Co-production, the involvement of clients in the delivery of public services, is believed to foster trust. However, there is insufficient research on this topic to prove what is at present merely an assumption. This article gives theoretical insights into this relationship. First, it is identified that co-production relates to identification-based trust. Second, the most important theoretical mechanisms are identified that link the two concepts: increasing self-efficacy and the creation of trust networks. A third step is to move towards a more contingent perspective. This involves not only favourable conditions, but also obstructions to trust-building, such as crowding-out motivations and free-riding.

Engaging public service users as co-producers is expected to lead to more efficient services and better outcomes. What has been missing so far, however, is a solid theoretical basis to explain what compels actors to pursue co-production, or not, and what strategies they adopt in this pursuit. Building on established theories, it is argued that although co-production of public service delivery decreases uncertainty for users, it seems to increase uncertainty for organizations. The main conclusion is that the need of organizations to reduce this uncertainty might diminish the possibilities for users to coproduce. The consequences of this conclusion for future research are discussed in this article.

Activation services that aim at re-employment of jobseekers often suffer from 'creaming', i.e. selecting those who have the best qualifications to re-enter the labour market. New ways of delivery, such as co-production, are supposed to be less subject to selection mechanisms. To analyse whether co-produced activation programmes suffer from selection biases, participants in a local innovative activation programme (n ¼ 60) were compared to non-participants (n ¼ 18). Participants are more motivated in general and showed higher levels of generalized, municipal and interpersonal trust. Moreover, high general motivation relates to high levels of trust and perceived control. This indicates that there is indeed a selection bias within co-produced activation programmes. Therefore, it remains uncertain whether co-production is more successful in dealing with creaming than common types of service delivery. Points for practitionersPublic services, in the field of activation policies for instance, are increasingly delivered in a fashion that requires more responsibility and effort from users. This study shows that such demands elicit a selection of users. Professionals dealing with co-produced services should be aware that when they choose clients they are likely to leave out vulnerable individuals. In particular, when intrinsic motivation is an important selection criterion, those who have low levels of trust and perceived control will not be involved. Consequently, seemingly inclusive strategies could in fact lead to exclusion.

Purpose – Co-production of public service delivery is believed to foster trust among users, but little empirical work is devoted to this assumption. Public sector organizations have therefore little knowledge about the conditions that determine whether co-production leads to trust. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – A longitudinal mixed method is used, following participants of a co-produced activation programme over time (n=60). Quantitative methods are employed to investigate changes in trust levels, whereas qualitative methods are used to explain these changes and explore conditions for trust-building. Findings – After a half year, trust in the service provider, trust in local government and generalized trust decreased significantly among co-producing participants. Particularly, a decrease in trust in fellow participants strongly related to decreases in trust in the service provider and generalized trust. Qualitative evidence indicate that motivation during the co-production decreased, as well as personal control. Organizational support and user commitment show to be important conditions for building trust. Research limitations/implications – The study draws upon a small sample, limiting possibilities for statistical analysis. Also, comparison with other types of service delivery is required to safely assign the effects to co-production. Originality/value – Longitudinal studies on co-production are rarely performed. Additionally, the findings indicate a more critical approach to the effects of co-production, which are often assumed to be positive for the public sector and citizens.

No abstract