Dog fouling and potholes: understanding the role of coproducing ‘citizen sensors’ in local governance

References

• Abel, G. A., M. E. Barclay, and R. A. Payne. 2016. “Adjusted Indices of Multiple Deprivation to Enable Comparisons within and between Constituent Countries of the UK Including an Illustration Using Mortality Rates.” BMJ Open 6 (11): 11. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012750.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alford, J. 2002. “Why Do public-sector Clients Coproduce? toward a Contingency Theory.” Administration & Society 34 (1): 32–56. doi:10.1177/0095399702034001004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• APSE. 2017. Redefining Neighbourhoods: A Future beyond Austerity? Trafford: Association for Public Service Excellence.
   Google Scholar
• Ashmore, F. H., J. H. Farrington, and S. Skerratt. 2015. “‘Superfast Broadband and Rural Community Resilience: Examining the Rural Need for Speed’, Scottish Geographical Journal.” Taylor & Francis 131: 265–278.
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, N., G. Bramley, and A. Hastings. 2015. “Symposium Introduction: Local Responses to “Austerity”.” Local Government Studies 41 (4): 571–581.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bang, H. P., and S. Eva. 1999. “The Everyday Maker: A New Challenge to Democratic Governance.” Administrative Theory & Praxis 21 (3): 325–341. doi:10.1080/10841806.1999.11643381.
   Google Scholar
• Bimber, B. 2001. “Information and Political Engagement in America: The Search for Effects of Information Technology at the Individual Level: Information and Political Engagement in America.” Political Research Quarterly 54 (1): 53–67. doi:10.1177/106591290105400103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blank, G., M. Graham, and C. Calvino. 2018. “Local Geographies of Digital Inequality.” Social Science Computer Review 36 (1): 82–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovaird, T. 2007. “Beyond Engagement and Participation: User and Community Coproduction of Public Service.” Public Administration Review 67 (5): 846–860. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00773.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovaird, T., G. G. Van Ryzin, E. Loeffler, and S. Parrado. 2015. “Activating Citizens to Participate in Collective Co-Production of Public Services.” Journal of Social Policy 44 (1): 1–23. doi:10.1017/S0047279414000567.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovarid, T., and E. Loeffler. 2008. “User and Community Co-Production of Public Services: Fad or Fact, Nuisance or Necessity?.” In TSRC Briefing Paper 12. Birmingham: Third Sector Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• British Standards Institute. 2014. “Smart City Framework – Guide Customer Service to Establishing Strategies for Smart Cities and Communities.” London: British Standards Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Cantijoch, M., S. Galandini, and R. Gibson. 2016. “‘It’s Not about Me, It’s about My Community ‘: A mixed-method Study of Civic Websites and Community Efficacy’.” New Media & Society 19 (8): 1896–1915. doi:10.1177/1461444815616225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, B. Y., J. L. Brudney, and S.-G. Jang. 2013. “Coproduction of Government Services and the New Information Technology: Investigating the Distributional Biases.” Public Administration Review 73 (5): 704–713. doi:10.1111/puar.12092.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, B. Y., J. L. Brudney, S.-G. Jang, and B. Davy. 2020. “Do Advanced Information Technologies Produce Equitable Government Responses in Coproduction: An Examination of 311 Systems in 15 U.S. Cities.” The American Review of Public Administration 50 (3): 315–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dempsey, Burton, N. Dempsey, and M. Burton. 2011. “Defining place-keeping: The long-term Management of Public Spaces.” Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 11 (1): 11–20. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2011.09.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dutton, W. H., G. Blank, and D. Groselj. 2013. Cultures of the Internet: The Internet in Britain. Oxford Internet Survey 2013. Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Eckersley, P., and P. Tobin. 2019. “The Impact of Austerity on Policy Capacity in Local Government.” Policy and Politics 47 (3): 455–472. doi:10.1332/030557319X15613701303511.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ENRD. (2018). “Smart Countryside Study Finland - Working Document.” 1–4. Retrieved from https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/sites/enrd/files/tg_smart-villages_case-study_fi.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Feigenbaum, J. J., and A. B. Hall (2015) “‘How High-Income Neighborhoods Receive More Service From Municipal Government: Evidence From City Administrative Data’.” http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/jfeigenbaum/files/feigenbaum_hall_respublica.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Gray, M., and A. Barford. 2018. “The Depths of the Cuts: The Uneven Geography of Local Government Austerity.” Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 11 (3): 541–563. doi:10.1093/cjres/rsy019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimshaw, L. 2011. “Community Work as Women’s Work? the Gendering of English Neighbourhood Partnerships.” Community Development Journal 46 (3): 327–340. doi:10.1093/cdj/bsr034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haklay, M. E. 2016. ”Why is Participation Inequality Important?” In European Handbook of Crowdsourced Geographic Information, edited by C. Capineri, M. Haklay, H. Huang, V. Antoniou, J. Kettunen, F. Ostermann, R. Purves, 35–44. London, United Kindom: Ubiquity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hasting, A. 2009b. “Poor Neighbourhoods and Poor Services: Evidence on the “Rationing” of Environmental Service Provision to Deprived Neighbourhoods.” Urban Studies 46 (13): 2907–2927. doi:10.1177/0042098009344995.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hastings, A. 2007. “Territorial Justice and Neighbourhood Environmental Services: A Comparison of Provision to Deprived and better-off Neighbourhoods in the UK.” Environment and Planning. C, Government & Policy 35 (6): 896–917. doi:10.1068/c0657.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hastings, A. 2009a. “Neighbourhood Environmental Services and Neighbourhood ‘Effects’: Exploring the Role of Urban Services in Intensifying Neighbourhood Problems.” Housing Theory and Society 24 (4): 503–524.
   Google Scholar
• Hastings, A., N. Bailey, G. Bramley, R. Croudace, and D. Watkins. 2014. “‘Managing ’ the Middle Classes: Urban Managers, Public Services and the Response to Middle- Class Capture.” In Local Government Studies 40 (2): 203–223. doi:10.1080/03003930.2013.815615.
   Google Scholar
• Hastings, A., N. Bailey, G. Bramley, and M. Gannon. 2017. “Austerity Urbanism in England: The ‘Regressive Redistribution’ of Local Government Services and the Impact on the Poor and Marginalised.” Environment & Planning A 49 (9): 2007–2024. doi:10.1177/0308518X17714797.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hastings, A., P. Matthews, and Y. Wang. 2021. “Unequal and Gendered: Assessing the Impacts of Austerity Cuts on Public Service Users.” In Social Policy and Society, 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Hero, R. E. 1986. “Explaining Citizen-Initiated Contacting of Government Officials: Socioeconomic Status, Perceived Need or Something Else?” Social Science Quarterly 67 (3): 627–635.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keep Britain Tidy. 2015. How Clean Is England? the Local Environmental Quality Survey of England 2014/15. London: Keep Britain Tidy.
   Google Scholar
• Levine, J. R., and C. Gershenson. 2014a. “From Political to Material Inequality: Race, Immigration, and Requests for Public Goods.” Sociological Forum 29 (3): 607–627. doi:10.1111/socf.12106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews, P., and A. Hastings. 2013. “Middle-Class Political Activism and Middle-Class Advantage in Relation to Public Services: A Realist Synthesis of the Evidence Base.” Social Policy & Administration 47 (1): 72–92. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9515.2012.00866.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijer, A. J. 2011. “Networked Coproduction of Public Services in Virtual Communities: From a Government-Centric to a Community Approach to Public Service Support.” Public Administration Review 71 (4): 598–607. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02391.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michener, J. 2013. “Neighborhood Disorder and Local Participation: Examining the Political Relevance of “Broken Windows”.” Political Behavior 35 (4): 777–806. doi:10.1007/s11109-012-9217-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naff, K. C. 2009. “Nancy Alfaro as an Exemplary Collaborative Public Manager: How Customer Service Was Aligned with Customer Needs.” a 69 (3): 487–493.
   Google Scholar
• Needham, C. 2008. “Realising the Potential of Co-production: Negotiating Improvements in Public Services.” Social Policy and Society 7 (27): 221–231. doi:10.1017/S1474746407004174.
   Google Scholar
• Noble, M., G. Wright, G. Smith, and C. Dibben. 2006. “Measuring Multiple Deprivation at the small-area Level.” Environment & Planning A 38 (1): 169–185. doi:10.1068/a37168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, D. F., and C. G. Reddick. 2013. “Local E-Government in the United States: Transformation or Incremental Change?” Public Administration Review 73 (1): 165–175. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02647.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nyanzu, E. (2018) “FixMyStreet Meta Categories.” viewed 27 September 2019. https://github.com/mysociety/fms_meta_categories
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, D. T. 2016. “‘Using Small Data to Interpret Big Data: 311 Reports as Individual Contributions to Informal Social Control in Urban Neighborhoods’, Social Science Research.” Elsevier Ltd 59: 83–96.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, D. T., D. Offenhuber, J. Baldwin-Philippi, M. Sands, and E. Gordon. 2017. “Uncharted Territoriality in Coproduction: The Motivations for 311 Reporting.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 27 (2): 320–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien, D. T., R. J. Sampson, and C. Winship. 2015b. “Ecometrics in the Age of Big Data Measuring and Assessing “Broken Windows” Using Large-scale Administrative Records.” Sociological Methodology 45 (1): 101–147. doi:10.1177/0081175015576601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Offenhuber, D. 2015. “Infrastructure legibility—a Comparative Analysis of open311-based Citizen Feedback Systems.” Economy and Society 8 (1): 93–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. P. 2018. “From Public service-dominant Logic to Public Service Logic: Are Public Service Organizations Capable of Co-production and Value Co-creation?” Public Management Review 20 (2): 225–231. doi:10.1080/14719037.2017.1350461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pak, B., A. Chua, and A. Vande Moere. 2017. “FixMyStreet Brussels: Socio-Demographic Inequality in Crowdsourced Civic Participation.” Journal of Urban Technology 24 (2): 65–87. doi:10.1080/10630732.2016.1270047.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, E. B. 2000. “Closing the Digital Divide in Rural America.” Telecommunications Policy 24 (4): 281–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsons, A. (2017) “Dog Fouling and FixMyStreet.” Viewed 27 September 2019. https://research.mysociety.org/publications/dog-fouling-and-fixmystreet
   Google Scholar
• Parsons, A. (2019) “Explorer: FixMyStreet: Gender - Female.” Viewed 27 September 2019. https://research.mysociety.org/sites/explorer/fms/analysis/gender/female/method/
   Google Scholar
• Parsons, A. (2019a). “Super Contributors and Power Laws.” https://www.mysociety.org/2019/08/20/super-contributors-and-power-laws/
   Google Scholar
• Parsons, A. (2019b). “Service Bundles: Exploring the Many Uses of mySociety Services.” https://www.mysociety.org/2019/08/20/service-bundles/
   Google Scholar
• Przeybilovicz, E., M. A. Cunha, S. Geertman, C. Leleux, A. Michels, Z. Tomor, W. R. Webster, and A. Meijer. 2022. “Citizen Participation in the Smart City: Findings from an International Comparative Study.” Local Government Studies 48 (1): 23–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheufele, D. A., and M. C. Nisbet. 2002. “Being a Citizen Online: New Opportunities and Dead Ends.” Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 7 (3): 55–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidthuber, L., D. Hilgers, T. Gegenhuber, and S. Etzelstorfer. 2017. “The Emergence of Local Open Government: Determinants of Citizen Participation in Online Service Reporting.” Government Information Quarterly 34 (3): 457–469. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2017.07.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sepasgozar, S. M. E., S. Hawken, S. Sargolzaei, and M. Foroozanfa. 2019. “Implementing Citizen Centric Technology in Developing Smart Cities: A Model for Predicting the Acceptance of Urban Technologies.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 142: 105–116. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.09.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjoberg, F. M., J. Mellon, and T. Peixoto. 2017. “The Effect of Bureaucratic Responsiveness on Citizen Participation.” Public Administration Review 77 (3): 340–351. doi:10.1111/puar.12697.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solymosi, R., K. J. Bowers, and T. Fujiyama. 2017. “Crowdsourcing Subjective Perceptions of Neighbourhood Disorder: Interpreting Bias in Open Data.” The British Journal of Criminology 58 (4): 944–967. doi:10.1093/bjc/azx048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitaker, G. P. 1980. “Coproduction: Citizen Participation in Service Delivery.” Public Administration Review 40 (3): 240–246. doi:10.2307/975377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, A., and K. Trump. 2018. “The Promises and Pitfalls of 311 Data.” Urban Affairs Review 54 (4): 794–823. doi:10.1177/1078087416673202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, W.-N. 2020. “Determinants of citizen-generated Data in a Smart City: Analysis of 311 System User Behavior.” Sustainable Cities and Society 59: 102167. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2020.102167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, C. K., and T. Tang. 2020. “Closing the Gap or Widening the Divide: The Impacts of Technology-Enabled Coproduction on Equity in Public Service Delivery.” Public Administration Review 80 (6): 962–975. doi:10.1111/puar.13222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, M. M. 2021. “The Impact of Technological Innovation on Service Delivery: Social Media and Smartphone Integration in a 311 System 311 System.” Public Management Review. 1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar