Making sense of the digital co-production of welfare services: using digital technology to simplify or tailor the co-production of services

References

• Alam, Sultana Lubna. 2021. “Many Hands Make Light Work: Towards a Framework of Digital Co-Production to Co-Creation on Social Platforms.” Information Technology & People 34 (3): 1087–1118. doi:10.1108/ITP-05-2019-0231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alford, John. 2009. Engaging Public Sector Clients: From Service-Delivery to Co-Production. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Andresen, Herbjørn. 2008. “Systemintegrasjon I E-forvaltningen Og Følgene for Dokumentasjon Av Systemenes Rettslige Innhold.” In Elektronisk Forvaltning På Norsk: Statlig Og Kommunal Bruk Av IKT, edited by A. Jansen, and D. W. Schartum. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, 227–243.
   Google Scholar
• Bannister, Frank, and Regina Connolly. 2014. “Ict, Public Values and Transformative Government: A Framework and Programme for Research.” Government Information Quarterly 31 (1): 119–128. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2013.06.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovens, Mark, and Stavros Zouridis. 2002. “From Street‐Level to System‐Level Bureaucracies: How Information and Communication Technology Is Transforming Administrative Discretion and Constitutional Control.” Public Administration Review 62 (2): 174–184. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowker, Geoffrey C., and Susan Leigh Star. 2000. Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Breit, Eric. 2019. “Digitalisering.” In Trygd I Aktiverings Tid, edited by Ann-Helén Bay, Aksel Hatland, Tale Hellevik, and Lars Inge Terum. Oslo: Gyldendal 311–324.
   Google Scholar
• Breit, Eric, and Robert Salomon. 2015. “Making the Technological Transition—Citizens’ Encounters with Digital Pension Services.” Social Policy & Administration 49 (3): 299–315. doi:10.1111/spol.12093.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brudney, Jeffrey L., and Robert E. England. 1983. “Toward a Definition of the Coproduction Concept.” Public Administration Review 43 (1): 59–65. doi:10.2307/975300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickinson, Helen, and Sophie Yates. 2021. “From External Provision to Technological Outsourcing: Lessons for Public Sector Automation from the Outsourcing Literature.” Public Management Review 1–19. doi:10.1080/14719037.2021.1972681.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, Paul, Eszter Hargittai, Coral Celeste, and Steven Shafer. 2004. “Digital Inequality: From Unequal Access to Differentiated Use.” In Social Inequality, edited by K. Neckerman, 355–400. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Dornan, Paul, and John Hudson. 2003. “Welfare Governance in the Surveillance Society: A Positive‐Realistic Cybercriticalist View.” Social Policy & Administration 37 (5): 468–482. doi:10.1111/1467-9515.00352.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunleavy, Patrick. 2016. “Big Data and Policy Learning.” In Evidence-Based Policy Making in the Social Sciences: Methods that Matter, edited by G. Stoker and M. Evans, 143–151. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eubanks, Virginia. 2018. Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. New York: St: Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foley, Paul, David Sutton, Alexandra Gemmell, Richard Potter, and Selina Patel. 2021. “International Digital Economy and Society Index 2020.” Brussels: European Commission. doi:10.2759/757411.
   Google Scholar
• Grönroos, Christian. 2007. Service Management and Marketing: Customer Management in Service Competition. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Haustein, Ellen, and Peter C. Lorson. 2021. “Co-Creation and Co-Production in Municipal Risk Governance—A Case Study of Citizen Participation in a German City.” Public Management Review 1–28. doi:10.1080/14719037.2021.1972704.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellang, Øyvind, and Leif Skiftenes Flak. 2012. “Assessing Effects of Egovernment Initiatives Based on a Public Value Framework.” Paper presented at the International Conference on Electronic Government, Kristiansand, September 3–6.
   Google Scholar
• Herd, Pamela, and Donald P. Moynihan. 2010. “Red Tape and Democracy: How Rules Affect Citizenship Rights.” The American Review of Public Administration 40 (6): 654–670. doi:10.1177/0275074010366732.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herd, Pamela, and Donald P. Moynihan. 2019. Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Hofmann, Sara, Daniel Beverungen, Michael Räckers, and Jörg Becker. 2013. “What Makes Local Governments‘ Online Communications Successful? Insights from a Multi-method Analysis of Facebook.” Government Information Quarterly 30 (4): 387–396. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2013.05.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaakkola, Daniel. 2018. E-Id and Digital Border Obstacles in the Nordic Region. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers.
   Google Scholar
• Janowski, Tomasz. 2015. “Digital Government Evolution: From Transformation to Contextualization.” Government Information Quarterly 32 (3): 221–236. doi:10.1016/J.GIQ.2015.07.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaspers, Sylke, and Trui Steen. 2019. “Realizing Public Values: Enhancement or Obstruction? Exploring Value Tensions and Coping Strategies in the Co-Production of Social Care.” Public Management Review 21 (4): 606–627. doi:10.1080/14719037.2018.1508608.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juhila, Kirsi, Suvi Raitakari, and Christopher Hall. 2016. Responsibilisation at the Margins of Welfare Services. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Katsonis, Maria, and Andrew Botros. 2015. “Digital Government: A Primer and Professional Perspectives.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 74 (1): 42–52. doi:10.1111/1467-8500.12144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kayser, Lars, Christian Nøhr, Pernille Bertelsen, Lars Botin, Sidsel Villumsen, Chris Showell, and Paul Turner. 2018. “Theory and Practice in Digital Behaviour Change: A Matrix Framework for the Co-Production of Digital Services that Engage, Empower and Emancipate Marginalised People Living with Complex and Chronic Conditions.” Informatics 5: 41. doi:10.3390/informatics5040041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labour, The Norwegian, and Welfare Administration. 2017. “Årsrapport 2016”. Oslo: The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration. Retrieved 01 September 2021.” https://www.nav.no/_/attachment/download/01376d98-97e8-4885-8b3d-06033584fda9:af5aed5acb9e67c5a53e3b7bef6756f05673dc88/arsrapport-2016-arbeids-og-velferdsdirektoratet.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, Torbjørn. 2018a. “Livet Er En Strøm Av Hendelser.” MEMU Accessed 01 May 2021. https://memu.no/innspill/livet-er-en-strom-av-hendelser/
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, Trond. 2018b. “Digilab Gjør Brukerne Digitale Accessed 01 May 2021.” https://memu.no/artikler/digilab-gjor-brukerne-digitale/
   Google Scholar
• Larsson, K K. 2021. “Digitization or Equality: When Government Automation Covers Some, but Not All Citizens.” Government Information Quarterly 38 (1). doi:10.1016/j.giq.2020.101547.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Grand, Julian. 2018. The Strategy of Equality: Redistribution and the Social Services. 13th ed. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lember, Veiko, Taco Brandsen, and Tõnurist Piret. 2019. “The Potential Impacts of Digital Technologies on Co-Production and Co-Creation.” Public Management Review 21 (11): 1665–1686. doi:10.1080/14719037.2019.1619807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lember, Vico. 2018. “The Increasing Role of Digital Technologies in Co-Production.” In Co-Production and Co-Creation Engaging Citizens in Public Services, edited by Trui Steen, Bram Verschuere, and Taco Brandsen. New York: Routledge 115–127.
   Google Scholar
• Linders, Dennis. 2012. “From E-Government to We-Government: Defining a Typology for Citizen Coproduction in the Age of Social Media.” Government Information Quarterly 29 (4): 446–454. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindgren, Ida, Christian Østergaard Madsen, Sara Hofmann, and Ulf Melin. 2019. “Close Encounters of the Digital Kind: A Research Agenda for the Digitalization of Public Services.” Government Information Quarterly 36 (3): 427–436. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2019.03.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lips, Miriam. 2019. Digital Government: Managing Public Sector Reform in the Digital Era. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Loeffler, Elke, and Tony Bovaird. 2020. “Assessing the Impact of Co-Production on Pathways to Outcomes in Public Services: The Case of Policing and Criminal Justice.” International Public Management Journal 23 (2): 205–223. doi:10.1080/10967494.2019.1668895.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madsen, Christian Østergaard, and Kræmmergaard Pernille. 2016. “Warm Experts in the Age of Mandatory E-Government: Interaction among Danish Single Parents regarding Online Application for Public Benefits.” Electronic Journal of E-government 14 (1): 87–98. http://www.ejeg.com/issue/download.html?idArticle=447
   Google Scholar
• Mäkinen, Maarit. 2006. “Digital Empowerment as a Process for Enhancing Citizens‘ Participation.” E-learning and Digital Media 3 (3): 381–395. doi:10.2304/elea.2006.3.3.381.
   Google Scholar
• Mandal, Roland, Karin Dyrstad, Line Melby, and Midtgård Trude. 2016. Omgjøring av vedtak i NAV og Trygderetten. Oslo: SINTEF. Retrieved 01 December 2020. https://www.sintef.no/publikasjoner/publikasjon/?pubid=CRIStin+1431110
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation. 2016. Digital Agenda for Norge. Oslo. sRetrieved 10 December 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/digital-agenda-for-Norway-in-brief/id2499897/
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation. 2019. Retrieved 10 July 2021. https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/one-digital-public-sector/id2653874/
   Google Scholar
• Nabatchi, Tina, Alessandro Sancino, and Mariafrancesca Sicilia. 2017. “Varieties of Participation in Public Services: The Who, When, and What of Coproduction.” Public Administration Review 77 (5): 766–776. doi:10.1111/puar.12765.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, Stephen P., and Kirsty Strokosch. 2013. “It Takes Two to Tango? Understanding the Co‐Production of Public Services by Integrating the Services Management and Public Administration Perspectives.” British Journal of Management 24: S31–S47. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, Stephen P., Zoe Radnor, and Greta Nasi. 2013. “A New Theory for Public Service Management? toward A (Public) Service-Dominant Approach.” The American Review of Public Administration 43 (2): 135–158. doi:10.1177/0275074012466935.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, Stephen P., Zoe Radnor, and Kirsty Strokosch. 2016. “Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A Suitable Case for Treatment?” Public Management Review 18 (5): 639–653. doi:10.1080/14719037.2015.1111927.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, Stephen 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
• Osborne, Stephen P. 2020. Public Service Logic: Creating Value for Public Service Users, Citizens, and Society through Public Service Delivery. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Parks, Roger B., Paula C. Baker, Larry Kiser, Ronald Oakerson, Elinor Ostrom, Stephen L. Vincent Ostrom, Martha B. Percy, Gordon P. Whitaker Vandivort, and Rick Wilson. 1981. “Consumers as Coproducers of Public Services: Some Economic and Institutional Considerations.” Policy Studies Journal 9 (7): 1001–1011. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.1981.tb01208.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeters, Rik 2013. “Responsibilisation on Government’s Terms: New Welfare and the Governance of Responsibility and Solidarity.” Social Policy and Society 12 (4): 583–595. doi:10.1017/S1474746413000018.
   Google Scholar
• Peeters, Rik, and Arjan Widlak. 2018. “The Digital Cage: Administrative Exclusion through Information Architecture–the Case of the Dutch Civil Registry’s Master Data Management System.” Government Information Quarterly 35 (2): 175–183. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2018.02.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pestoff, Victor. 2006. “Citizens and Co-Production of Welfare Services: Childcare in Eight European Countries.” Public Management Review 8 (4): 503–519. doi:10.1080/14719030601022882.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pestoff, Victor. 2012. “Co-Production and Third Sector Social Services in Europe: Some Concepts and Evidence.” Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 23 (4): 1102–1118. doi:10.1007/s11266-012-9308-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramirez, Rafael. 1999. “Value Co‐Production: Intellectual Origins and Implications for Practice and Research.” Strategic Management Journal 20 (1): 49–65. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199901)20:1<49::AID-SMJ20>3.0.CO;2-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reddick, Christopher G. 2005. “Citizen Interaction with E-Government: From the Streets to Servers?” Government Information Quarterly 22 (1): 38–57. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2004.10.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringnes, Ida 2018. “Satser Stort På Digitale Tjenester Til Foreldre.” MEMU. Accessed 10 January 2021. https://memu.no/artikler/satser-stort-pa-digitale-tjenester-til-foreldre/
   Google Scholar
• Røhnebæk, Maria Taivalsaari, and Eric Breit. 2021. “‘Damned if You Do and Damned if You Don’t’: A Framework for Examining Double Binds in Public Service Organizations.” Public Management Review 1–23. doi:10.1080/14719037.2021.1882542.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumball-Smith, Juliet, Paul Shekelle, and Cheryl L. Damberg. 2018. “Electronic Health Record ‘Super-users’ and ‘Under-users’ in Ambulatory Care Practices.” The American Journal of Managed Care 24 (1): 26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rygh, Silje Helen. 2019. “Chat Med NAV Om AAP.” MEMU Accessed 10 January 2021. https://memu.no/artikler/chat-med-nav-om-aap/
   Google Scholar
• Scholta, Hendrik, Willem Mertens, Marek Kowalkiewicz, and Jörg Becker. 2019. “From One-Stop Shop to No-Stop Shop: An E-Government Stage Model.” Government Information Quarterly 36 (1): 11–26. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2018.11.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, Murray, William DeLone, and William Golden. 2016. “Measuring Egovernment Success: A Public Value Approach.” European Journal of Information Systems 25 (3): 187–208. doi:10.1057/ejis.2015.11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sirendi, Regina, Antonette Mendoza, Mariane Barrier, Kuldar Taveter, and Leon Sterling. 2018. “A Conceptual Framework for Effective Appropriation of Proactive Public E-Services.” In Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Government (ECEG): Santiago de Compostela, Spain 213–221.
   Google Scholar
• Sorrentino, Maddalena, Mariafrancesca Sicilia, and Michael Howlett. 2018. “Understanding Co-Production as a New Public Governance Tool.” Policy and Society 37 (3): 277–293. doi:10.1080/14494035.2018.1521676.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Standing, Guy. 2011. The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Strokosch, Kirsty, and S P. Osborne. 2020. “Co-Experience, Co-Production and Co-Governance: An Ecosystem Approach to the Analysis of Value Creation.” Policy & Politics 48 (3): 425–442. doi:10.1332/030557320X15857337955214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teknologirådet. 2017. “Denne Gangen Er Det Personlig”. Oslo: Teknologirådet. Retrieved 01 May 2021.” https://teknologiradet.no/wp-content/uploads/sites/105/2018/05/Rapport_Denne-gangen-er-det-personlig.-Det-digitale-skiftet-i-offentlig-sektor.pdf
   Google Scholar
• The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration. 2019. “Årsrapport 2018 Retrieved 01 May 2021”. Oslo: Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration. https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/ccfdb1de77a04e41ad4989825a70e315/arsrapport_2018_arbeids_og_velferdsdirektoratet.pdf
   Google Scholar
• The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration. 2020. “Årsrapport 2019 Retrieved 01 January 2021”. Oslo: Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration. https://www.nav.no/no/nav-og-samfunn/om-nav/a%CC%8Arsrapport/navs-arsrapport-for-2019
   Google Scholar
• Thorgersen, Anders. 2017. “Digitale Tjenester Og Brukerens Tillit Til Nav.” Arbeid Og Velferd 3: 97–209.
   Google Scholar
• Trischler, Jakob, and Jessica Westman Trischler Design for Experience—a Public Service Design Approach in the Age of Digitalization. In Public Management Review 1–20 https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1899272, .
   Google Scholar
• Trnka, Susanna, and Catherine Trundle. 2014. “Competing Responsibilities: Moving Beyond Neoliberal Responsibilisation.” Anthropological Forum 24 (2): 136–153. doi:10.1080/00664677.2013.879051.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vågeng, Sigrunn. 2020. “Den Store Stresstesten.” MEMU. Accessed 01 February 2021. https://memu.no/innspill/den-store-stresstesten/
   Google Scholar
• Van Deursen, Alexander J.A.M, and Ellen J. Helsper The Third-Level Digital Divide: Who Benefits Most from Being Online? In Communication and Information Technologies Annual vol. 10 29–52.
   Google Scholar
• Van Deursen, Alexander J.A.M, and Jan A.G.M Van Dijk. 2019. “The First-Level Digital Divide Shifts from Inequalities in Physical Access to Inequalities in Material Access.” New Media & Society 21 (2): 354–375. doi:10.1177/1461444818797082.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vennik, Femke D., Hester M. Van de Bovenkamp, Kim Putters, and Kor J. Grit. 2016. “Co-Production in Healthcare: Rhetoric and Practice.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 82 (1): 150–168. doi:10.1177/0020852315570553.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Widlak, Arjan, and Rik Peeters. 2020. “Administrative Errors and the Burden of Correction and Consequence: How Information Technology Exacerbates the Consequences of Bureaucratic Mistakes for Citizens.” International Journal of Electronic Governance 12 (1): 40–56. doi:10.1504/IJEG.2020.106998.
   Google Scholar
• Wihlborg, Elin, Hannu Larsson, and Hedström Karin. 2016. “The Computer Says No!’—a Case Study on Automated Decision-Making in Public Authorities.” Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Koloa, 5–8 Jan.
   Google Scholar
• Xu, Corey Kewei, and Tian 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
• Zouridis, Stavros, Marlies Van Eck, and Mark Bovens. 2020. “Automated Discretion”. Chapter 17.” In Discretion and the Quest for Controlled Freedom, edited by Peter Hupe, and Tony Evens. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar