Ideas of value co-creation, co-production and co-design are all well-established. In many ways these concepts cut across notions of ‘localism’, devolution and community empowerment. This paper explores aspects of... [ view full abstract ]
Ideas of value co-creation, co-production and co-design are all well-established. In many ways these concepts cut across notions of ‘localism’, devolution and community empowerment. This paper explores aspects of continuity and change in the way these principles have been enacted and practiced in England and Scotland.
In Scotland the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act represents a significant development towards greater localism in the way public services are designed and delivered. This act puts in statue a commitment to greater citizen participation in the design and delivery of public services including an enhanced role for community councils. Yet at its core it retains a commitment to social justice and the tackling of inequalities. As such this Act is seen to embody many of the principles of the ‘Scottish Approach’ to public administration and policymaking. In England, following the Localism Act, which emphasised the need for communities to act in ‘devolved’ ways to take ownership of local issues, though often against the political context of large and deep financial cuts, we have seen the advent of the Conservatives’ focus on city regions and combined authorities. In terms of devolution in English city regions, such as the Northern Powerhouse and the flagship Manchester, the opportunities devolution presents are vast: investment, and increased community participation and engagement through local decision-making.
These changes in the way localism is delivered bring with them challenges. How can localism respond to existing inequalities and distinct different identities within cities, regions and nations? These issues, in the English and Scottish cases, around the practice of empowerment, such as participatory budgeting, co-commissioning or longer-term engagement from communities, remain largely unexplored. In this paper we argue that much of the rhetoric of empowerment and co-production belies a continued drive towards greater levels of public service cuts, both in the financial sense and also in the skills and capabilities of those charged with delivery. In particular whilst true co-production and co-design might be laudable these ambitions must be matched with devolution of resources and accountability if these initiatives are to be any more than window dressing.
Value co-creation, co-design and co-production in public services
