Abstract
In many neoliberal economies, co-production is an increasingly popular way of generating public value, empowering citizens, and innovating public service delivery, and cuts to public sector budgets have seen it becoming more important as cash strapped public bodies strip back their services. However, its effectiveness as a means of inclusive engagement is unclear. This paper uses Bourdieu’s theory of practice to explore ethnographic data relating to the collaborative commissioning of a youth project on a South London housing estate and understand how effective the activities were at empowering people to take action. The study shows that although co-production has the potential to increase local involvement; the habitus of those with greater political, economic, and professional capital shaped the social space in which participation takes place. This habitus shaped how people should engage, causing some to disengage, limiting what outcomes were possible. Co-productive practices, such as the co-commissioning discussed in this paper, contain the promise of greater participation and empowerment. However, a lack of understanding of the power dynamics between those involved means the processes can be hierarchical and restricting, rather than increasing the participation of those whom such initiatives are meant to empower.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the author. The data are not publicly available due to their containing information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.
References
Adler P, Adler P (1987) Membership roles in field research. Sage, London. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984973
Alford J (2009) Engaging public sector clients: from service-delivery to co-production, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire (272 pages, ISBN 978-0-230-22376-9)
Alford J (2013) Engaging citizens in co-producing service outcomes. In: Lindquist EA, Vincent S, Wanna J (eds) Putting citizens first. ANU Press, Camberra, pp 75–82
Alford J, Yates S (2016) Co-production of public services in Australia: the roles of government organisations and co-producers. Aust J Public Adm 75(2):159–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12157
Amit V (2004) Constructing the field: ethnographic fieldwork in the contemporary world. Routledge, London
Anderson L (2006) Analytic autoethnography. J Contemp Ethnography 35(4):373–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241605280449
Arnstein SR (2007) A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Plann 35(4):216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
Ashcraft K, Muhr S, Rennstam J, Sullivan K (2012) Professionalization as a branding activity: occupational identity and the dialectic of inclusivity-exclusivity. Gender Work Organization 19(5):467–488
Blackman S (2007) `Hidden ethnography’: crossing emotional borders in qualitative accounts of young people’s lives. Sociology 41(4):699–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038507078925
Booth J (2019) Empowering disadvantaged communities in the UK: missing the potential of co-production. Soc Change 49(2):276–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049085719832401
Boswell J, Corbett J (2017) Why and how to compare deliberative systems. Eur J Polit Res 56(4):801–819. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12205
Bottero W (2010) Intersubjectivity and Bourdieusian Approaches to ‘Identity.’ Cult Sociol 4(1):3–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1749975509356750
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Bourdieu P (1984) Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London
Bourdieu P (1990) The logic of practice. Stanford University Press, Stanford
Bourdieu P, Wacquant L (2013) Symbolic capital and social classes. J Class Sociol 13(2):292–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468795X12468736
Bovaird T, Loeffler E (2012) From engagement to co-production: the contribution of users and communities to outcomes and public value. Voluntas 23(4):1119–1138
Bovaird T, Stoker G, Jones T, Loeffler E, PinillaRoncancio M (2015a) Activating collective co-production of public services: influencing citizens to participate in complex governance mechanisms in the UK. Int Rev Adm Sci 82(1):47–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314566009
Bovaird T, Van Ryzin G, Loeffler E, Parrado S (2015b) Activating citizens to participate in collective co-production of public services. J Soc Policy 44(1):1–23. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279414000567
Brubaker S, Keegan B (2018) “Suddenly everyone’s an expert in our field”: campus victim advocates and the promise and perils of professionalization. Violence Against Women 25(9):1116–1137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801218807096
Brunton-Smith I, Bullock K (2019) Patterns and drivers of co-production in neighbourhood watch in england and wales: from neo-liberalism to new localism. Br J Criminol 59(1):85–106
Bucerius S (2013) Becoming a “trusted outsider”: gender, ethnicity, and inequality in ethnographic research. J Contemp Ethnography 42(6):690–721. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241613497747
Charmaz K (2004) Premises, principles, and practices in qualitative research: revisiting the foundations. Qual Health Res 14(7):976–993. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732304266795
Corbin J, Strauss A (2008) Theoretical sampling. In: Corbin J, Strauss A (eds) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 143–158
Crompton A (2019) Inside co-production: Stakeholder meaning and situated practice. Soc Policy Adm 53(2):219–232
Decoteau C (2015) The reflexive habitus: critical realist and Bourdieusian social action. Eur J Soc Theory 19(3):303–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431015590700
Denshire S (2014) On auto-ethnography. Curr Sociol 62(6):831–850. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392114533339
Denzin N, Lincoln Y (2018) The sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage, London
Dhattiwala R (2017) Mapping the self: challenges of insider research in a riot-affected city and strategies to improve data quality. Contemp South Asia 25(1):7–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09584935.2017.1297385
Docherty I, Goodlad R, Paddison R (2001) Civic culture, community and citizen participation in contrasting neighbourhoods. Urban Stud 38(12):2225–2250. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980120087144
Dwyer S, Buckle J (2009) The space between: on being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods 8(1):54–63
Eglinton K (2013) Youth identities, localities, and visual material culture: making selves, making worlds. Springer, London
Ellis CS, Bochner AP (2006) Analyzing analytic autoethnography: an autopsy. J Contemp Ethnography 35(4):429–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606286979
Emmel N (2013) Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research: a realist approach. SAGE Publications Ltd., London
Evetts J (2003) The sociological analysis of professionalism. Int Sociol 18:395–415
Evetts J (2006) Trust and professionalism: challenges and occupational changes. Curr Sociol 54(4):515–531
Evetts J (2011) Sociological analysis of professionalism: past, present and future. Comp Sociol 10:1–37
Evetts J (2013) Professionalism: value and ideology. Curr Sociol 61(5/6):778–796
Farr M (2018) Power dynamics and collaborative mechanisms in co-production and co-design processes. Crit Soc Policy 38(4):623–644. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018317747444
Fledderus J, Brandsen T, Honingh ME (2015) User co-production of public service delivery: an uncertainty approach. Public Policy Adm 30:145–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076715572362
Flinders M, Wood M (2019) Ethnographic insights into competing forms of co-production: a case study of the politics of street trees in a northern English city. Soc Policy Adm 53(2):279–294
Fortun K (2012) Ethnography in late industrialism. Cult Anthropol 27(3):446–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1360.2012.01153.x
Fung A (2015) Putting the public back into governance: the challenges of citizen participation and its future. Public Adm Rev 75(4):513–522. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12361
Galuszka J (2018) What makes urban governance co-productive? Contradictions in the current debate on co-production. Plann Theory 18(1):143–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095218780535
Geertz C (2007) Works and lives: the anthropologist as author. Polity Press, Oxford
Gobo G (2018) Doing ethnography. Sage, London. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857028976
Grenfell M (2014) Pierre bourdieu key concepts. Taylor and Francis, Hoboken
Hammersley M, Atkinson P (2010) Ethnography: principles in practice. Routledge, London
Hickman P (2018) A flawed construct? Understanding and unpicking the concept of resilience in the context of economic hardship. Soc Policy Soc 17(3):409–424. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746417000227
Innes M, Davies B, McDermont M (2018) How co-production regulates. Soc Legal Stud 28(3):370–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663918777803
Jakobsen M, Andersen S (2013) Co-production and equity in public service delivery. Public Adm Rev 73(5):704–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12094
James E (2016) The professional humanitarian and the downsides of professionalisation. Disasters 40(2):185–206
Karner A, Brower Brown K, Marcantonio R, Alcorn L (2019) The view from the top of Arnstein’s ladder. J Am Plann Assoc 85(3):236–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2019.1617767
Kelly P (2014) Intercultural comparative research: rethinking insider and outsider perspectives. Oxford Rev Educ 40(2):246–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2014.900484
Kotzee B (2014) Expertise, fluency and social realism about professional knowledge. J Educ Work 27(2):161–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2012.738291
Leyshon C, Leyshon M, Jeffries J (2019) The complex spaces of co-production, volunteering, ageing and care. Area 51(3):433–442
Loeffler E, Bovaird T (2019) Co-commissioning of public services and outcomes in the UK: bringing co-production into the strategic commissioning cycle. Public Money Manag 39(4):241–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2019.1592905
Lyons M (2011) The professionalization of children’s services in Australia. J Sociol 48(2):115–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783311407945
Machamer P, Darden L, Craver C (2000) Thinking about mechanisms. Philos Sci 67(1):1–25. https://doi.org/10.1086/392759
Mathers J, Parry J, Jones S (2008) Exploring resident (non-)participation in the UK new deal for communities regeneration programme. Urban Stud 45(3):591–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098007087336
McKenzie L (2013) Narratives from a Nottingham council estate: a story of white working-class mothers with mixed-race children. Ethnic Racial Stud 36(8):1342–1358. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2013.776698
Mckenzie L (2015) Getting by: estates, class and culture in austerity Britain. Bristol Policy Press, Bristol
Molland S (2013) Tandem ethnography: on researching ‘trafficking’ and ‘anti-trafficking.’ Ethnography 14(3):300–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138113491671
Moskovskaia A (2012) The professionalization of management. Russ Educ Soc 54(3):22–42
McQuaid R (2010) Theory of organizational partnerships: partnership advantages, disadvantages and success factors. In: Osborn SP (ed) The new public governance? Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. Routledge, London, pp 127–148
Noordegraaf M (2011) Remaking professionals? How associations and professional education connect professionalism and organizations. Curr Sociol 59(4):465–488. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392111402716
Offer S (2012) The burden of reciprocity: processes of exclusion and withdrawal from personal networks among low-income families. Curr Sociol 60(6):788–805. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392112454754
Oliver C, O’Reilly K (2010) A bourdieusian analysis of class and migration: habitus and the individualizing process. Sociology 44(1):49–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038509351627
Osborne SP, Radnor Z, Strokosch K (2016) Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: a suitable case for treatment? Null 18:639–653. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1111927
Pemberton S, Fahmy E, Sutton E, Bell K (2015) Navigating the stigmatised identities of poverty in austere times: resisting and responding to narratives of personal failure. Crit Soc Policy 36(1):21–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018315601799
Pestoff V (2009) Towards a paradigm of democratic participation: citizen participation and co-production of personal social services in Sweden. Ann Public Coop Econ 80:197–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8292.2009.00384.x
Pestoff V, Brandsen T (2010) Public governance and the third sector: opportunities for co-production and innovation. In: Osborne SP (ed) The new public governance: emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. Routledge, London, pp 223–236
Reeves A (2015) Neither class nor status: arts participation and the social strata. Sociology 49:624–642
Steinmetz G (2011) Bourdieu, historicity, and historical sociology. Cult Sociol 5(1):45–66
Struthers J (2014) Analytic autoethnography: one story of the method. In: Theory and method in higher education research II., International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, vol. 10. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp 183–202
Swartz D (2013) Symbolic power, politics, and intellectuals: the political sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Tavory I, Timmermans S (2013) A pragmatist approach to causality in ethnography. Am J Sociol 119(3):682–714. https://doi.org/10.1086/675891
Thijssen P, Van Dooren W (2015) Who you are/where you live: do neighbourhood characteristics explain co-production? Int Rev Adm Sci 82(1):88–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315570554
Tonkens E, Verhoeven I (2018) The civic support paradox: fighting unequal participation in deprived neighbourhoods. Urban Stud 56(8):1595–1610. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018761536
van Eijk C (2018) Helping Dutch neighborhood watch schemes to survive the rainy season: studying mutual perceptions on citizens’ and professionals’ engagement in the co-production of community safety. Voluntas 29(1):222–236
van Eijk C, Steen T (2015) Why engage in co-production of public services? Mixing theory and empirical evidence. Int Rev Adm Sci 82(1):28–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314566007
Vanleene D, Voets J, Verschuere B (2018) The co-production of a community: engaging citizens in derelict neighbourhoods. Voluntas 29(1):201–221
Vanleene D, Voets J, Verschuere B (2019) The co-production of public value in community development: can street-level professionals make a difference? Int Rev Adm Sci. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852318804040
Waring A, Waring J (2009) Looking the part: embodying the discourse of organizational professionalism in the City. Curr Sociol 57:344–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392108101587
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author knows of no conflicts of interest related to this submission.
Ethical approval
This study approved ethical approval by Goldsmiths College as part of the author’s PhD study.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Alexander, J. Co-production: fostering greater inclusion or reproducing existing exclusion? An analysis of co-commissioning and resident participation on a South London housing estate. SN Soc Sci 1, 56 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-021-00058-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-021-00058-0