Value conflicts in co-production: governing public values in multi-actor settings

• Pages: 775-793
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-08-2017-0222
• Published date: 08 October 2018
• Date: 08 October 2018
• Author: Nils Aschhoff,Rick Vogel
• Subject Matter: Public policy & environmental management,Politics,Public adminstration & management

Value conflicts in co-production:

governing public values in

multi-actor settings

Nils Aschhoff and Rick Vogel

Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

Abstract

Purpose –Co-production with citizens brings about the challenge to orchestrate public values which

might be in conflict with each other. However, little is known about what types of value tensions occur in

co-production and how actors cope with them. The purpose of this paper is to address this gap.

Design/methodology/approach –The paper is based on three case studies of co-production in Germany.

In total, 24 semi-structured interviews with public managers, citizens, and third parties were conducted.

Findings –The analysis identified three major public value tensions occurring in co-production: the

inclusiveness-accountability-tension, the flexibility-accountability-tension, and the productivity-diversity-tension.

Furthermore, six strategiesof coping with these tensions are examined.

Research limitations/implications –As the paper is based on case studies, further research is required to

explore possible other public value tensions emerging from different manifestations of co-production.

Originality/value –This paper bridges the fields of public values and co-production. By including

perceptions of all actor groups, a more comprehensive understanding of public values in co-production and

how they are in conflict is provided. A novel coping strategy is revealed, which has previously not been

mentioned in the literature.

Keywords Co-production, Public values, New Public Governance, Collaborative public management,

Value conflicts

Paper type Research paper

Introduction

Public organisations increasingly act in settings which require managers to collaborate with

actors from beyond the public sector, including laypeople who participate voluntarily in

the delivery of public services (Cooper et al., 2006; Collm and Schedler, 2012). To cover a

wide range of concepts and cases of such collaborations between government and citizens,

the umbrella term of co-production has recently spread among public management scholars

(Osborne et al., 2016; Nabatchi et al., 2017) and policy advisory bodies (OECD, 2016).

Co-production is defined as “the involvement of both citizens and public sector professionals

in the delivery of public services”(Nabatchi et al., 2016, p. 1001). Among other beneficial

outcomes, co-production is said to improve the quality and effectiveness of public services

because users know best about their needs and contribute specific knowledge and expertise

when they are co-producers of these services (Meijer, 2016). At the same time, the inclusion

of citizens in service delivery strengthens the responsiveness of public administration and

thus helps to overcome democratic deficits (e.g. Cooper et al., 2006; Meijer, 2016).

Co-producing public services with citizens brings about new challenges for public

managers. A particular challenge arises from public values which might be at odds when

public managers and citizens co-produce services. Due to the multiplicity of stakeholders

and the plurality of goals, public organisations are attached to, and in charge of, a great

many values that bear potential for conflicts (Beck Jørgensen and Bozeman, 2007). While

some public values such as responsiveness and innovation might be fostered in

co-production, others such as political loyalty or professionalism might be threatened.

Balancing these values is already difficult within the public sector, but it is even more

challenging in multi-actor settings where professionals and citizens sometimes promote

incommensurable values.

International Journal of Public

Sector Management

Vol. 31 No. 7, 2018

pp. 775-793

© Emerald PublishingLimited

0951-3558

DOI 10.1108/IJPSM-08-2017-0222

Received 24 August 2017

Revised 8 January 2018

16 February 2018

Accepted 18 February 2018

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0951-3558.htm

775

Value

conflicts in

co-production

Research on conflicting values in collaborative settings is scarce. Emerging from the

literatures on street-level bureaucrats (Lipsky, 1980) and New Public Management (NPM)

(Hood, 1991), value conflicts have long been acknowledged as a problem in public policy and

management (Thacher and Rein, 2004; Stewart, 2006), yet still little is known about the more

specific conflicts that might occur in the co-production of public services ( Jaspers and Steen,

2017). For instance, it remains vague what public values the involved actors give priority to,

which of these values are in conflict, how such conflicts surface in daily work, and how –if

at all –they can be resolved. This paper addresses this gap and fosters the understanding of

public values in collaborative settings. Hence, this paper poses the following research

question: which value tensions do occur in the co-production of public services by public

managers and citizens and what strategies do different actor groups use in order to cope

with these tensions?

We address this question by scrutinising three different cases of co-production in the

fields of city marketing, employment opportunities, and urban development in Germany.

All cases are situated at the level of local government, but each of them addresses a different

stage of the service delivery lifecycle and thus reflects a different form of co-production

(i.e. co-designing, co-delivery, co-assessment). In total, 24 interviews with public managers,

citizens, and other parties involved in the collaboration were conducted. The interview

transcripts were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

By being among the first to bridge the fields of public values and co-production

( Jaspers and Steen, 2017), this paper contributes to the literature in three ways. First, our

empiricalstudyisnotlimitedtotheroleofpublicmanagerswhoareinvolvedin

co-production but encompasses all actor groups, i.e. public managers, citizens, and third

parties. This enlarged focus promises a more comprehensive analysis of public values in

co-production and how they are in conflict. Second, by revealing tensions between public

values in co-production, this paper shifts thefocus to the downsides of co-production. This

is in some contrast to the current debate which draws a largely positive picture of

co-production, sometimes considering it a panacea for problems of management and

governance in the public sector and beyond(e.g.OECD,2016).Third,byanalysing

strategies that the involved actor groups use to cope with value tensions, this paper adds

new perspectives to the literature on coping (e.g. Steenhuisen and van Eeten, 2013;

Tummers et al., 2015), carrying more practical implications for the design and governance

of arrangements for co-production.

Conceptual framework: value conflicts in co-production

Co-producing public services

Originating from the seminal work of Ostrom (1972), and interfering with both the

consumerism of NPM (Hood, 1991) and the open systems approach of New Public

Governance (Osborne, 2010), the literature on the involvement of citizens in the delivery of

public services has become vast and varied ( for reviews, see Voorberg et al., 2015; Osborne

et al., 2016; Nabatchi et al., 2017). While co-production has been established as an umbrella

term for the involvement of end-users and public sector professionals in the delivery of

public services (Nabatchi et al., 2017), it remains an elusive concept and is among the

“woolly-words”(Osborne et al., 2016, p. 640) in public management and policy. The concept

of co-production accounts for the fact that citizens are no longer mere consumers of public

services at one end of a unilateral relationship with public agencies as producers of these

services at the other end. Rather, the relationship has become bilateral and citizens interact

with public managers, to an increasing extent and in various forms, along all stages of the

service delivery process (Nabatchi et al., 2017). When co-production is successful, a service is

“better”(in whatever terms; e.g. efficiency, innovativeness, legitimacy) than if it had been

produced by a state actor alone.

776

IJPSM

31,7