The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Distinguishing Different Types of Coproduction: A Conceptual Analysis Based on the Classical Definitions
Open accessAbstract
Coproduction of public services means that services are not only delivered by professional and managerial staff in public agencies but also coproduced by citizens and communities. Although recent research on this topic has advanced the debate considerably, there is still no consensus on precisely what coproduction means. This article argues that rather than trying to determine one encompassing definition of the concept, several different types of coproduction can be distinguished. Starting from the classical definitions of Elinor Ostrom and Roger Parks, the article draws on the literature on professionalism, volunteering, and public management to identify the distinctive nature of coproduction and identify basic dimensions on which a typology of coproduction can be constructed. Recognizing different types of coproduction more systematically is a critical step in making research on this phenomenon more comparable and more cumulative.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
CONSUMERS AS COPRODUCERS OF PUBLIC SERVICES: SOME ECONOMIC AND INSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
Parks, R. B., Baker, P. C., Kiser, L., Oakerson, R., Ostrom, E., Ostrom, V., Percy, S. L., Vandivort, M. B., Whitaker, G. P., & Wilson, R. (1981) · Policy Studies Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.1981.tb01208.x · Cited by 761
Cited by
Varieties of Participation in Public Services: The Who, When, and What of Coproduction
Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & Sicilia, M. (2017) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.12765 · Cited by 848
Masterson, D., Areskoug Josefsson, K., Robert, G., Nylander, E., & Kjellström, S. (2022) · Health Expectations · doi:10.1111/hex.13470 · Cited by 281
Value Creation in the Public Service Ecosystem: An Integrative Framework
Osborne, S. P., Powell, M., Cui, T., & Strokosch, K. (2022) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.13474 · Cited by 258
Farr, M., Banks, J., Edwards, H. B., Northstone, K., Bernard, E., Salisbury, C., & Horwood, J. (2018) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019966 · Cited by 106
A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence on (Digital) Public Services Co-Creation
Rodriguez Müller, A. P., Casiano Flores, C., Albrecht, V., Steen, T., & Crompvoets, J. (2021) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci11040130 · Cited by 65
Metadata
- Authors
- Brandsen, T., & Honingh, M.
- Venue
- Public Administration Review
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-10-08
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 427-435
- ISSN
- 0033-3352 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-6210
- OpenAlex
- W1932773272
- Cited by
- 625
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 83.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Distinguishing Different Types of Coproduction: A Conceptual Analysis Based on the Classical Definitions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/puar.12465
- The paper
- Brandsen, T., & Honingh, M. (2016). Distinguishing Different Types of Coproduction: A Conceptual Analysis Based on the Classical Definitions. Public Administration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12465
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
