ICT-Enabled Citizen Co-production in Excluded Areas – Using Volunteers in Emergency Response

  • Sofie PilemalmEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11686)


One of many contemporary public-sector challenges is the increasing socio-economic gaps and excluded areas in many cities worldwide. This study explores ICT-enabled citizen co-production using volunteers as first responders in excluded areas near Stockholm, the capital of Sweden. The study indicates that these volunteers can make a major difference if arriving first at an emergency site, e.g. saving lives by administering CPR and extinguishing fires before they spread. Major challenges relate to individual versus collective engagement, gender aspects and language barriers. Current ICT support, in the form of text messages or a basic app, is deemed sufficient but, for the initiative to expand and enable long-term effective engagement, calibrated solutions matching competence, role and language with incident and area are needed. In a public-sector innovation context, the study highlights the need for future research on digitalized co-production with an explicit focus on the ICT artifact and its co-creation artifact as catalysts for change. In relation to this, this study confirms previous research arguing for the merging of policy science and information systems research in an era of rapid digitalized public-sector transformation, but adds that they need to be complemented by perspectives from sociology, e.g. on gender and ethnicity, in initiatives involving citizens in excluded areas.


Public-sector innovation Co-production Citizen engagement ICT 



This study has been made possible by financial support from the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency and the Swedish Fire Research Board.


  1. 1.
    Haddow, G., Bullock, J., Coppola, D.P.: Introduction to Emergency Management, 5th edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, Waltham (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Linders, D.: From e-government to we-government: defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Gov. Inf. Q. 29(4), 446–454 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alford, J., O’Flynn, J.: Rethinking Public Service Delivery: Managing with External Providers. Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guldåker, N., Hallin, P.-O.: Spatio-temporal patterns of intentional fires, social stress and socio-economic determinants: a case study of Malmö, Sweden. Fire Saf. J. 70, 71–80 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chalfin, A., McCrary, J.: Criminal deterrence: a review of the literature. J. Econ. Lit. 55(1), 5–48 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    David, E., Enarson, E.: The Women of Katrina: How Gender, Race, and Class Matter in an American Disaster. Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Díaz, P., Carroll, J.M., Aedo, I.: Coproduction as an approach to technology-mediated citizen participation in emergency management. Future Internet 8(3), 41 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pilemalm, S.: Participatory design in emerging civic engagement initiatives in the new public Sector: applying PD concepts in resource-scarce organizations. ACM Trans. Hum.-Comput.-Interact. 5(1), 5–26 (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ramsell, E., Pilemalm, S., Andersson Granberg, T.: Using volunteers for emergency response in rural areas: network collaboration factors and IT support in the case of enhanced neighbors. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM), Albi, France (2019)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    AvBason, C.: Leading Public-Sector Innovation: Co-creating for a Better Society, 2nd edn. The Policy Press, Bristol (2018)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ostrom, E.: Crossing the great divide: coproduction, synergy, and development. World Dev. 24(6), 1073–1087 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schuler, D., Namioka, A. (eds.): Participatory Design: Principles and Practices. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale (1993)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ostrom, A.L., et al.: Moving forward and making a difference: research priorities for the science of service. J. Serv. Res. 13(1), 4–36 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Melin, U., Wihlborg, E.: Balanced and integrated e-government implementation: exploring the crossroad of public policy-making and information systems project management processes. Transform. Gov.: People Process Policy 12(2), 191–208 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Janowski, T., Pardo, T.A., Davies, J.: Government information networks: mapping electronic governance cases through public administration. Gove. Inf. Q. 29(1), 1–10 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gil-Garcia, J.R., Dawes, S.S., Pardo, T.A.: Digital government and public management research: finding the crossroads. Public Manag. Rev. 20(5), 633–646 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wijkström, F., Zimmer, A. (eds.): Nordic Civil Society at a Cross-Roads: Transforming the Popular Movement Tradition. Nomos, Baden-Baden (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Urinboyev, R.: Migration and parallel legal orders in Russia. Aleksanteri Insight-Expert Opinion Series 4, (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sefyrin J., Pilemalm, S.: “It’s more important to be fast than to be informed”: gender, age, disability and ethnicity in relation to IT in the Swedish Rescue Services. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y.S.: Entering the Field of Qualitative Research: Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Myers, M.: Qualitative Research in Business and Management. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Verschuere, V., Brandsen, T., Pestoff, V.: Co-production: the state of the art in research and the future agenda. VOLUNTAS: Int. J. Volunt. Non-Profit Organ. 23(4), 1083–1101 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kling, R., McKim, G., King, A.: A bit more to IT: scholarly communication forums as socio-technical interaction networks. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 54(1), 47–67 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shan, S., Wang, L., Li, L.: Modeling of emergency response decision-making process using stochastic Petri net: an e-service perspective. Inf. Technol. Manag. 13(4), 363–376 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Loukis, E., Janssen, M., Dawes, S., Zheng, L.: Evolving ICT and governance in organizational networks: conceptual and theoretical foundations. Electron. Mark. 26(1), 7–14 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Watson, R.T., Kelly, G.G., Galliers, R.D., Brancheau, J.C.: Key issues in information systems management: an international perspective. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 13(4), 91–115 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Klein, M., Maxson, C.: Street Gang Patterns and Policies. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Thijssen, P., van Dooren, W.: Who you are/where you live: do neighborhood characteristics explain co-production? Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. 82(1), 88–109 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hillgren, P., Seravalli, A., Emilson, A.: Prototyping and infrastructuring in design for social innovation. CoDesign 7(3–4), 169–183 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Halskov, K., Brodersen Hansen, N.B.: The diversity of participatory design research practice at PDC 2002–2012. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 74, 81–92 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Balka, E.: Participatory design in women’s organizations: the social world of organizational structure and the gendered nature of expertise. Gender, Work Organ. 4(2), 99–115 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dietrich, T., Trischler, J., Schuster, L., Rundle-Thiele, S.: Co-designing services with vulnerable consumers. J. Serv. Theory Pract. 27(3), 663–688 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Linköping UniversityLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations