Comparing user and community co-production approaches in local ‘welfare’ and ‘law and order’ services: Does the governance mode matter?

Abstract

This paper analyses the relationship between modes of governance at local level and the adoption of user and community co-production approaches in community safety and social care services, based on a German case study. The findings draw on a series of intensive focus groups with managers and staff of public services in four different regions in Germany, exploring existing levels of co-production and its potential in social care and community safety services, with particular focus on older and young people. The paper provides the first clear research evidence on how approaches to co-production are specific to the modes of governance within which they take place. The paper concludes with policy conclusions, both in the two programme areas concerned and in local public services more generally.

Value of Including the Children’s Experience for Improving Their Rights During Hospitalization: Protocol for the VoiCEs Project

“…The VoiCEs project will contribute to enhancing direct participation of children and adolescents in the evaluation and improvement of health care services during hospitalization, considering the scarcity of systematic processes of coassessment [ 12 , 13 , 44 ]. The project will directly involve young individuals, in addition to adults with various expertise, knowledge, and skills, in a circular process of coassessment for co-design and coinnovation.…”

“…The participation of lay actors in coassessment processes remains rare in several sectors [12][13][14]. Strokosch and Osborne [12] described the negative experiences of assessment processes involving people with disability in the United Kingdom, by either public social and health care organizations or for-profit organizations.…”

“…Strokosch and Osborne [ 12 ] described the negative experiences of assessment processes involving people with disability in the United Kingdom, by either public social and health care organizations or for-profit organizations. Loeffler and Timm-Arnold [ 13 ] reported a low or bad level of public involvement in coassessment initiatives concerning public safety and social services not only for young people, but also for elderly people, both using digital channels and traditional methods. Indeed, the level of participation depends also on the successful design and implementation of these coassessment initiatives.…”

Building student engagement through co-production and curriculum co-design in public administration programmes

“…More recently, Loeffler (e.g. Loeffler and Bovaird, 2019, Loeffler and Timm-Arnold, 2020) also revealed wider positive effects of co-production, including on public order, crime reduction, as well as offenders' and victims' quality of life.…”

Not the usual suspects: creating the conditions for and implementing co-production with marginalised young people in Glasgow

“…Co-governance, operating at the macro level (in this case, the CPP), is associated with the design and planning of services involving senior level public service professionals, elected officials and non-state actors; co-management, at the meso level, relates to the resourcing and delivery of services involving mid-level and front-line public service professionals; and co-production, at the micro level, relates to the process of mid-level and front-line public service professionals working with citizens or service users in the production and shaping of services (Brandsen and Pestoff, 2006). It is through what Loeffler and Timm-Arnold (2021) term networks that citizens, service providers and commissioners come together to plan and co-produce services. This paper highlights the work that goes into setting up these networks and the interplay between the three levels.…”