Social innovation is a recurring theme in public administration. Social innovation has been used to frame transformation within the public sector in order to enhance public values, such as effectiveness, efficiency and... [ view full abstract ]
Social innovation is a recurring theme in public administration. Social innovation has been used to frame transformation within the public sector in order to enhance public values, such as effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy (Bekkers et al., 2013). At the core of the concept of social innovation lies the active involvement of citizens into public service delivery. This involvement is often referred to as co-creation or co-production (Voorberg et al., 2013, 2014).
Despite the general agreement about the benefits of co-production practices (Osborne & Strokosch, 2013; Bovaird, 2012, Glynos & Speed, 2012; Verschuere et al., 2012; Fuglsang, 2008), co-production is not easy. Voorberg et al. (2014, 3013) identify a variety of influential factors which they categorize into eight dimensions: four coming from the organizational side (compatibility of public organizations with citizen participation, open attitude towards citizen participation, risk-averse administrative culture, presence of clear incentives for co-creation) and four coming from the citizen side (citizen characteristics, user awareness/feeling of ownership, presence of social capital, citizens’ risk aversion).
Using qualitative interviews with public managers, stakeholders and citizens, this paper analyzes the impact of these eight influential factors in the case of two co-production initiatives within the Barcelona Metropolitan Area (Spain): Citilab, a center for social and digital innovation in Cornellà, which has been considered a good practice in the European Union, and Pla Buits, a very innovative approach toward co-opting urban activism into institutionalized planning by inviting neighborhood entities throughout the city of Barcelona to manage (self-management) various abandoned parcels. The findings show that the two most important organizational factors are the lack of resources both in terms of money and time) and the bureaucratic administrative culture (which sometimes is mediated by a positive public servants attitude) while the citizen-side factors with more impact are willingness to co-produce and the existence of a feeling of ownership. These results are aligned with what has been found in other European Union countries in the framework of the LIPSE project on social innovation, which has also funded this study.
However, the results also show that there are additional influential factors to those identified in the literature, such the city/country administrative structure or the political situation. These factors have a lot to do with the context where the initiatives take place, which let us conclude that co-creation/co-production is contextual.
References:
Bekkers, V., Tummers, L.G., Voorberg, W.H. (2013). “From public innovation to social innovation in the public sector: A literature review of relevant drivers and barriers”. Paper presented at EGPA Conference. Edinburgh, September 11-13.
Bovaird, T. (2012). We’re all in this together: User and community co-production of public outcomes. Birmingham: Institute of Local Government Studies.
D3 - Co-production in the design and delivery of public services: The role of internal and
