Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Managing co-production and enhancing good governance principles: insights from two case studies

  • Published:
Journal of Management and Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Co-production of public services is attracting growing attention, although little is known regarding its outcomes. This paper aims to examine how the management of co-production can enhance the principles of good governance, which are intended as its potential outcomes. To this purpose, the research investigates the key issues in managing co-production to explain how they contribute to enhancing good governance principles and fulfil the potential of co-production as a transformative governance arrangement suitable for achieving outcomes instead of being an outcome per se. Two case studies were carried out in Italy with data gathered from both desk analysis and focus groups with key actors involved in the process of co-production. The findings show that group co-production may require limited participation and inclusiveness of actors who have a direct stake in co-produced services and are able to contribute to them. The findings also show that state actors should consider the perspective of lay actors for co-producing usable information. Specifically, the co-elaboration of managerial tools and measures contributes to strengthening horizontal accountability mechanisms which, however, act mainly through commitment. This study contributes to the body of knowledge on co-production and good governance by investigating key issues that can enhance good governance principles. It also provides practitioners with significant insights into the management of co-production.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Collaborative public management has been defined as a concept that ‘describes the process of facilitating and operating in multi-organizational arrangements… to achieve common goals… Collaborative public management may include participatory governance: the active involvement of citizens in government decision making’ (O’Leary and Bingham 2009: 3).

  2. We are indebted for this distinction to John Alford who has used this typology in an unpublished paper circulated to one of the authors of this paper in 2017. The paper has the following title: Customer focus and co-production in the public sector—Distinguishing the roles of citizens, service-recipients and volunteers.

  3. The terms Alpha and Beta are used for the sake of anonymity.

References

  • Abrahamson, E. (1996). Management fashion. Academy of management review, 21(1), 254–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ace, K. (2014). Debate: New guidance to improve public sector governance. Public Money & Management, 34(6), 405–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management: New strategies for local governments. Washington DC, US: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akhtar, M. J. U., Cepiku, D., & Lapenta, A. (2014). Public participation and co-production in the irrigation sector of Punjab, Pakistan. In C. Conteh & A. S. Huque (Eds.), Public Sector Reforms in Developing Countries: Paradoxes and Practices. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J. (2009). Engaging Public Sector Clients: From Service-Delivery to Co-Production. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J. (2017). Customer focus and co-production in the public sector–distinguishing the roles of citizens, service-recipients and volunteers. Working paper unpublished.

  • Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardhan, P., & Mookherjee, D. (2006). Decentralisation and accountability in infrastructure delivery in developing countries. The Economic Journal, 116(508), 101–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besley, T., & Ghatak, M. (2003). Incentives, choice, and accountability in the provision of public services. Oxford review of economic policy, 19(2), 235–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, C., Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2017). Applying a dynamic performance management framework to wicked issues: How coproduction helps to transform young people’s services in Surrey County Council. UK. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(10), 833–846.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, L. B., Nabatchi, T., & O’Leary, R. (2005). The new governance: Practices and processes for stakeholder and citizen participation in the work of government. Public Administration Review, 65(5), 547–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouckaert, G. (2017). Taking stock of “governance”: A predominantly European perspective. Governance, 30(1), 45–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouckaert, G., & Van de Walle, S. (2003). Comparing measures of citizen trust and user satisfaction as indicators of ‘good governance’: Difficulties in linking trust and satisfaction indicators. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 69(3), 329–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovaird, T. (2005). Public governance: Balancing stakeholder power in a network society. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 71(2), 217–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 846–860.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovaird, T., & Kenny, R. (2013). Modelling Birmingham: Using strategy maps to compare the cost-effectiveness of alternative outcome pathways. In Paper presented at the 11th Public Management Research Conference, Madison, Wisconsin, 20–22 June 2013.

  • Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2016). What has co-production ever done for interactive governance? In J. Edelenbos & I. van Meerkerk (Eds.), Critical Reflections on Interactive Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovaird, T., & Löffler, E. (2003). Evaluating the quality of public governance: Indicators, models and methodologies. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 69(3), 313–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovaird, T., Van Ryzin, G., Loeffler, E., & Parrado, S. (2015). Activating citizens to participate in collective co-production of public services. Journal of Social Policy, 44(1), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, D., Coote, A., Sherwood, C., & Slay, J. (2010). Right Here, Right Now. Taking Co-production into the Mainstream. London: National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, D., & Harris, M. (2009). The Challenge of Co-production (pp. 185–194). London: New Economics Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, T., & Helderman, J. K. (2012). The trade-off between capital and community: The conditions for successful co-production in housing. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(4), 1139–1155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, T., & Honingh, M. (2016). Distinguishing different types of coproduction: A conceptual analysis based on the classical definitions. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 427–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, T., & Pestoff, V. (2006). Co-production, the third sector and the delivery of public services: An introduction. Public Management Review, 8(4), 493–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, T., Trommel, W., & Verschuere, B. (2017). The state and the reconstruction of civil society. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(4), 676–693.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brudney, J. L. (1985). Coproduction: Issues in implementation. Administration & Society, 17(3), 243–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brudney, J. L., & England, R. (1983). Towards a definition of the co-production concept. Public Administration Review, 43(1), 59–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busuioc, M., & Lodge, M. (2017). Reputation and accountability relationships: Managing accountability expectations through reputation. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 91–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cepiku, D. (2015). Collaborative governance. In T. Klassen, D. Cepiku, & T. J. Lah (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Global Public Policy and Administration. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cepiku, D., & Giordano, F. (2014). Co-production in developing countries: Insights from the community health workers experience. Public Management Review, 16(3), 317–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cepiku, D., Mussari, R., Poggesi, S., & Reichard, C. (2014). Special Issue on Governance of networks: Challenges and future issues from a public management perspective Editorial. Journal of Management & Governance, 18(1), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cinquini, L., Campanale, C., Grossi, G., Mauro, S. G., & Sancino, A. (2017). Co-production and Governance. In Ali Farazmand (Ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance (pp. 1–8). Cham: Springer International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2013). Charity accountability in the UK: Through the eyes of the donor. Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management, 10(3/4), 259–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Graaf, G., & van Asperen, H. (2018). The art of good governance: How images from the past provide inspiration for modern practice. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(2), 405–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, K. (2012). Self-service society: Participative politics and new forms of governance. Public Administration, 90(3), 685–698.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2018). Co-production. Enhancing the role of citizens in governance and service delivery. Technical Dossier, n. 4, 1-25.

  • Farooqi, S. A. (2016). Co-production: What makes co-production work? Evidence from Pakistan. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(4), 381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fledderus, J. (2015). Building trust through public service co-production. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 28(7), 550–565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frieling, M. A., Lindenberg, S. M., & Stokman, F. N. (2014). Collaborative communities through coproduction: Two case studies. The American Review of Public Administration, 44(1), 35–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gage, R. W., & Mandel, M. P. (1990). Strategies for Managing Intergovernmental Policies and Networks. Westport: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J., Amos, B., & Plumptre, T. (2003). Principles for good governance in the 21st century. Policy brief, 15(6), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hand, L. C. (2018). Producing a vision of the self-governing mother: A study of street-level bureaucrat behavior in coproductive interactions. Administration & Society, 50(8), 1148–1174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money and Management, 25(1), 27–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2013). Managing to collaborate: The theory and practice of collaborative advantage. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyndman, N., & McConville, D. (2018). Trust and accountability in UK charities: Exploring the virtuous circle. The British Accounting Review, 50, 227–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • IFAC & CIPFA. (2014). International Framework: Good Governance in the Public Sector. Retrieved December 29, 2017, from http://file://userdata/documents9/As33839/Downloads/InternationalFrameworkGoodGovernanceinthePublicSectorIFACCIPFA2.pdf.

  • Jakobsen, M. (2013). Can government initiatives increase citizen coproduction? Results of a randomized field experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(1), 27–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jakobsen, M., & Andersen, S. C. (2013). Coproduction and equity in public service delivery. Public Administration Review, 73(5), 704–713.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H. (2005). Designing and managing networks: Possibilities and limitations for network management. European Political Science, 4(3), 328–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2000). Public management and policy networks. Public Management: An International Journal of Research and Theory, 2(2), 135–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., Steijn, B., & Edelenbos, J. (2010). The impact of network management on outcomes in governance networks. Public Administration, 88(4), 1063–1082.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvartiuk, V. (2016). Participation and local governance outcomes: Evidence from Ukraine. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27(3), 1123–1151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lember, V., Brandsen, T., & Tõnurist, P. (2019). The potential impacts of digital technologies on co-production and co-creation. Public Management Review, 21, 1655–1686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandell, M. P., & Keast, R. (2008). Evaluating the effectiveness of interorganizational relations through networks: Developing a framework for revised performance measures. Public Management Review, 10(6), 715–731.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manzetti, L. (2003). Political manipulations and market reforms failures. World Politics, 55(3), 315–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayo, E. (2004). Learning about good governance in five lessons. Public Money & Management, 24(5), 262–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, A. (2016). Coproduction as a structural transformation of the public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(6), 596–611.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, L., & Lapenta, A. (2014). Partnerships as strategic choices in public management. Journal of Management and Governance, 18(1), 51–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. (2014). Co-governance and co-production: Power and accountability. Management Review, 8(4), 551–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & Sicilia, M. (2017). Varieties of participation in public services: The who, when, and what of co-production. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766–776.

    Google Scholar 

  • Needham, C. (2008). Realising the potential of co-production: Negotiating improvements in public services. Social policy and society, 7(2), 221–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, R., & Bingham, L. B. (2009). The collaborative public manager: New ideas for the twenty-first century. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2011). Together for Better Public Services: Partnering with Citizens and Civil Society. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P., Radnor, Z., & Nasi, G. (2013). A new theory for public service management? Toward a (public) service-dominant approach. The American Review of Public Administration, 43(2), 135–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1087.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2000). Collective action and the evolution of social norms. Journal of economic perspectives, 14(3), 137–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ottmann, G., Laragy, C., Allen, J., & Feldman, P. (2011). Coproduction in practice: Participatory action research to develop a model of community aged care. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 24(5), 413–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parrado, S., Van Ryzin, G. G., Bovaird, T., & Löffler, E. (2013). Correlates of co-production: Evidence from a five-nation survey of citizens. International Public Management Journal, 16(1), 85–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J. L., de Graaf, G., van der Wal, Z., & van Montfort, C. (2014). Returning to our roots: “Good Government” evolves to “Good Governance”. Public Administration Review, 74(1), 27–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pestoff, V. (2006). Citizens and co-production of welfare services: Childcare in eight European countries. Public Management Review, 8(4), 503–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pestoff, V. (2009). Towards a paradigm of democratic participation: Citizen participation and co-production of personal social services in Sweden. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 80(2), 197–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pestoff, V. (2018). Co-production and public service management: Citizenship, governance and public services management. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pestoff, V., Osborne, S. P., & Brandsen, T. (2006). Patterns of co-production in public services: Some concluding thoughts. Public Management Review, 8(4), 591–595.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., & Hupe, P. (2011). Talking about government: The role of magic concepts. Public Management Review, 13(5), 641–658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poocharoen, O., & Ting, B. (2015). Collaboration, co-production, networks: Convergence of theories. Public Management Review, 17(4), 587–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. (2004). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, B., Scapens, R. W., & Theobald, M. (2002). Research Method and Methodology in Finance and Accounting. Padstow: TJ Digital.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sancino, A. (2016). The meta coproduction of community outcomes: Towards a citizens’ capabilities approach. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Non Profit Organizations, 27(1), 409–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sancino, A., Grossi, G., & Sicilia, M. (2018). Between patronage and good governance: Organizational arrangements in (local) public appointment processes. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(4), 785–802.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sancino, A., & Jacklin-Jarvis, C. (2016). Co-production and inter-organisational collaboration in the provision of public services: A critical discussion. In M. Fugini, E. Bracci, & M. Sicilia (Eds.), Co-production in the Public Sector (pp. 13–26). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sicilia, M., Guarini, E., Sancino, A., Andreani, M., & Ruffini, R. (2016). Public services management and co-production in multi-level governance settings. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82(1), 8–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sicilia, M., Sancino, A., Nabatchi, T., & Guarini, E. (2019). Facilitating co-production in public services: Management implications from a systematic literature review. Public Money & Management, 39(4), 233–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorrentino, M., Guglielmetti, C., Gilardi, S., & Marsilio, M. (2017). Health care services and the coproduction puzzle: Filling in the blanks. Administration & Society, 49(10), 1424–1449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomsen, M. K., & Jakobsen, M. (2015). Influencing citizen coproduction by sending encouragement and advice: A field experiment. International Public Management Journal, 18(2), 286–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torfing, J., Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., & Sørensen, E. (2012). Interactive governance: Advancing the paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuurnas, S. (2015). Learning to co-produce? The perspective of public service professionals. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 28(7), 583–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuurnas, S. (2016). Looking beyond the normative ideals of neighbourhood projects: How to foster co-production? International Journal of Public Administration, 39(13), 1077–1087.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Development Program. (1997). Governance for Sustainable Human Development. New York: UNDP policy document.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (2009). What is good governance? Retrieved December, 29, 2009 from https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/good-governance.pdf.

  • Van Kersbergen, K., & van Waarden, F. (2004). Politics and the transformation of governance Issues of legitimacy, accountability, and governance in political science. European Journal of Political Research, 43(2), 143–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vangen, S., Hayes, J. P., & Cornforth, C. (2015). Governing cross-sector, inter-organizational collaborations. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1237–1260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verschuere, B., Brandsen, T., & Pestoff, V. (2012). Co-production: The state of the art in research and the future agenda. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(4), 1083–1101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, A. (2014). Good governance: A radical and normative approach to nonprofit management. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 25(3), 797–817.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (1992). Governance and Development. Washington DC, US: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funding for this research was provided by the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (R518).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Management, University of Pisa, Via Cosimo Ridolfi, 10, 56124, Pisa, Italy

    Cristina Campanale

  2. Institute of Management, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Piazza Martiri della Libertà, 24, 56127, Pisa, Italy

    Sara Giovanna Mauro

  3. Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, UK

    Alessandro Sancino

Authors
  1. Cristina Campanale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sara Giovanna Mauro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alessandro Sancino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sara Giovanna Mauro.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Campanale, C., Mauro, S.G. & Sancino, A. Managing co-production and enhancing good governance principles: insights from two case studies. J Manag Gov 25, 275–306 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-020-09508-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-020-09508-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation