Enabling and Constraining Conditions for Co-production with Vulnerable Users: A Case Study of Refugee Services

Abstract

This article explores co-production as processes occurring at three levels: at the level of service interactions, at the organizational level, and at the system level. We propose next that two forms of co-production may take place at these three levels: co-production through direct participation and co-production through representation. We use these conceptualizations to outline a framework for analyzing conditions for co-production with vulnerable users, and we explore the applicability of the framework in the context of public services for refugees. Insights from the case are finally used as a basis for evoking more general discussions on co-production with vulnerable users. KEYWORDSCo-production; co-creation; public services; vulnerable users; refugee immigrants management, delivery and/or evaluation of public services" (Osborne et al., 2016, p. 640).Research on co-production in public services has developed and matured over the years, and the literature has shifted from being largely agenda setting to become more oriented toward fact finding (Verschuere et al., 2018). Thus, a growing body of research literature addresses questions of why, how, and with what effects public services are co-produced. This includes also critical studies that shed light on the challenges of coproduction due to power structures and unequal opportunities to participate among users and citizens (Dietrich et al., 2017;Donetto et al., 2015;Morrison & Dearden, 2013). The latter has been highlighted as a pertinent issue that deserves more research attention, especially in the context of services dealing with vulnerable users and marginalized citizens.Consequently, understanding the conditions for coproduction with vulnerable users becomes paramount, and this is the focus of our paper. By conditions, we mean factors that influence co-production or co-production efforts. These conditions can be enabling or constraining, and we argue that insights into these conditions need to be understood in relation to different forms of co-production. Thus, the aim of this paper is to outline a framework for analyzing enabling and constraining conditions for the coproduction of services with vulnerable users.Scholars in public administration and management have recently highlighted the needs for further developing discources on co-production through metadialogues on the outcomes of co-production (See for instance, Osborne et al., 2021). This is addressed through conceptual debates on value and value creation in public service contexts based on service management teories. These meta-dialogues are important for advancing research on the outcomes and impact of coproduction, which is still not well understood (Voorberg et al., 2015). However, these dialogues cannot evolve in isolation from debates and research on the (pre)conditions for co-production. Understanding coproduction as value creation, require understanding of which voices that are heard; which influence they might have and specifically how marginalized or often silenced voices can be better incl...

The ReCoN intervention: a co-created comprehensive intervention for primary mental health care aiming to prevent involuntary admissions

“…To avoid placing vulnerable individuals in such situations during the co-creation process in the current study, we recruited participants with lived experience and family carers from the local advocacy organisations. Such representation can give an element of empowerment [ 45 ]. In addition, in the first group work session, participants were, as far as possible, divided by service, organisation and role (staff/managers) for everybody to feel equal and comfortable to contribute to the dialogue and the brainstorming of measures.…”

Co-creating a new Charter for equitable and inclusive co-creation: insights from an international forum of academic and lived experience experts

“…Indigenous educational workshops (bridging Indigenous and Western worldviews) and co-designed visions of EqCC in theory and practice. [32][33][34][35] Disciplines of academic participants included business, social work, inclusive design, rehabilitation sciences, global health, critical disability studies, community psychology, Indigenous studies, sociology, health policy and nursing. On the final day, an inventory of approximately 35 key themes captured through illustrations, panellist presentations, group discussions, a wall mural, poetry and dance were presented for discussion (see online supplemental file).…”

“…The Forum was an immersive event held at the Gathering Place by the Grand at Six Nations, the largest First Nation reserve in Canada, located along the banks of the Grand River in Ohsweken, Ontario. A total of 48 purposely invited participants with intersecting positionalities (21 academic experts, 6 experience experts, 10 trainees and 11 members of EDGs) from 9 countries (Bangladesh, Botswana, Canada, England, Italy, Norway, Scotland, Singapore, Sweden) shared their co-creation experiences, discussed focused case studies, participated in arts-based (visual art, dance, poetry, traditional Indigenous beading, digital storytelling) and Indigenous educational workshops (bridging Indigenous and Western worldviews) and co-designed visions of EqCC in theory and practice 32–35. Disciplines of academic participants included business, social work, inclusive design, rehabilitation sciences, global health, critical disability studies, community psychology, Indigenous studies, sociology, health policy and nursing.…”

Commentary: Strength-based co-design that EMPOWERs – Lessons from codesigning with older adults

“…We engaged additional facilitators and organised groups with four to five CALD participants per facilitator. When dealing with complex and unfamiliar tasks, in our case the persona enrichment task, along with cultural and language barriers, the experience of vulnerability may be compounded (Røhnebaek and Bjerck, 2021). Consequently, we provided facilitation support for participants who may need additional support and time to articulate their views.…”