Abstract
The recent special issue ‘Inside Co-production’ (edited by Bevir et al. in Social Policy & Administration, 2019) of the journal Social Policy and Administration called for a ‘decentring of co-production’ (p. 199) by focusing attention on elite narratives, local traditions and resistance, and meaningful practices. We continue the analysis of these themes in this chapter by highlighting what we view as important distinctions between co-production and Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in applied health research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alford, J. (2014). The multiple facets of co-production: Building on the work of Elinor Ostrom. Public Management Review, 16(3), 299–316.
Barnes, M., Newman, J., & Sullivan, H. (2007). Power, participation and political renewal: Case studies in public participation. Bristol: Policy Press.
Batalden, P. (2018). Getting more health from healthcare: Quality improvement must acknowledge patient coproduction—An essay by Paul Batalden. BMJ, 362, k3617.
Bate, P., & Robert, G. (2006). Experience-based design: From redesigning the system around the patient to co-designing services with the patient. BMJ Quality & Safety, 15(5), 307–310.
Beresford, P. (2013). Beyond the usual suspects: Towards inclusive user involvement—Findings. London: Shaping Our Lives.
Beresford, P. (2019a). Public participation in health and social care: Exploring the co-production of knowledge. Frontiers in Sociology, 3, 41.
Beresford, P. (2019b, January 14). Austerity is denying patients and care service users a voice. The Guardian. Viewed 29 April 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jan/14/austerity-denying-patients-care-service-users-voice.
Bevir, M. (2013). A theory of governance. London: University of California Press.
Bevir, M., Needham, C., & Waring, J. (2019). Inside co-production: Ruling, resistance, and practice. Social Policy & Administration. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12483.
Boivin, A., Richards, T., Forsythe, L., Grégoire, A., L’Espérance, A., Abelson, J., et al. (2018). Evaluating patient and public involvement in research. BMJ, 363, k5147.
Carding, N., Lintern, S., Clover, B., & Illman, J. (2018). Exclusive: Trusts alerted as firm stockpiles clinical waste and body parts. Health Service Journal [Online]. Available at: https://www.hsj.co.uk/policy-and-regulation/exclusive-trusts-alerted-as-firm-stockpiles-clinical-waste-and-body-parts/7023511.article. Accessed 12 April 2019.
Charlton, J. (1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. London: University of California Press.
Conklin, A., Morris, Z., & Nolte, E. (2015). What is the evidence base for public involvement in healthcare policy? Results of a systematic scoping review. Health Expectations, 18(2), 153–165.
Crompton, A. (2019). Inside co-production: Stakeholder meaning and situated practice. Social Policy & Administration, 53(2), 219–232.
Department of Health. (2010). Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS. London, UK: The Stationery Office Limited.
Donetto, S., & Cribb, A. (2011). Researching involvement in health care practices: Interrupting or reproducing medicalization? Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(5), 907–912.
Dorling, D. (2016). Brexit: The decision of a divided country. BMJ, 354, i3697.
Durose, C., Needham, C., Mangan, C., et al. (2017). Generating ‘good enough’ evidence for co-production. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 13(1), 135–151.
Glynos, J., & Speed, E. (2012). Varieties of co-production in public services: Time banks in a UK health policy context. Critical Policy Studies, 6(4), 402–433.
Green, D. (2018, November 15–16). UK PPI perspective on evaluation. Paper presented at the International Perspectives on Evaluation of Patient & Public Involvement in Research, Newcastle, UK.
Gregory, J. (2003). Scandinavian approaches to participatory design. International Journal of Engineering Education, 19(1), 62–74.
Hanna, E. (2018). Patient dignity must be central to appropriate disposal of body parts. BMJ Opinion [Online]. https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2018/10/19/esmee-hanna-patient-dignity-central-appropriate-disposal-body-parts/.
Hanna, E. (2019). “What do you want to do with the leg?” A critical narrative review of the understandings and implications of disposal in the context of limb amputations. SAGE Open, 9(2), 2158244019859953.
Hanna, E., & Robert, G. (2019, July 29). Ethics of limb disposal: Dignity and the medical waste stockpiling scandal. Journal of Medical Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105554.
Hickey, G., Brearley, S., Coldham, T., Denegri, S., Green, G., Staniszewska, S., et al. (2018). Guidance on co-producing a research project. Southampton: INVOLVE.
Hodge, S. (2005). Participation, discourse and power: A case study in service user involvement. Critical Social Policy, 25, 164–179.
hooks, b. (1981). Ain’t I a woman?: Black women and Feminism. Boston: South End Press.
Hunter, D. J. (2011). Change of government: One more big bang health care reform in England’s national health service. International Journal of Health Services, 41(1), 159–174.
INVOLVE. (2012). Briefing notes for researchers: Involving the public in NHS, public health and social care research. Eastleigh: INVOLVE.
INVOLVE. (2018). Examples of co-producing research: Expression of interest form. INVOLVE. Viewed 4 April 2018. https://www.invo.org.uk/current-work/co-production/#.
Kislov, R., Wilson, P. M., Knowles, S., & Boaden, R. (2018). Learning from the emergence of NIHR Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs): A systematic review of evaluations. Implementation Science, 13(1), 111.
Madden, M., & Speed, E. (2017). Beware zombies and unicorns: Toward critical patient and public involvement in health research in a neoliberal context. Frontiers in Sociology, 2, 7.
Maguire, K., & Britten, N. (2018). ‘You’re there because you are unprofessional’: Patient and public involvement as liminal knowledge spaces. Sociology of Health & Illness, 40(3), 463–477.
Marlow, L. A. V., Wardle, J., & Waller, J. (2015). Understanding cervical screening non-attendance among ethnic minority women in England. British Journal of Cancer, 113(5), 833–839.
Martin, G. P. (2008). ‘Ordinary people only’: Knowledge, representativeness, and the publics of public participation in healthcare. Sociology of Health & Illness, 30(1), 35–54.
Martin, G. P., & Carter, P. (2017). Patient and public involvement in the new NHS: Choice, voice, and the pursuit of legitimacy. In M. Bevir & J. Waring (Eds.), Decentring Health Policy (pp. 121–139). London: Routledge.
Martin, G. P., Carter, P., & Dent, M. (2018). Major health service transformation and the public voice: Conflict, challenge or complicity? Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 23(1), 28–35.
Martin, G. P., Currie, G., & Finn, R. (2009). Reconfiguring or reproducing intraprofessional boundaries? Specialist expertise, generalist knowledge and the ‘modernization’ of the medical workforce. Social Science and Medicine, 68(5), 1191–1198.
Mockford, C., Staniszewska, S., Griffiths, F., & Herron-Marx, S. (2011). The impact of patient and public involvement on UK NHS health care: A systematic review. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 24(1), 28–38.
Ocloo, J., & Matthews, R. (2016). From tokenism to empowerment: Progressing patient and public involvement in healthcare improvement. BMJ Quality & Safety, 25, 626–632.
O’Hara, J. K., & Lawton, R. J. (2016). At a crossroads? Key challenges and future opportunities for patient involvement in patient safety. BMJ Quality & Safe, 25, 565–568.
Oliver, K., Kothari, A., & Mays, N. (2019). The dark side of coproduction: Do the costs outweigh the benefits for health research? Health Research Policy and Systems, 17(1), 33.
Ostrom, E., Park, R. B., Whitaker, G. P., & Percy, S. L. (1978). The public service production process: A framework for analyzing police services. Policy Studies Journal 7(2), 381.
Ostrom, E., & Whitaker, G. (1973). Does local community control of police make a difference? Some preliminary findings. American Journal of Political Science, 17(1), 48–76.
Palmer, V. J., Weavell, W., Callander, R., Piper, D., Richard, L., Maher, L., Boyd, H., et al. (2019). The participatory zeitgeist: An explanatory theoretical model of change in an era of coproduction and codesign in healthcare improvement. Medical Humanities, 45(3), 247–257.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5–14.
Rose, D., Carr, S., & Beresford, P. (2018). Widening cross-disciplinary research for mental health: What is missing from the Research Councils’ UK mental health agenda? Current Issues Disability & Society, 33, 476–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2018.1423907.
Smith, J., Walshe, K., & Hunter, D. J. (2001). The ‘redisorganisation’ of the NHS. BMJ, 323(7324), 1262–1263.
Sobchack, V. (2010). Living a ‘phantom limb’: On the phenomenology of bodily integrity. Body & Society, 16(3), 51–67.
Speed, E. (2017). Transforming a public good into a private bad: Political legitimacy, wilful deceit and the reform of the NHS in England. In M. Bevir & J. Waring (Eds.), Decentring health policy. London: Routledge.
Staniszewska, S., Herron-Marx, S., & Mockford, C. (2008). Measuring the impact of patient and public involvement: The need for an evidence base. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 20(6), 373–374.
Wilson, P., Mathie, E., Poland, F., et al. (2018). How embedded is public involvement in mainstream health research in England a decade after policy implementation? A realist evaluation. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 23(2), 98–106.
Acknowledgements
Graham Martin and Oli Williams were supported during the writing of this chapter by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East Midlands (NIHR CLAHRC East Midlands). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Graham Martin and Oli Williams are supported by the Health Foundation’s grant to the University of Cambridge for The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute. The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute is supported by the Health Foundation—an independent charity committed to bringing about better health and healthcare for people in the United Kingdom.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Williams, O., Robert, G., Martin, G.P., Hanna, E., O’Hara, J. (2020). Is Co-production Just Really Good PPI? Making Sense of Patient and Public Involvement and Co-production Networks. In: Bevir, M., Waring, J. (eds) Decentring Health and Care Networks. Organizational Behaviour in Healthcare. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40889-3_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40889-3_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-40888-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-40889-3
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)