Coproduction and inclusion: A public administrator perspective

Abstract

This article theorizes equality and inclusion in coproduction, from the perspective of public administrators. Coproduction may occur across the policy cycle and at the individual, group, and collective levels, and for reasons of both instrumentality (such as improved efficiency) and normativity (such as democracy). Participation of the disadvantaged in various modes of coproduction is essential if the solidarity principle (stipulating prioritization of those in greatest need) is to be taken seriously. However, their access may be hindered due to external exclusion (not having a place) and internal exclusion (not having a say). Whether inclusion of the disadvantaged is argued for in terms of sameness or difference, different reasons are addressed: justice (for the former) as well as additional perspectives and resources (for the latter). Policymakers and practitioners need to recognize that strategies of equality are likely to differ at various levels and modes of coproduction.

Exploring the meaning, role and experiences of a patient-led social innovation for people affected by cancer: a new collaborative care model complementing traditional cancer rehabilitation in Sweden

“…The importance of both external (not having a place) and internal (not having a say) exclusion based on race/ethnicity in developing healthcare services has been highlighted in previous research. 41 Moreover, race/ethnicity is likely to intersect with other categories which may reinforce inequities in cancer care, access and so forth. 42 Further, three options on gender were available: male, female or other.…”

Co-production of social innovations and enabling ecosystems for social enterprises

“…This enables social enterprises to quickly meet the needs of citizens who otherwise would be in danger of dropping out of the service cycle, making them especially vulnerable. Co-production has an opportunity to include the disadvantaged citizens in the service development and delivery process (Eriksson, 2022), making it a potentially effective way for SEs to seek social innovations.…”

Concept of public services coproduction: Creating prerequisites of development or streetlight effect?

“…Как ни странно, это обстоятельство не находит своего достойного отражения в литературе, посвященной проблематике со-производства публичных услуг (Lee et al, 2020). По нашему мнению, этому можно найти лишь одно объяснение: убежденность преобладающей части исследователей в том, что любое участие граждан в управлении деятельностью государства является не чем иным, как развитием демократии, что само по себе является ценностью высокого уровня (Munno and Nabatchi, 2014;Eriksson, 2022). Ряд исследователей говорит о существовании границ и пределов применения концепции со-производства (Torfing et al, 2019), но связывает их, скорее, с возможными высокими издержками организации взаимодействия госорганизаций с членами локальных сообществ и неоднородным участием различных групп, чем с оппортунистическим поведением.…”