What makes urban governance co-productive? Contradictions in the current debate on co-production

Following a number of prominent concepts in urban planning, like participatory planning or selfhelp housing, co-production has started to gain momentum in the global South context. While it is has been long discussed as a means of service provision, the term is more and more often used in the broade...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Planning theory (London, England) England), 2019-02, Vol.18 (1), p.143-160
Main Author: Galuszka, Jakub
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Civil society
Governance
Housing
Interest groups
Policy making
Poverty
Production
Residents
Urban planning
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Following a number of prominent concepts in urban planning, like participatory planning or selfhelp housing, co-production has started to gain momentum in the global South context. While it is has been long discussed as a means of service provision, the term is more and more often used in the broader sense of urban governance and policy planning. This understanding goes beyond the aspect of scaling-up successful co-productive infrastructure focused projects; rather, it indicates a different format of engagement for prompting urban stakeholders into planning citywide urban solutions. This article discusses the distinction between the different levels of coproduction and their inter-linkages, and it investigates the relevance of positioning co-production as a factor framing urban governance. This includes a discussion on three main contradictions that can be identified within the current discussion on co-production. Finally, it identifies a set of arguments for elaborating the role of co-production in a policy and urban governance setting.
ISSN:1473-0952
1741-3052
DOI:10.1177/1473095218780535