by Sam van Elk & Britt Regal
This situation has sparked thinking about how to foster co-creation on a larger scale. One key idea involves co-creation ‘platforms’. These platforms are adaptable structures that can be applied to diverse contexts, similar to a computer operating system that can run various programs. The UK’s Local Enterprise Zones are good examples of such ‘platforms’ – each ‘Zone’ is tailored to local needs but operates within a common framework. Academics have suggested that governments use platforms to encourage their citizens, businesses, and communities to co-create. But to date, there has been limited research into what happens when a government follows this advice.
Our study, ‘The opportunities and challenges of politically designed co-creation platforms’, recently published in Policy and Politics addresses this limitation. We studied the London Borough of Culture programme, a platform that aims to foster collaboratively created cultural events. The program offers annual awards to a winning ‘London Borough of Culture’ to run a year of cultural events, alongside several runner-up prizes. Boroughs are encouraged to work collaboratively and treat residents as ‘co-creators’. Our work centred on the Greater London Authority, which administers the scheme, and the London Borough of Waltham Forest, the inaugural winning borough.
We identified significant ways the programme facilitated co-creation, including the funding and support it provides, the connections it enables, and its team’s efforts to ensure flexibility. Yet our research also highlighted distinct challenges faced by politically-led organisations when designing co-creation platforms. Governments operate in fast-paced, high-stakes public environments, while co-creation requires time and the freedom to experiment and learn from failures. Governments must meet high standards of fairness and value for money, so normally expect projects they fund to clearly specify their deliverables ahead of time. Conversely, co-creation often relies on the flexibility to develop unexpected outcomes. What makes a government effective may not make it skilled in designing or operating platforms.
Our research suggests that government-designed platforms might cut both ways when it comes to supporting co-creation. While their resources, connections and efforts to offer flexibility may support co-creation, the realities of political timescales, governance and visibility may get in the way. Consequently, we encourage governments keen to facilitate co-creation not to see platforms as silver bullets, but as potentially rewarding approaches that bring significant challenges to navigate.
You can read the original research in Policy & Politics:
van Elk, S., & Regal, B. (2023). The opportunities and challenges of politically designed co-creation platforms, Policy & Politics, 51(3), 579-601 from https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16799905123057
If you enjoyed this blog post, you may also be interested to read:
Ansell, C., & Torfing, J. (2021). Co-creation: the new kid on the block in public governance, Policy & Politics, 49(2), 211-230 from https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16115951196045
Sørensen, E., Bryson, J., & Crosby, B. (2021). How public leaders can promote public value through co-creation, Policy & Politics, 49(2), 267-286 from https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16119271739728
Strokosch, K., & Osborne, S. P. (2020). Co-experience, co-production and co-governance: an ecosystem approach to the analysis of value creation, Policy & Politics, 48(3), 425-442 from https://doi.org/10.1332/030557320X15857337955214
Torfing, J., Ferlie, E., Jukić, T., & Ongaro, E. (2021). A theoretical framework for studying the co-creation of innovative solutions and public value, Policy & Politics, 49(2), 189-209 2023, from https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16108172803520
