The Future of Co-production: Policies, Strategies and Research Needs

Loeffler, Elke

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-55509-2_7

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, most of the articles selected ( 14) are single case studies or comparative cases in single countries (nine). This methodological aspect is still considered as one of the main criticisms of co-creation and co-production research (e.g., Loeffler 2021;Jukić et al 2019). In terms of the geographical focus, the majority of the cases were focused on Europe, followed by the USA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this regard, our review confirms the lack of co-creation studies considering a multi-level governance perspective (cf. Loeffler 2021). As observed in Table 2, most of the revised studies have focused on the local level.…”

Section: Concluding Remarks and Future Research Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These collaborative efforts are expected to provide not only higher-quality services but also to deliver responsive services that meet users' needs (O'Brien et al 2016). Moreover, co-creation can be a starting point for digital transformation and innovation in the public sector (Loeffler 2021) while supporting user-centric and inclusive services.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence on (Digital) Public Services Co-Creation

Müller

Flores

Albrecht

et al. 2021

Administrative Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The public sector is facing significant challenges regarding public services provision, including declination of users’ trust and limited resources. An alternative approach to traditional public service provision with the potential to address these challenges is the co-creation of public services. Co-creation promises to foster innovative solutions to provide high-quality services that respond to users’ needs. Considering this background, we aim at critically exploring public service co-creation via a scoping review, employing the PRISMA-ScR method. Our review focuses on 25 empirical studies out of 75 analyzed articles that examine the implementation of co-creation of (digital) public services and investigates how the empirical literature portrays the concept of public service co-creation. Our findings primarily suggest that co-creation can be implemented in a wide range of sectors and settings, to improve public services and to foster innovation, throughout the whole public service cycle, using a variety of digital, analog and hybrid co-creation tools and strategies. Yet, our review has also shown that there is still an implementation gap that needs to be bridged between knowing and doing in the context of public services co-creation in a digital setting.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Concluding Remarks and Future Research Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence on (Digital) Public Services Co-Creation

Müller

Flores

Albrecht

et al. 2021

Administrative Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using co-production to make "Do You See Me? ": a critical reflexive account Globally, co-production is becoming one of the most appealing mechanisms to bring about positive change across public services, policy and social research (Bovaird, 2007(Bovaird, , 2008Bovaird and Loeffler, 2012;Kara, 2017;Loeffler, 2009). Co-production is an "assets-based" approach that builds on the skills, experiential knowledge and networks that individuals and communities possess.…”

Section: Age Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the invisible, visible: older lesbian, gay and bisexual victim-survivors’ “lived experiences” of domestic abuse

Wydall

Zerk

Freeman

2023

JAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to examine the use of coproduction to create a film “Do You See Me?”, to amplify the voices of a “hard to reach” group: older lesbian, gay, bisexual (LGB) victim-survivors of domestic abuse (DA). Design/methodology/approach Qualitative methods were used as part of the co-production, which included two practitioner focus groups and 14 narrative interviews with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning persons or the community (LGBTQ+) victim-survivors. Findings Despite differences in gender, sexualities, roles and “lived experiences” across stakeholders, there was a shared aim to ensure victim-survivors had a sense of ownership in this endeavour. Consequently, a positive reciprocity existed that helped to foster effective communication, allow for capacity building and subsequent knowledge exchange. The collaboration produced a nuanced meta-narrative making visible the “lived experiences” of LGB victim-survivors’ perceptions of perpetrator behaviours. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is original in two ways, firstly, providing insights into the “lived experiences” of an invisible group; older LGBTQ+ victim-survivors, and secondly, in involving them in the co-production of a film. The paper aims to reveal how interdependencies that developed between stakeholders helped to disrupt understandings, develop new ways of knowing and build levels of trust. Group interactions helped to dismantle hierarchies, so those with experiential knowledge: the survivors, had greater control throughout the research process. The paper is significant in providing a critical reflection on the ethical, methodological and resource challenges involved in co-production. It also makes recommendations for researchers and funders about the value of using co-production as a method to engage with hard-to-reach groups.

show abstract

Knowledge coproduction: panacea or placebo? Lessons from an emerging policy partnership

Reddel

Ball

2021

Policy Design and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Future of Co-production: Policies, Strategies and Research Needs

Cited by 3 publications

References 20 publications

A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence on (Digital) Public Services Co-Creation

A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence on (Digital) Public Services Co-Creation

Making the invisible, visible: older lesbian, gay and bisexual victim-survivors’ “lived experiences” of domestic abuse

Knowledge coproduction: panacea or placebo? Lessons from an emerging policy partnership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About