Advertisement

Leveraging Collaborative Governance: How Co-production Contributes to Outcomes and Public Value in a Small Town

Chapter
  • 155 Downloads
Part of the System Dynamics for Performance Management & Governance book series (SDPM, volume 4)

Abstract

Collaborative governance is increasingly considered an effective approach to improve outcomes and public value. This chapter focuses on co-production as an instrument to implement collaborative governance at local level. It is not uncommon that small towns develop co-production processes to deliver cultural and touristic services. Out of a literature review, the study develops a Dynamic Multidimensional Performance Management framework to explore the impact of co-production on community outcomes. To this end, this chapter discusses the case “Museo Civico di Castelbuono (MCC)”,which concerns the co-production process of the guided tour of the museum’s venue. The resulting model provides insights into how co-production improves management outcomes, organizational, and community-level performance, finding that the motivation of co-producers drives service capacity. Lastly, the analysis of performance drivers and associated measures offers several implications for policy design and implementation and suggests strategic levers to make collaborative governance work.

Keywords

Collaborative Governance Co-production of Public Service Urban Regeneration and Renewal Performance Management Outcomes Governance Platforms and Multisided Market-Places System Dynamics Case study Action Research 

References

  1. Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management new strategies for local governments. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alford, J. (2009). Engaging public sector clients: From service-delivery to co-production. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. Alford, J. (2014). The multiple facets of co-production: Building on the work of Elinor Ostrom. Public Management Review, 16(3), 299–316.Google Scholar
  4. Alford, J. (2016). Citizen co-production of public services. In T. R. Klassen, D. Cepiku, & T. J. Lah (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of global public policy and administration. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2007). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571.Google Scholar
  6. Bardach, E. (1998). Getting agencies to work together. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7864/j.ctv86ddm9Google Scholar
  7. Bianchi, C. (2010). Improving performance and fostering accountability in the public sector through system dynamics modelling: From an ‘external’ to an ‘internal’ perspective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 27(4), 361–384.Google Scholar
  8. Bianchi, C. (2015). Enhancing joined-up government and outcome-based performance management through system dynamics modelling to deal with wicked problems: The case of societal ageing. Systems Research & Behavioural Science, 32, 502–505.Google Scholar
  9. Bianchi, C. (2016). Dynamic performance management. Zurich, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. Bianchi, C., Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2017). Applying a dynamic performance management framework to wicked issues: How coproduction helps to transform young People’s Services in Surrey County Council, UK. International Journal of Public Administration, (40), 833–846.Google Scholar
  11. Bianchi, C., & Rivenbark, W. C. (2014). Performance management in local government: The application of system dynamics to promote data use. International Journal of Public Administration, 37(13), 945–954.Google Scholar
  12. Bivona, E., & Cosenz, F. (2018). Designing outcome-based performance management systems to assess policies impacting on caesarean section rate: An analysis of the Sicilian maternity pathway. In E. Borgonovi, E. Anessi-Pessina, & C. Bianchi (Eds.), Outcome-based performance management in the public sector (pp. 63–77). Zurich, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  13. Bianchi, C., Bereciartua, P., Vignieri, V., & Cohen, A. (2019). Enhancing urban brownfield regeneration to pursue sustainable community outcomes through dynamic performance governance. International Journal of Public Administration, 00(00) 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2019.1669180
  14. Borgonovi, E. (2002). Principi e sistemi aziendali per le amministrazioni pubbliche. Milan, Italy: EGEA.Google Scholar
  15. Bouckaert, G., Peters, B., & Verhoest, K. (2010). The coordination of public sector organizations: Shifting patterns of public management. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  16. Bouckaert, G., Peters, G., & Verhoest, K. (2017). The coordination of public sector organizations. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 846–860.Google Scholar
  18. Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2016). What has co-production ever done for interactive governance? In J. Edelenbos & I. van Meerkerk (Eds.), Critical reflections on interactive governance: Self-organization and participation in public governance. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, Incorporated.Google Scholar
  19. Bovaird, T., & Löffler, E. (2009). Public management and governance (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Bovaird, T., Stoker, G., Jones, T., Loeffler, E., & Roncancio, M. 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.Google Scholar
  21. Bovaird, T., Van Ryzin, G. G., Loeffler, E., & Parrado, S. (2015). Activating citizens to participate in collective co-production of public services. Journal of Social Policy, 44(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
  22. Boyle, D., & Harris, M. (2009). The challenges of co-production: How equal partnerships between professionals and the public are crucial to improving public services. London, UK: Nesta.Google Scholar
  23. 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.Google Scholar
  24. Buonincontri, P., Morvillo, A., Okumus, F., & van Niekerk, M. (2017). Managing the experience co-creation process in tourism destinations: Empirical findings from Naples. Tourism Management, 62, 264–277.Google Scholar
  25. Cepiku, D. (2013). Unraveling the concept of public governance: A literature review of different traditions. In L. Gnan, A. Hinna, & F. Monteduro (Eds.), Conceptualizing and researching governance in public and non-profit organizations (pp. 3–32). Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
  26. Cepiku, D. (2014). Network performance: Towards a dynamic multidimensional model. In R. Keast, M. P. Mandell, & R. Agranoff (Eds.), Network theory in the public sector: Building new theoretical frameworks. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Cepiku, D. (2016). Collaborative governance. In T. R. Klassen, D. Cepiku, & T. J. Lah (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of global public policy and administration. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Cepiku, D., & Giordano, F. (2014). Co-production in developing countries: Insights from the community health workers experience. Public Management Review, 16(3), 317–340.Google Scholar
  29. Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2007). The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform. Public Administration Review, 67(6), 1059–1066.Google Scholar
  30. Durose, C., Mangan, C., Needham, C., & Rees, J. (2013). Transforming local public services through co-production. Birmingham, UK: University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
  31. Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679.Google Scholar
  32. Edelenbos, J., & van Meerkerk, I. (2016a). Critical reflections on interactive governance: Self-organization and participation in public governance. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  33. Edelenbos, J., & van Meerkerk, I. (2016b). Introduction: Three reflecting perspectives on interactive governance. In J. Edelenbos & I. van Meerkerk (Eds.), Critical reflections on interactive governance: Self-organization and participation in public governance (pp. 1–28). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  34. Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29.Google Scholar
  35. Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  36. Forrester, J. W. (1969). Urban dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  37. Forrester, J. W. (1992). Policies, decisions and information sources for modeling. European Journal of Operational Research, 59(1), 42–63.Google Scholar
  38. Frederickson, H. G. (2009). Whatever happened to public administration?: Governance, governance everywhere. In E. Ferlie, L. E. Lynn, & C. Pollitt (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public management. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Fugini, M., Bracci, E., & Sicilia, M. (2016). Co-production in the public sector: Experiences and challenges. Zurich, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  40. Fukuyama, F. (2013). What is governance? Governance, 26(3), 347–368.Google Scholar
  41. Ghaffarzadegan, N., Lyneis, J., & Richardson, G. P. (2011). How small system dynamics models can help the public policy process. System Dynamics Review, 27(1), 22–44.Google Scholar
  42. Hill, C., & Lynn, L. (2003). Producing human services why do agencies collaborate? Public Management Review, 5(1), 63–81.Google Scholar
  43. Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2017). The Achilles heels of collaboration: Overcoming critical capacity deficits in collaborative governance arrangements. Joint NUS-FPZG UNESCO Chair Workshop: The Governance of Collaboration: Co-Production, Contracting, Commissioning and Certification.Google Scholar
  44. Huxham, C. (2012). Collaboration and collaborative advantage. In C. Huxham (Ed.), Creating collaborative advantage. London, UK: Sage.  https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221600.n1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Huxham, C., Vangen, S., Huxham, C., & Eden, C. (2000). The challenge of collaborative governance. Public Management: An International Journal of Research and Theory, 2(3), 337–358.Google Scholar
  46. Imperial, M. T. (2005). Using collaboration as a governance strategy: Lessons from six watershed management programs. Administration and Society, 37(3), 281–320.Google Scholar
  47. Jakobsen, M., & Andersen, S. C. (2013). Coproduction and equity in public service delivery. Public Administration Review, 73(5), 704–713.Google Scholar
  48. Keast, R., Mandell, M. P., & Agranoff, R. (2014). Network theory in the public sector: Building new theoretical frameworks. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. Klijn, E. H. (2008). Governance and governance networks in Europe. Public Management Review, 10(4), 505–525.Google Scholar
  50. Klijn, E.-H., Steijn, B., & Edelenbos, J. (2010). The impact of network management on outcomes in governance networks. Public Administration, 88(4), 1063–1082.Google Scholar
  51. Lang, R., Roessl, D., & Weismeier-Sammer, D. (2013). Co-operative governance of public–citizen partnerships: Two diametrical participation modes. In L. Gnan, A. Hinna, & F. Monteduro (Eds.), Conceptualizing and researching governance in public and non-profit organizations (pp. 227–246). Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
  52. Lewis, P., Thornhill, A., & Saunders, M. (2007). Research methods for business students. New York, NY: Financial Times/Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  53. Loeffler, E., & Bovaird, T. (2016). User and community co-production of public services: What does the evidence tell us? International Journal of Public Administration, 39(13), 1006–1019.Google Scholar
  54. Löffler, E., Parrado, S., Bovaird, T., & Van Ryzin, G. (2008). If you want to go fast, walk alone. If you want to go far, walk together. Citizens and the co-production of public services. Report to the EU Presidency. Ministry of Finance, Budget and Public Services, Paris.Google Scholar
  55. Lynn, L. E., Jr., Heinrich, C. J., & Hill, C. J. (2001). Improving governance: A new logic for empirical research. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  56. McCaffrey, D. P., Faerman, S. R., & Hart, D. W. (2008). The appeal and difficulties of participative systems. Organization Science., 6, 603.  https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.6.6.603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Morecroft, J., Sanchez, R., & Heene, A. (2002). Systems perspectives on resources, capabilities and management processes. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  58. Morecroft, J. D. W. (2015). Strategic modelling and business dynamics: A feedback systems approach. Cornwall, UK: Wiley. Retrieved from https://books.google.it/books?id=2xezCQAAQBAJGoogle Scholar
  59. Morris, T., & Wood, S. (1991). Testing the survey method: Continuity and change in British industrial relations. Work, Employment & Society, 5(2), 259–282.Google Scholar
  60. Morse, R. S. (2011). The practice of collaborative governance. Public Administration Review, 71(6), 953–957.Google Scholar
  61. Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & Sicilia, M. (2017). Varieties of participation in public services: The who, when, and what of coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766–776.Google Scholar
  62. O’Flynn, J., & Wanna, J. (2008). Collaborative governance: A new era of public policy in Australia? Canberra, Australia: ANU E Press.Google Scholar
  63. O’Leary, R., & Bingham, L. B. (2009). The collaborative public manager: New ideas for the twenty-first century. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  64. OECD. (2017). Systems approaches to public sector challenges. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  65. Osborne, S. P. (2006). The new public governance? Public Management Review, 8(3), 377–387.Google Scholar
  66. Osborne, S. P. (2008). The third sector in Europe: Prospects and challenges. Sheffield, UK: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  67. Osborne, S. P. (2010). The new public governance: Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  68. Osborne, S. P., Radnor, Z., & Strokosch, K. (2016). Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: A suitable case for treatment? Public Management Review, 18(5), 639–653.Google Scholar
  69. Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1087.Google Scholar
  70. Ostrom, E., Parks, R. B., Whitaker, G. P., & Percy, S. L. (1978). The public service production process: A framework for analyzing police services. Policy Studies Journal, 7(s1), 381–381.Google Scholar
  71. Ostrom, V., & Ostrom, E. (1971). Public choice: A different approach to the study of public administration. Public Administration Review, 31(2), 203–216.Google Scholar
  72. Parks, R. B., Baker, P. C., Kiser, L., Oakerson, R., Ostrom, E., Ostrom, V., … Wilson, R. (1981). Consumers as coproducers of public services: Some economic and institutional considerations. Policy Studies Journal, 9(7), 1001–1011.Google Scholar
  73. Pessina, E. A. (2014). L’evoluzione dei sistemi contabili pubblici: Aspetti critici nella prospettiva aziendale. Milan, Italy: Egea.Google Scholar
  74. Pestoff, V. (2012). Co-production and third sector social Services in Europe: Some concepts and evidence. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(4), 1102–1118.Google Scholar
  75. Pestoff, V., Brandsen, T., & Verschuere, B. (2013). New public governance, the third sector, and co-production. Sheffield, UK: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  76. Provan, K. G., & Milward, H. B. (1995). A preliminary theory of interorganizational network effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 1–33.Google Scholar
  77. Provan, K. G., & Milward, H. B. (2001). Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public-sector organizational networks. Public Administration Review, 61(4), 414–423.Google Scholar
  78. Radnor, Z., Osborne, S. P., Kinder, T., & Mutton, J. (2014). Operationalizing co-production in public services delivery: The contribution of service blueprinting. Public Management Review, 16(3), 402–423.Google Scholar
  79. Rhodes, R. A. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham, PA: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2007). Theories of democratic network governance. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  81. Sorrentino, M., Sicilia, M., & Howlett, M. (2018). Understanding co-production as a new public governance tool. Policy and Society., 37, 277.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2018.1521676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Sterman, J. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Boston, MA: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  83. Stoker, G. 2004. Designing institutions for governance in complex environments: Normative rational choice and cultural institutional theories explored and contrasted. Economic and Social Research Council Fellowship Paper Series.Google Scholar
  84. Thomas, J. (2013). Citizen, customer, partner: Rethinking the place of the public in public management. Public Administration Review, 73(6), 786–796.Google Scholar
  85. Verschuere, B., Brandsen, T., & Pestoff, V. (2012). Co-production: The state of the art in research and the future agenda. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(4), 1083–1101.Google Scholar
  86. Vignieri V. (2018). Image of a local area: Measuring and managing. In: Farazmand, A. (ed). Global encyclopedia of public administration, Public Policy, and Governance (p. 1–13). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3481-1
  87. Vignieri V. (2019). Framing the sources of image of a local area through outcome-based dynamic performance management. Public Organization Review, 19(2), 249–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-018-0402-1
  88. Vignieri, V. (2019). Destination governance at stake: Fostering policy coordination among decision-makers of a small town. Tourism Planning & Development, 16(5), 556–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2018.1537001
  89. Whitaker, G. P. (1980). Coproduction: Citizen participation in service delivery. Public Administration Review, 40(3), 240–246.Google Scholar
  90. Wood, D. J., & Gray, B. (1991). Toward a comprehensive theory of collaboration. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science., 27, 139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886391272001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political Sciences and International RelationsUniversity of PalermoPalermoItaly
  2. 2.Institute for Archeological and Cultural Heritage (IBAM)National (Italian) Research Council (CNR)CataniaItaly

Personalised recommendations