A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the social innovation journey
By W. Voorberg, Victor Bekkers, Lars Tummers. 2015
1,956 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Abstract This article presents a systematic review of 122 articles and books (1987–2013) of co-creation/co-production with citizens in public innovation. It analyses (a) the objectives of co-creation and co-production, (b) its influential factors and (c) the outcomes of co-creation and co-production processes. It shows that most studies focus on the identification of influential factors, while hardly any attention is paid to the outcomes. Future studies could focus on outcomes of co-creation/co-production processes. Furthermore, more quantitative studies are welcome, given the qualitative, case study, dominance in the field. We conclude with a research agenda to tackle methodological, theoretical and empirical lacunas.
Subfields: Finance, Management of Technology and Innovation, Marketing
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bcb9a2566e65227c5e3625fdb9e5137540084ff1
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Finance
In Management of Technology and Innovation
- Dennis Hilgers
- Zoe J. Radnor
- Candice Howarth
- Marcel Bogers
- S. Osborne
- Frank T. Piller
- I. Monasterolo
In Marketing
- Anna-Sophie Oertzen
- Kirsty Strokosch
- Gaby Odekerken-Schröder
- Saara A. Brax
- Zoe J. Radnor
- Birgit Mager
- Marcel Bogers
- S. Osborne
Citations in the corpus
- Co-creating services—conceptual clarification, forms and outcomes (2018, background): “In conclusion, involvement, engagement and participation are necessary but not sufficient conditions that must be fulfilled altogether for the co-creation of services to occur (Verleye, 2015; Voorberg et al., 2015; Yi and Gong, 2013); yet these prerequisites cannot ensure that co-creation of service”
- Citizen participation in public administration: investigating open government for social innovation (2019, background): “In doing so, those who stimulate social innovation, such as the political-administrative system, companies, nongovernmental organizations, or self-organized citizens, collaborate with the periphery to leverage ideas and knowledge of the ‘crowd’ (e.g., Bekkers et al., 2013; Voorberg et al., 2015).”
- Research co-design in health: a rapid overview of reviews (2020, background): “There are many relevant examples of this literature, including reports explaining how to engage in co-design [19, 38–42], how coproduction techniques have been used in applied contexts [43], and research into co-design in non-health contexts [44, 45].”
- Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A suitable case for treatment? (2016, background): “Emerging new technology has offered service users potential routes to wrest (some) bottom-up control over public services from the policy, administrative and managerial structures (Dunleavy et al. 2006; Bekkers et al. 2011; Voorberg, Bekkers, and Tummers 2014).”
- Reforming public services: does service logic have anything to offer? (2018, background): “Co-production focussing on the participation of citizens/users in public service provision has been criticized for concentrating on what influences the citizens’/users’ engagement and paying too little attention to the outcomes of such participation (Voorberg, Bekker, and Tummers 2015).”
- Opportunities for knowledge co-production across the energy-food-water nexus: Making interdisciplinary approaches work for better climate decision making (2017, background): “It has gained prominence more recently due to a focus on end users (Voorberg et al., 2014), incorporating actors beyond academia (Polk, 2015), relevance to rapidly evolving policy landscapes, resource and capacity constraints and increased need to demonstrate value for money.”
- Entrepreneurship in island contexts: A systematic review of the tourism and hospitality literature (2020, methodology): “Tourism and Hospitality studies are an increasingly post-disciplinary fields (Lynch et al., 2011; Pernecky et al., 2016), meaning that research on tourism and hospitality can be published across a wide range of specialist journals, and therefore the searches for this review were not limited to touri”