IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jadmsc/v11y2021i4p130-d676063.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence on (Digital) Public Services Co-Creation

Author

Listed:
  • A. Paula Rodriguez Müller

    (Public Governance Institute, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

  • Cesar Casiano Flores

    (Public Governance Institute, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

  • Valerie Albrecht

    (Department for E-Governance and Administration, Danube University Krems, 3500 Krems, Austria)

  • Trui Steen

    (Public Governance Institute, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

  • Joep Crompvoets

    (Public Governance Institute, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

Abstract

The public sector is facing significant challenges regarding public services provision, including declination of users’ trust and limited resources. An alternative approach to traditional public service provision with the potential to address these challenges is the co-creation of public services. Co-creation promises to foster innovative solutions to provide high-quality services that respond to users’ needs. Considering this background, we aim at critically exploring public service co-creation via a scoping review, employing the PRISMA-ScR method. Our review focuses on 25 empirical studies out of 75 analyzed articles that examine the implementation of co-creation of (digital) public services and investigates how the empirical literature portrays the concept of public service co-creation. Our findings primarily suggest that co-creation can be implemented in a wide range of sectors and settings, to improve public services and to foster innovation, throughout the whole public service cycle, using a variety of digital, analog and hybrid co-creation tools and strategies. Yet, our review has also shown that there is still an implementation gap that needs to be bridged between knowing and doing in the context of public services co-creation in a digital setting.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Paula Rodriguez Müller & Cesar Casiano Flores & Valerie Albrecht & Trui Steen & Joep Crompvoets, 2021. "A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence on (Digital) Public Services Co-Creation," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:11:y:2021:i:4:p:130-:d:676063
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/11/4/130/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/11/4/130/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paskaleva, Krassimira & Cooper, Ian, 2018. "Open innovation and the evaluation of internet-enabled public services in smart cities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 4-14.
    2. Stephen P Osborne & Zoe Radnor & Kirsty Strokosch, 2016. "Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A suitable case for treatment?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 639-653, May.
    3. Mariafrancesca Sicilia & Alessandro Sancino & Tina Nabatchi & Enrico Guarini, 2019. "Facilitating co-production in public services: management implications from a systematic literature review," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 233-240, May.
    4. Ansell,Christopher & Torfing,Jacob, 2021. "Public Governance as Co-creation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108487047, October.
    5. John Alford, 2016. "Co-Production, Interdependence and Publicness: Extending public service-dominant logic," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 673-691, May.
    6. Alessandro Liberati & Douglas G Altman & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Cynthia Mulrow & Peter C Gøtzsche & John P A Ioannidis & Mike Clarke & P J Devereaux & Jos Kleijnen & David Moher, 2009. "The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-28, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aldona Fraczkiewicz-Wronka & Anna Kozak, 2021. "Facilitating Co-production in Health Promotion: Study of Senior Councils in Poland," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4B), pages 182-201.
    2. Buics, László & Eisinger Balassa, Boglárka, 2020. "Analyzing Public Service Processes from Customer and Employee Perspectives by Using Service Blueprinting and Business Process Modelling," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2020), Virtual Conference, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Virtual Conference, 10-12 September 2020, pages 195-211, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    3. Noella Edelmann & Ines Mergel, 2021. "Co-Production of Digital Public Services in Austrian Public Administrations," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, February.
    4. Sabina De Rosis & Francesca Pennucci & Guido Noto & Sabina Nuti, 2020. "Healthy Living and Co-Production: Evaluation of Processes and Outcomes of a Health Promotion Initiative Co-Produced with Adolescents," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Mette Sønderskov & Rolf Rønning, 2021. "Public Service Logic: An Appropriate Recipe for Improving Serviceness in the Public Sector?," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, June.
    6. Andrea BASSI & Alessandro FABBR, 2022. "Co-production paradigm: Threat or Opportunity for Social Economy?," CIRIEC Studies Series, in: Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING & CIRIEC (ed.), New perspectives in the co-production of public policies, public services and common goods, volume 3, chapter 5, pages 99-123, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    7. Jinpeng Wu & Jing Xiong, 2022. "How Governance Tools Facilitate Citizen Co-Production Behavior in Urban Community Micro-Regeneration: Evidence from Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, August.
    8. Jim Broch Skarli, 2021. "Creating or Destructing Value in Use? Handling Cognitive Impairments in Co-Creation with Serious and Chronically Ill Users," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, February.
    9. Yewande Adetoro Adewunmi & Uchendu Eugene Chigbu & Uaurika Kahireke & Prisca Simbanegavi & Sam Mwando & Amin Ally Issa & Samuel Hayford, 2023. "A Multi-Faceted Approach to Improving Public Services in Low-Income Housing in Windhoek, Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-25, March.
    10. Järvi, Henna & Kähkönen, Anni-Kaisa & Torvinen, Hannu, 2018. "When value co-creation fails: Reasons that lead to value co-destruction," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 63-77.
    11. Jacob Torfing & Eva Sørensen, 2019. "Interactive Political Leadership in Theory and Practice: How Elected Politicians May Benefit from Co-Creating Public Value Outcomes," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, July.
    12. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    13. Ludoviko Zirimenya & Fatima Mahmud-Ajeigbe & Ruth McQuillan & You Li, 2020. "A systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between urogenital schistosomiasis and HIV/AIDS infection," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-13, June.
    14. Trang Nguyen & Sara Holton & Thach Tran & Jane Fisher, 2019. "Informal mental health interventions for people with severe mental illness in low and lower middle-income countries: A systematic review of effectiveness," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 65(3), pages 194-206, May.
    15. Natalya Ivanova & Ekaterina Zolotova, 2023. "Landolt Indicator Values in Modern Research: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-22, June.
    16. Su Keng Tan & Wai Keung Leung & Alexander Tin Hong Tang & Roger A Zwahlen, 2017. "Effects of mandibular setback with or without maxillary advancement osteotomies on pharyngeal airways: An overview of systematic reviews," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-20, October.
    17. Vecchio, Riccardo & Caso, Gerarda & Cembalo, Luigi & Borrello, Massimiliano, 2020. "Is respondents’ inattention in online surveys a major issue for research?," Economia agro-alimentare / Food Economy, Italian Society of Agri-food Economics/Società Italiana di Economia Agro-Alimentare (SIEA), vol. 22(1), March.
    18. Alessandro Concari & Gerjo Kok & Pim Martens, 2020. "A Systematic Literature Review of Concepts and Factors Related to Pro-Environmental Consumer Behaviour in Relation to Waste Management Through an Interdisciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-50, May.
    19. Damiano Pizzol & Mike Trott & Igor Grabovac & Mario Antunes & Anna Claudia Colangelo & Simona Ippoliti & Cristian Petre Ilie & Anne Carrie & Nicola Veronese & Lee Smith, 2021. "Laparoscopy in Low-Income Countries: 10-Year Experience and Systematic Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-11, May.
    20. Yehuda Weizman & Oren Tirosh & Jeanie Beh & Franz Konstantin Fuss & Sonja Pedell, 2021. "Gait Assessment Using Wearable Sensor-Based Devices in People Living with Dementia: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-14, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:11:y:2021:i:4:p:130-:d:676063. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.