Advertisement

Co-production: The State of the Art in Research and the Future Agenda

  • Bram VerschuereEmail author
  • Taco Brandsen
  • Victor Pestoff
Original Paper

Abstract

In this introductory article to the thematic issue, our aim is to discuss the state of the art in research on co-production of public services. We define co-production, for the purpose of this article rather narrowly, as the involvement of individual citizens and groups in public service delivery. We discuss the concept along three main research lines that emerge from the literature: what are the motives for co-production? How can co-production be organized effectively? What are the effects of co-production? Secondly, we also critically assess the state of the art and discuss some conceptual and methodological issues that are still open to debate. Thirdly, we propose some directions for future research: greater methodological diversity and the need for empirical and comparative research with a specific attention for theoretical advancement in co-production research.

Keywords

Co-production Research State of the art Motives Effects Theory 

Résumé

Dans cet article d’introduction à la question thématique, notre objectif est de discuter le pointe de la dans la recherche sur la coproduction des services publics. Nous définissons la coproduction, dans le but de cet article plutôt étroite, comme la participation des citoyens et des groupes dans la prestation des services publics. Nous discutons du concept le long de trois lignes de recherche principales qui se dégagent de la littérature : quels sont les motifs de coproduction ? Comment pouvez coproduction être organisée efficacement ? Quels sont les effets de coproduction ? Deuxièmement, nous avons aussi critique évaluer l’état de l’art et discuter de certains problèmes conceptuels et méthodologiques qui sont encore ouverts au débat. Troisièmement, nous proposons quelques orientations pour la recherche future : une plus grande diversité méthodologique et la nécessité pour la recherche empirique et comparative avec une attention spécifique d’avancement théorique dans la recherche de la coproduction.

Zusammenfassung

In diesem einführenden Artikel zur thematischen Ausgabe ist unser Ziel, dem von der Stand in der Forschung auf Koproduktion der öffentlichen Dienstleistungen zu diskutieren. Wir definieren Koproduktion im Sinne dieses Artikels ziemlich eng, als die Beteiligung der einzelnen Bürger und Gruppen in öffentlichen Dienstleistungen. Wir diskutieren das Konzept entlang drei Forschungsschwerpunkte-Linien, die von der Literatur entstehen: Was sind die Motive für Koproduktion? Wie kann die Koproduktion effektiv werden organisiert? Was sind die Auswirkungen der Co-Produktion? Zweitens, wir auch kritisch bewerten den Stand der Technik und diskutieren einige konzeptionelle und methodische Probleme, die noch offen zu diskutieren sind. Drittens schlagen wir eine Wegbeschreibung für die künftige Forschung: größere methodische Vielfalt und die Notwendigkeit für die empirische und vergleichende Forschung mit einer besonderen Aufmerksamkeit für die theoretische Weiterentwicklung in Co-Produktion-Forschung

Resumen

En este artículo introductorio a la cuestión temática, nuestro objetivo es debatir el estado de la arte en investigación en coproducción de los servicios públicos. Definimos la coproducción, con el propósito de este artículo bastante restringida, como la participación de los ciudadanos individuales y grupos en la prestación de servicios públicos. Discutimos el concepto a lo largo de los tres principales líneas de investigación que surgen de la literatura: ¿Cuáles son los motivos para la coproducción? ¿Cómo puede coproducción organizarse eficazmente? ¿Cuáles son los efectos de la coproducción? En segundo lugar, que también críticamente evaluar el estado del arte y discutir algunos problemas conceptuales y metodológicos que siguen abren al debate. En tercer lugar, proponemos algunas direcciones para futuras investigaciones: mayor diversidad metodológica y la necesidad de una investigación empírica y comparativa con una atención específica para avance teórico en la investigación de coproducción.

摘要

介绍本文中的主题性的问题,我们的目的是讨论研究的国家耐心艺术联产的公共服务。我们联合制作,而这篇文章,而是狭义定义为公民个人和提供公共服务中的组的参与。我们讨论的概念从文学出现的三个主要研究线沿线: 联产的动机是什么?如何可以联产将有效地组织了?联产的影响是什么?第二,我们也会审慎评估艺术状态,并讨论一些概念和方法的问题,仍是打开进行辩论。第三,我们建议一些未来的研究方向: 更多的方法不同和实证研究和比较研究与理论研究进展联产研究具体注意事项需要。

要約

主題の問題にこの入門記事では、私たちの目的は、上の公共サービスの共同研究の 芸術状態を議論します。この資料の目的のための共同制作は個々 の市民と公共サービスの配信でグループの関与として僅差ではなく、定義します。文学から出てくる 3 つの主な研究ラインに沿ってコンセプトについて説明: 共同制作の動機は何ですか?どのように共同整理できますか?共同製作の効果とは何ですか第二に、また批判的、芸術の状態を評価し、討論をまだ開いているいくつかの概念と方法論的問題を議論します。第三に、提案するいくつかの方向の今後の研究: 方法論的多様性の大きいと共同研究の理論的発展のための特定の関心を実証的・比較研究の必要性。

ملخص

في هذه المقالة تمهيدية للقضية المواضيعية، هدفنا لمناقشة أحدث في الأبحاث حول الإنتاج المشترك للخدمات العامة. نحن تعريف الإنتاج المشترك، ولأغراض هذه المادة بدلاً من ذلك الضيق، كالمشاركة من المواطنين الأفراد والجماعات في تقديم الخدمات العامة. ونحن نناقش هذا المفهوم على ثلاثة محاور البحث الرئيسية التي تنبثق عن الأدب: ما هي الدوافع للإنتاج المشترك؟ كيف يمكن تنظيم الإنتاج المشترك الفعال؟ ما هي آثار الإنتاج المشترك؟ وثانيا، نحن أيضا حاسمة تقييم لحالة الفن، ومناقشة بعض القضايا المفاهيمية والمنهجية التي ما زالت مفتوحة المناقشة. ثالثا، نقترح بعض التوجيهات للبحوث المستقبلية: زيادة التنوع المنهجي، والحاجة إلى إجراء البحوث التجريبية والمقارنة مع إيلاء اهتمام محدد للنهوض النظرية في بحوث الإنتاج المشترك.

References

  1. Agranoff, R. (2007). Managing within networks. Adding value to public organisations. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alford, J. (2002). Why do public sector clients co-produce? Towards a contingency theory. Administration & Society, 34(1), 32–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alford, J. (2009). Engaging public sector clients. From service delivery to co-production. New York: Palgrave Macmillian.Google Scholar
  4. Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement & participation: User & community co-production of public services. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 846–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brandsen, T., & Helderman, J. (2012). The conditions for successful co-production in housing: A case study of German housing cooperatives. In V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Brandsen, T., & Pestoff, V. (2006). Co-production, the third sector and the delivery of public services: An introduction. Public Management Review, 8(4), 493–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brandsen, T., & Pestoff, V. (2009). Co-production, the third sector and the delivery of public services: An introduction. In V. Pestoff & T. Brandsen (Eds.), Co-production. The third sector and the delivery of public services. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, K., Keast, R., Waterhouse, J., Murphy, G., & Mandell, M. (2012). Co-management to solve homelessness: Wicked solutions for wicked problems. In V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Brudney, J., & England, R. (1983). Towards a definition of the co-production concept. Public Administration Review, 43, 59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cahn, E., & Gray, C. (2012). Co-production from a normative perspective. In V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Calabro, A. (2012). Co-production: An alternative to the partial privatization processes in Italy and Norway. In V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society—The information age: Economy, society and culture. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  13. Douglas, J. (1987). Political theories of nonprofit organizations. In W. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Etzioni, A. (1993). The spirit of community: Rights, responsibilities and the communitarian agenda. New York: Crown.Google Scholar
  15. Glazer, N. (1989). The self service society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hansmann, H. (1980). The role of nonprofit enterprise. Yale Law Journal, 89, 835–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. James, E. (1987). The nonprofit sector in comparative perspective. In W. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Jaworski, B., & Kohli, A. (1993). Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57, 53–70.Google Scholar
  19. Meijer, A. (2012). Co-production in an information age. In V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Osborne, S. P. (2006). The new public governance. Public Management Review, 8(3), 377–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Osborne, S. P. (Ed.). (2010). The new public governance? Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Ostrom, V. (1973). The intellectual crisis in American Public Administration (3rd ed. 2008). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
  23. Ostrom, E. (1975). The delivery of urban services: Outcomes of change. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ostrom, E. (1999). Crossing the great divide. Co-production, synergy & development, polycentric governance and development. In M. D. McGinnes (Ed.), Reading from the workshop in political theory and policy analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  26. Ostrom, E. (2009). Nobel Prize lecture. www.nobelprize.org.
  27. Parks, R. B., et al. (1981). Consumers as co-producers of public services: Some economic and institutional considerations. Policy Studies Journal, 9(7), 1001–1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Parks, R. B., et al. (1999). Consumers as co-producers of public services. Some institutional and economic considerations. Polycentric governance and development. In M. D. McGinnes (Ed.), Reading from the workshop in political theory and policy analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  29. Pestoff, V. (1998). Beyond the market and state. Civil democracy and social enterprises in a welfare society. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  30. Pestoff, V. (2006). Citizens as co-producers of welfare services: Preschool services in eight European countries. Public Management Review, 8(4), 503–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pestoff, V. (2008). A democratic architecture for the welfare state: Promoting citizen participation, the third sector and co-production. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Pestoff, V. (2012). Co-production and third sector social services in Europe—Some crucial conceptual issues. In V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production (Chap. 2). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Pestoff, V., Brandsen, T., & Verschuere, B. (Eds.). (2012). New public governance, the third sector and co-production. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Porter, D. (2012). Coproduction and network structures in public education. In V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Powell, W., & DiMaggio, P. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Rosentraub, M. S., & Sharp, E. B. (1981). Consumers and producers of social services: Co-production and the level of social services. Southern Review of Public Administration, 4(March), 502–539.Google Scholar
  38. Salamon, L. (1987). Partners in public service: The scope and theory of government—Nonprofit relations. In W. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Salamon, L. (2002). The tools of government: A guide to the new governance. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Salamon, L., & Anheier, H. (1998). Social origins of civil society: Explaining the nonprofit sector cross-nationally. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 9, 213–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schlappa, H. (2012). Co-management in urban regeneration: New perspectives on transferable collaborative practice. In V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Smith, S. R. (2002). Social services. In L. Salamon (Ed.), The state of the nonprofit sector. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press.Google Scholar
  43. Smith, S. R., & Grönbjerg, K. (2006). Scope and theory of government—Nonprofit relations. In W. W. Powell & R. Steinberg (Eds.), The nonprofit sector—A research handbook. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (1993). Nonprofits for hire: The welfare state in the age of contracting. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Vamstad, J. (2007). Governing welfare: The third sector and the challenges to the Swedish Welfare State. Doctoral dissertation, Mid Sweden University, Östersund.Google Scholar
  46. Vamstad, J. (2012). Co-production and service quality: A new perspective for the Swedish welfare state. In V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Warren, R., Harlow, K. S., & Rosentraub, M. S. (1982). Citizen participation in services: Methodological and policy issues in co-production research. Southwestern Review of Management and Economics, 2, 41–55.Google Scholar
  48. Weisbrod, B. (1977). The voluntary nonprofit sector. Lexington: Lexington Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society for Third-Sector Research and The Johns Hopkins University 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bram Verschuere
    • 1
    Email author
  • Taco Brandsen
    • 2
  • Victor Pestoff
    • 3
  1. 1.University College Ghent & Ghent UniversityGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Radboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Ersta Skondal University CollegeStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations