenJ. (2012). Towards peer production in public services: Cases from Finland. Helsinki, Finland: Alto University.
9.
BovairdT. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: Users and community co-production of services. Public Administration Review, 67, 846-860.
10.
BoyleD.HarrisM. (2009). The Challenge of Co-production. London: NESTA.
11.
Department of Health. (2006). National evaluation of the pilot phase of the expert patient programme. London, England: Author.
12.
Department of Health. (2007). Research evidence on the effective of self-care support. London, England: Author.
13.
FerrettiM. P.PavoneV. (2009). What do civil society organizations expect from participation in science? Lessons from Germany and Spain on the issue of GMOs. Science and Public Policy, 36, 287-299.
14.
FotakiM. (2011). Towards developing new partnerships in public services: Users as consumers, citizens and/or co-producers driving improvements in health and social care in the UK and Sweden. Public Administration, 89, 933-995.
15.
Gibson-GrahamJ. K. (2006). A postcapitalist politics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
16.
GlendinningC.ChallisD.FernandezJ.JacobsS.JacobsK.MoranN.. . . WilberforceM. (2008). Evaluation of the individual budgets pilot programme. York, UK: Individual Budgets Evaluation Network.
17.
GlynosJ.SpeedE. (2012). Varieties of co-production in public services: Timebanks in a UK health policy context. Critical Policy Studies, 6, 402-433.
GregoryL. (2009). Change takes time: Exploring the structural and development issues of time banking. International Journal of Community Currencies, 13, 19-36.
20.
GritzasG.KavoulakosK. I.AmanatidouE. (2012, July1-2). Alternative spaces in Greece in the era of crisis. Some principles for classification and evaluation of “alterity.”Presented at ERSA conference, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki and University of Macedonia, Greek.
21.
HallP.SoskiceD. (2001). Varieties of capitalism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
22.
HjörthD. (2013). Public entrepreneurship: Desiring social change, creating sociality. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25, 34-51
23.
JakobsenM.AndersenS. C. (2013). Coproduction and equity in public service delivery. Public Administration Review, 73, 704-713.
24.
JoshiA.MooreM. (2004). Institutionalised co-production: Unorthodox public service delivery in challenging environments. The Journal of Development Studies, 40(4), 31-49.
25.
KennyK.FotakiM. (2014). The psychosocial and organization studies: Affect at work. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
26.
KennyK.WhittleA.WillmottH. (2012). Understanding identity and organizations. London, England: SAGE.
27.
NeedhamC.CarrS. (2009). Co-production: An emerging evidence base for adult social care transformation. London: Social Care Institute for Excellence.
28.
Office for Public Management. (2008). Budget-holding lead professional pilots: Final report. London, England: Author.
29.
OsborneS. P.RadnorZ. J.NasiG. (2013). A new theory for public service management? Towards a service-dominant approach. American Review of Public Administration, 43, 135-158.
30.
ÖstromE.BaughW. H. (1973). Community organization and the provision of police services. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
31.
PestoffV. (2006). Citizens and co-production of welfare services childcare in eight European countries. Public Management Review, 8, 508-519.
32.
PestoffV. (2009). Towards a paradigm of democratic participation: Citizen participation and co-production of personal social services in Sweden. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 80, 197-224.
33.
PestoffV.OsborneS. P.BrandsenT. (2006). Patterns of co-production in public services: Some concluding thoughts. Public Management Review, 8, 591-595.
34.
RadnorZ.OsborneS. P.KinderT.MuttonJ. (2014). Operationalizing co-production in public services delivery: The contribution of service blueprinting. Public Management Review, 16, 402-423.
35.
RamírezR. (1999). Value co-production: Intellectual origins and implications for research and practice. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 49-65.
36.
Ridley-DuffR. J.BullM. (2011). Understanding social enterprise: Theory and practice. London, England: SAGE.
37.
SeyfangG. (2008). The new economics of sustainable consumption: The seeds of change. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
38.
SimonH. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
39.
SotiropoulosD.BourikosD. (2014). Economic crisis, social solidarity and the voluntary sector in Greece. Journal of Power, Politics & Governance, 2, 33-53.
40.
TaylorD. (2011). Wellbeing and welfare: A psychosocial analysis of being well and doing well enough. Journal of Social Policy, 40, 777-794.
41.
UngerR. M. (2000). Democracy realized: The progressive alternative. London, England: Verso.
42.
UNICEF Office of Research. (2014). Children of the recession: The impact of the economic crisis on child well-being in rich countries. Innocenti Report Card 1 Florence: UNICEF Office of Research.
43.
VaillancourtY. (2009). Social economy in the co-construction of public policy. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 80, 275-313.
44.
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, 358-382.
45.
VoronovM.VinceR. (2012). Integrating emotions into the analysis of institutional work. The Academy of Management Review, 37, 58-81.
