1 June 2016

CenSE members shared their findings on co-production with high-profile Scottish policy makers at a University of Edinburgh Business School workshop.

Named 'the Scottish Approach' by the Scottish Government, co-production is receiving increasingly more attention across Scotland’s public and private service sectors. On 11 March 2016, CenSE contributed to current debates through a practitioner and policy-maker workshop hosted at the University of Edinburgh Business School in association with the EU FP7 project 'Learning from Innovation in Public Sector Environments' (LIPSE).

Attracting over 30 high-profile delegates from national and local government, as well as from the NHS and the third sector, Dr Sophie Flemig and Prof Stephen Osborne presented their findings from the Scottish case studies conducted as part of the LIPSE project. They were joined by Prof Victor Bekkers from Erasmus University (Netherlands), the director of the LIPSE consortium, as well as Tara Murphy from the Carnegie UK Trust.

Stephen set the theoretical framework, explaining CenSE’s trade-mark service dominant logic:

Co-production isn’t normative – it can create value but also lead to the co-destruction of value. Neither is co-production optional; every service depends on the service user’s co-operation in creating value.

Bridging theory and practice, Tara introduced the audience to Carnegie’s 'The Enabling State' project, looking at how the future of public services should be transformed by and through citizens across the UK.

Victor presented four scenarios for co-production and citizen engagement across the EU, ranging from 'Let’s Dance' in which both citizens and the public sector supported each other in an effort to drive successful co-production, to the 'Waste Land', in which neither citizens nor the public sector were interested in working together.

As the final presenter, Sophie shared the LIPSE lessons on co-production in Scotland, identifying drivers and barriers to citizen engagement and managing the risks it entails. These recommendations for practice and policy were then debated in break-out groups, generating insightful reactions, tips and further questions from a masterfully co-producing audience.