Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Place-Based Co-production. Working with Voluntarism in Danish Urban Regeneration

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Voluntary and Public Sector Collaboration in Scandinavia

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Third Sector Research ((PSTSR))

Abstract

This chapter presents the concept ‘place-based co-production’ (PBCP) as a specific approach to co-production of services. PBCP is co-production in a geographically limited area, aiming at improving the quality and services of the locality (physical, social, economic). The authors present two examples from the Danish area-based urban regeneration programme (a small town in a rural area, and a district in Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark) to illustrate characteristics of PBCP. In spite of the different contexts, the process and outcome in the two examples have several similarities: strong commitment amongst the involved actors, a high degree of co-financing as well as attraction of external funding and creation of synergy across the different local contributions. From this, the authors encourage pursuing the potentials of PBCP in other types of service production.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    This distinction was developed in the ‘Smart – Urban intermediary Project’ (Durose et al., 2019, p. 31), for more information see www.smart-urban-intermediaries.com.

References

  • Agger, A. (2005). Demokrati og deltagelse – et borgerperspektiv på kvarterløft. Statens Byggeforskningsinstitut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agger, A. (2012). Towards tailor-made participation: How to involve different types of citizens in participatory governance. Town Planning Review, 83(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2012.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agger, A., & Jensen, J. O. (2015). Area-based initiatives – And their work in bonding, bridging and linking social capital. European Planning Studies, 23(10), 2045–2061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agger, A., & Kahr Andersen, C. (2018). Stedsans – samskabelse gennem omverdensinddragelse. Roskilde University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agger, A., & Larsen, J. N. (2009). Exclusion in area-based urban policy programmes. European Planning Studies, 17(7), 1085–1099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agger, A., & Poulsen, B. (2017). Street-level bureaucrats coping with conflicts in area-based initiatives in Copenhagen and Malmö. Scandinavian Political Studies, 40(4), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.12093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agger, A., Roy, P., & Leonardsen, Ø. (2016). Sustaining area-based initiatives by developing appropriate “anchors”: The role of social capital. Planning Theory & Practice, 17(3), 325–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agger, A., & Sørensen, E. (2018). Managing collaborative innovation in public bureaucracies. Planning Theory, 17(1), 53–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J. (2009). Engaging public sector clients. From service delivery to co-production. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Als Research. (2017). Københavns Kommunes områdefornyelser. Københavns kommune. https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=1706

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, J., & Pløger, J. (2007). The dualism of urban governance in Denmark. European Planning Studies, 15(10), 1349–1367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, R., & Zimmermann, K. (2018). Area-based initiatives – A facilitator for participatory governance?: Handbook on participatory governance. In H. Heinelt (Ed.), Handbook of participatory governance (pp. 267–290). Elgar Online.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, K. P. R., Cozzi, G., & Mantovan, N. (2013). “The big society,” public expenditure, and volunteering. Public Administration Review, 73(2), 340–351. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borch, C., & Kornberger, M. (Eds.). (2015). Urban commons: Rethinking the city. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borchmann, I. H., Toft-Jensen, M., Månsson, S., Steenberg, L. M., & Cassøe, R. (2015). Samskabelse i by- og områdefornyelsen. Udlændinge-, Integrations- og Boligministeriet. http://uibm.dk/publikationer/samskabelse-i-by-og-omradefornyelsen

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovaird, T., Stoker, G., Jones, T., Loeffler, E., & Roncancio, M. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, T., & Honingh, M. (2016). Distinguishing different types of coproduction: A conceptual analysis based on the classical definitions. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 427–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brix, J., Krogstrup, H. K., & Mortensen, N. M. (2020). Evaluating the outcomes of co-production in local government. Local Government Studies, 46(2), 169–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, B. M. (2000). Fortællinger fra Indre Nørrebro. Solidaritet og handlekraft i det lokale. DJØF Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davoudi, S., & Madanipour, A. (2013). Localism and neo-liberal governmentalit. Town Planning Review, 84(5), 551–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durose, C., & Gilchrist, A. (2019). Socially smart cities. http://www.smart-urban-intermediaries.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Socially-Smart-Cities-Report-2019.pdf

  • Durose, C., van Hulst, M., Jeffares, S., Escobar, O., Agger, A., & de Graaf, L. (2016). Five ways to make a difference: Perceptions of practitioners working in urban neighborhoods. Public Administration Review, 76(4), 576–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durose, C., Escobar, O., Gilchrist, A., Agger, A., Henderson, J., Van Hulst, M., & van Ostaijen, M. (2019). Socially smart cities: Making a difference in urban neighbourhoods. Smart Urban Intermediaries.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elstub, S., & Escobar, O. (Eds.). (2019). Handbook of democratic innovation and governance. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foell, A., & Pitzer, K. A. (2020). Geographically Targeted Place-Based Community Development Interventions: A Systematic Review and Examination of Studies’ Methodological Rigor, Housing Policy Debate, 30(5), 741–765, https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2020.1741421

  • Foord, J., Ginsburg, N., Boddy, M., & Parkinson, M. (2004). Whose hidden assets? Inner city potential for social cohesion and economic competitiveness. In M. Boody & M. Parkinson (Eds.), City matters competitiveness, cohesion and urban governance (pp. 287–306). Policy Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, S. R., & Iaione, C. (2019). Ostrom in the city design principles and practices for the urban commons. In B. Hudson, J. Rosenbloom, & D. Cole (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of the Study of the Commons (pp. 235–255). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hambleton, R. (2015). Power, place and the New Civic Leadership. Local Economy, 30(2), 167–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269094215570563

  • Hambleton, R. (2019). The new civic leadership: Place and the co-creation of public innovation. Public Money and Management, 39(4), 271–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashemnezhad, H., Heidari, A. A., & Hoseini, P. M. (2013). “Sense of place” and “place attachment”. International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development, 3(1), 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healey, P. (2003). Collaborative planning in perspective. Planning Theory, 2(2), 101–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healey, P. (2017). Creating public value through caring for place. Policy & Politics, 46, 65–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, J. (2015). Think piece: community anchors. What Works Scotland. November 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriksen, L. (2014). Anledniger, sociale netværk og begrundelser for frivilligt arbejde. In T. Fridberg & L. Skov (Eds.), Udviklingen i frivilligt arbejde 2004–2012. SFI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Højgaard Jensen, E. & Munk, A. (Eds.) (2007). Kvarterløft.: Ten years of Urban Regeneration. København: Integrationsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holman, N., & Rydin, Y. (2013). What can social capital tell us about planning under localism? Local Government Studies, 39(1), 71–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibsen, B., & Espersen, H. H. (2016). Kommunernes samarbejde med civile aktører – Forskelle og ligheder i forventninger, praksis, samarbejdspartnere og oplevet udbytte, 104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibsen, B., & Levinsen, K. (2019). Collaboration between sports clubs and public institutions. European Journal for Sport and Society, 16(2), 187–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innes, J., & Booher, D. (1999). Consensus building and complex adaptive systems, a framework for evaluating collaborative planning. Journal of American Planning Association, 65(4), 412–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. The failure of town planning. https://doi.org/10.2307/794509

  • Jensen, J. O. (2009). Private investeringer i områdebaseret byfornyelse. SBi 2009:25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J. O. (2016). Kommunernes strategiske brug af byfornyelsen. SBi, nr. 2016:22, 1. udg. udg, SBi Forlag, København.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J. O., Engberg, L. A., Forman, M., & Suenson, V. (2010). Netværk og forankring i områdebaseret byfornyelse. SBi 2010, nr. 13, SBI forlag, Hørsholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J. O., Hansen, A. R., Martino, M. E., & Andersen, H. S. (2015). Private følgeinvesteringer ved områdefornyelse. SBi-rapport, nr. 2015:13, SBI forlag, København.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J. O., & Larsen, J. N. (2011). Public-private collaboration in area-based urban regeneration: Less contract – More contact, 1–15. Paper presented at the International Conference of the European Urban Research Association, Copenhagen, Danmark, June 22–25, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, B., & Nowak, J. (2018) The New Localism: How Cities Can Thrive in the Age of Populism. Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinsen, K., & Ibsen, B. (2020). Foreningernes samarbejde med kommunale institutioner. In B. Ibsen (Ed.), Den frivillige kommune. Samspillet mellem den frivillige og den offentlige sektor. Syddansk Universitetsforlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nørrebro Områdefornyelse. (2019a). Områdefornyelsen Indre Nørrebros erfaringer. https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=2000

  • Nørrebro Områdefornyelse. (2019b). Områdefornyelsen Indre Nørrebros resultater. https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=2002

  • Nørrebro Områdefornyelse. (2019c). Områdefornyelsen Indre Nørrebros undersøgelse af kvarterets samarbejdskultur. https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=2029

  • Ostrom, E. (2015). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316423936

  • Pass, N. (2019). Landsbyskolen Nørrebro – Nørrebroernes håndbog. https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=1989

  • Reitan, T. (2019). Negotiating space in confined places – Co-production of public services with unwilling users. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 23(3–4), 61–81. http://ojs.ub.gu.se/ojs/index.php/sjpa/article/view/4474

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, L., Durose, C., & Perry, B. (2018). Coproducing urban governance. Politics and Governance, 6(1), 145–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 (pp. 227–244). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlappa, H. (2017). Co-producing the cities of tomorrow: Fostering collaborative action to tackle decline in Europe’s shrinking cities. European Urban and Regional Studies, 24(2), 162–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776415621962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirianni, C. (2009). Investing in democracy: Engaging citizens in collaborative governance. Brookings Inst Pressh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2018). Co-initiation of collaborative innovation in urban spaces. Urban Affairs Review, 54(2), 388–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stadtler, L., & Karakulak, Ö. (2020). Broker organizations to facilitate cross-sector collaboration: At the crossroad of strengthening and weakening effects. Public Administration Review, 80(3), 360–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steen, T., Brandsen, T., & Verschuere, B. (2018). The dark side of co-creation and co-production. In T. Brandsen, B. Verschuere, & T. Steen (Eds.), Co-production and co-creation: Engaging citizens in public services (pp. 284–293). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Syddjurs Kommune. (2010). Områdefornyelse af Kolind Midtby. Program Marts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teknik og Miljøforvaltningen, K. K. (2014). Kvarterplan indre Nørrebro. https://www.kk.dk/omraadefornyelsenoerrebro

  • Tosics, I. (2015). Integrated regeneration of deprived areas and the new cohesion policy approach. An URBACT contribution to the European urban agenda. URBACT II.

    Google Scholar 

  • Udlændinge-, Integrations- og Boligministeriet. (2017). Afsluttende statusrapport for beslutninger om områdefornyelser i hhv. mindre byer, provinsbyer under pres, større byer samt nyere boligområder med sociale problemer. Evaluation report on Kolind Towncenter, made by Syddjurs Municipality.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallance, P., Tewdwr-Jones, M., & Kempton, L. (2019). Facilitating spaces for place-based leadership in centralized governance systems: The case of Newcastle City futures. Regional Studies, 53(12), 1723–1733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Meerkerk, I., & Edelenbos, J. (2013). The effects of boundary spanners on trust and performance of urban governance networks: Findings from survey research on urban development projects in the Netherlands. Policy Sciences, 47(1), 3–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanleene, D., Voets, J., & Verschuere, B. (2017). Co-producing a nicer neighborhood: Why do people participate in local community development projects? Lex Localis, 15(1), 111–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, V. (2014). Co-production and collaboration in planning – The difference. Planning Theory and Practice, 15(1), 62–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark

    Annika Agger

  2. Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

    Jesper Ole Jensen

Authors
  1. Annika Agger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jesper Ole Jensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annika Agger .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

    Bjarne Ibsen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Agger, A., Jensen, J.O. (2021). Place-Based Co-production. Working with Voluntarism in Danish Urban Regeneration. In: Ibsen, B. (eds) Voluntary and Public Sector Collaboration in Scandinavia . Palgrave Studies in Third Sector Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72315-6_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72315-6_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-72314-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-72315-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation