[
Ackermann, Fran, Susan Howick, John Quigley, Lesley Walls, and Tom Houghton. 2014. “Systemic Risk Elicitation: Using Causal Maps to Engage Stakeholders and Build a Comprehensive View of Risks.” European Journal of Operational Research 238(1), 290 – 99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2014.03.035.10.1016/j.ejor.2014.03.035
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Alford, John. 2014. “The Multiple Facets of Co-Production: Building on the Work of Elinor Ostrom.” Public Management Review 16(3), 299 – 316. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.806578.10.1080/14719037.2013.806578
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Andersen, Niklas A, Dorte Caswell, and Flemming Larsen. 2017. “A New Approach to Helping the Hard-to-Place Unemployed: The Promise of Developing New Knowledge in an Interactive and Collaborative Process.” European Journal of Social Security 19(4), 335 – 52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1388262717745193.10.1177/1388262717745193
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Baker, Keith, and Adele Irving. 2016. “Co-Producing Approaches to the Management of Dementia through Social Prescribing.” Social Policy & Administration 50(3), 379 – 97. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12127.10.1111/spol.12127
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Barbera, Carmela, Mariafrancesca Sicilia, and Ileana Steccolini. 2016. “What Mr. Rossi Wants in Participatory Budgeting: Two R’s (Responsiveness and Representation) and Two I’s (Inclusiveness and Interaction).” International Journal of Public Administration 39(13), 1088 – 1100. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2016.1177839.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bevir, Mark. 2011. The SAGE Handbook of Governance. The SAGE Handbook of Governance. London: SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446200964.10.4135/9781446200964
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bohanec, M. 2006. Odločanje in Modeli. Ljubljana: DMFA – založ niš tvo.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bohanec, M, and V Rajkovič. 1990. “DEX : An Expert System Shell for Decision Support.” Sistemica 1(1), 145–57.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bohanec, M, N Trdin, and B Kontić. 2017. “A Qualitative Multi-Criteria Modelling Approach to the Assessment of Electric Energy Production Technologies in Slovenia.” Central European Journal of Operations Research 25(3), 611 – 25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-016-0457-4.10.1007/s10100-016-0457-4
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bohanec, M, M Žnidaržič, V Rajkovič, I Bratko, and B Zupan. 2013. “DEX Methodology: Three Decades of Qualitative Multi-Attribute Modeling.” Informatica: An International Journal of Computing and Informatics 37(1), 49 – 54.
]Search in 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. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279414000567.10.1017/S0047279414000567
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bovaird, Tony, and Elke Loeffler. 2016. “Bringing the Resources of Citizens into Public Governance: Innovation through Co-Production to Improve Public Services and Outcomes.” In Enhancing Public Innovation by Transforming Public Governance, edited by Jacob Torfing and Peter Triantafillou, 160 – 77. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316105337.008.10.1017/CBO9781316105337.008
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Brans, J. P., and Ph. Vincke. 1985. “A Preference Ranking Organisation Method: (The Promethee Method for Multiple Criteria Decision-Making).” Management Science 31(6), 647 – 56.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bryson, John, Alessandro Sancino, John Benington, and Eva Sørensen. 2017. “Towards a Multi-Actor Theory of Public Value Co-Creation.” Public Management Review 19(5), 640 – 54. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2016.1192164.10.1080/14719037.2016.1192164
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Burall, Simon, and Tim Hughes. 2016. “The Hidden Politics of Policy Design.” In Designing Public Policy for Co-Production: Theory, Practice and Change, edited by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson, 71 – 80. Bristol: Policy Press.10.1332/policypress/9781447316695.003.0007
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cepiku, Denita, and Filippo Giordano. 2014. “Co-Production in Developing Countries: Insights from the Community Health Workers Experience.” Public Management Review 16(3), 317 – 40. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.822535.10.1080/14719037.2013.822535
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Chaebo, Gemael, and Janann Joslin Medeiros. 2017. “Conditions for Policy Implementation via Co-Production: The Control of Dengue Fever in Brazil.” Public Management Review 19(10), 1381 – 98. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2016.1209231.10.1080/14719037.2016.1209231
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cho, Chanwoo, Sun Young Park, Jong Ku Son, and Sungjoo Lee. 2016. “R&D Support Services for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: The Different Perspectives of Clients and Service Providers, and the Roles of Intermediaries.” Science and Public Policy 43(6), 859 – 71. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scw006.10.1093/scipol/scw006
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Co-VAL. 2018. “Co-VAL at the CC-11 Cluster and Linked EU EGovernment Initiatives & FuturGov2030 Workshop – Co-VAL.” March 17, 2020. Avaiable at https://www.co-val.eu/blog/2018/10/25/co-val-at-the-cultural-cooperation-11-cluster-and-linked-eu-egovernment-initiatives-futurgov2030-workshop/ (last accessed 17 March 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cvelić, Josipa, Tatjana Perše, Sanja Vrbek, and Irena Pluchinotta. 2020. “Rijeka 2020 Participatory Programme.” In Co-Production and Co-Governance, edited by Brittney Regal and Ewan
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ferlie, 130–45. London: King’s College.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Daly, Siobhan, Andreja Pegan, and Keith Shaw. 2019. Deliverable 1.2: Repository of Practices of Strategic Renewal. Newcastle: Northumbria University.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Duijn, Michael, Marc Rijnveld, and Merlijn van Hulst. 2010. “Meeting in the Middle: Joining Reflection and Action in Complex Public Sector Projects.” Public Money and Management 30(4), 227 – 33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2010.492183.10.1080/09540962.2010.492183
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dunn, William N., Katarina, Staronova, and Sergei Pushkarev. 2006. Implementation: The Missing Link in Public Administrative Reform in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dunston, Roger, Alison Lee, David Boud, Pat Brodie, and Mary Chiarella. 2009. “Co-Production and Health System Reform – From Re-Imagining To Re-Making.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 68(1), 39 – 52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2008.00608.x.10.1111/j.1467-8500.2008.00608.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Durose, Catherine, and Liz Richardson. 2016a. “Co-Productive Policy Design.” In Designing Public Policy for Co-Production: Theory, Practice and Change, edited by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson, 30 – 50. Bristol: Policy Press.10.1332/policypress/9781447316695.003.0004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Durose, Catherine, and Liz Richardson. 2016b. “Debating Co-Productive Policy Design.” In Designing Public Policy for Co-Production: Theory, Practice and Change, edited by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson, 181 – 202. Bristol: Policy Press.10.1332/policypress/9781447316695.001.0001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Durose, Catherine, and Liz Richardson. 2016c. “Governance for Co-Productive Policy Designs.” In Designing Public Policy for Co-Production: Theory, Practice and Change, edited by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson, 203 – 6. Bristol: Policy Press.10.1332/policypress/9781447316695.001.0001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Echeverri, Per, and Per Skålén. 2011. “Co-Creation and Co-Destruction: A Practice-Theory Based Study of Interactive Value Formation.” Marketing Theory 11(3), 351 – 73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593111408181.10.1177/1470593111408181
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Edelenbos, Jurian, Ingmar van Meerkerk, and Todd Schenk. 2018. “The Evolution of Community Self-Organization in Interaction With Government Institutions: Cross-Case Insights From Three Countries.” American Review of Public Administration 48 (1), 52 – 66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016651142.10.1177/0275074016651142
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Eden, Colin, and Fran Ackermann. 2004. “Cognitive Mapping Expert Views for Policy Analysis in the Public Sector.” European Journal of Operational Research 152(3), 615 – 30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00061-4.10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00061-4
]Search in Google Scholar
[
EU Commission. 2012. “Commission Staff Working Document Digital Agenda for Europe - a Good Start and Stakeholder Feedback Accompanying the Document Communication from ther Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Com.” Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX-%3A52012SC0446 (last accessed 11 December 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
EU Commission. 2013. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions EU Quality Framework for Anticipation of Change and Restructuring /* COM/2013/0882 Final */.”Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52013DC0882 (last accessed 11 December 2019).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
European Commission. 2017. A Comparative Overview of Public Administration Characteristics and Performance in EU28. Brussels: European Commission
]Search in Google Scholar
[
European Committe of the Regions. 2017. “Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on Social Innovation as a New Tool for Addressing Societal Challenges.” Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52016IR6945&from=EN (last accessed 17 March 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
European Committe of the Regions. 2020. “Croatia.” Available at https://portal.cor.europa.eu/divisionpowers/Pages/Croatia.aspx (last accessed 10 May 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Farr, Michelle. 2016. “Co-Production and Value Co-Creation in Outcome-Based Contracting in Public Services.” Public Management Review 18(5), 654 – 72. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1111661.10.1080/14719037.2015.1111661
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ferlie, Ewan, and Edoardo Ongaro. 2015. Strategic Management in Public Services Organizations: Concepts, Schools and Contemporary Issues. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203736432
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ferretti, Valentina, Irene Pluchinotta, and Alexis Tsoukiàs. 2019. “Studying the Generation of Alternatives in Public Policy Making Processes.” European Journal of Operational Research 273(1), 353 – 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.07.054.10.1016/j.ejor.2018.07.054
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fledderus, Joost, Taco Brandsen, and Marlies Honingh. 2014. “Restoring Trust Through the Co-Production of Public Services: A Theoretical Elaboration.” Public Management Review 16(3), 424 – 43. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.848920.10.1080/14719037.2013.848920
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gebauer, Heiko, Mikael Johnson, and Bo Enquist. 2014. “Service Innovations for Enhancing Public Transit Services.” In Framing Innovation in Public Service Sectors, edited by L. Fuglsang, R. Ronning, and B. Enquist, 30:41 – 62. Rout-ledge Studies in Innovation Organization and Technology. London: Routledge.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Giannone, Diego. 2015. “Suspending Democracy ? The Governance of the EU’s Political and Economic Crisis as a Process of Neoliberal Restructuring.” In The European Union in Crisis, edited by K. Demetriou, 101 – 19. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08774-0_6.10.1007/978-3-319-08774-0_6
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Giordano, R., I. Pluchinotta, A. Pagano, A. Scrieciu, and F. Nanu. 2020. “Enhancing Nature-Based Solutions Acceptance through Stakeholders’ Engagement in Co-Benefits Identification and Trade-Offs Analysis.” Science of The Total Environment 713, 1 – 18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136552.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136552
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Griffiths, Mary. 2015. “Empowering Citizens.” Public Affairs and Administration, 1443–61. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-8358-7.ch071.10.4018/978-1-4666-8358-7.ch071
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hammerschmid, Gerhard, Steven Van de Walle, Rhys Andrews, and Philippe Bezes. 2016. Public Administration Reforms in Europe: The View from the Top. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.10.4337/9781783475407
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Harary, Frank, Robert Z. Norman, and Dorwin Cartwright. 1965. Structural Models: An Introduction to the Theory of Directed Graphs. New York: Wiley.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Howell, Michaela, and Margaret Wilkinson. 2016. “Policy Design as Co-Design.” In Designing Public Policy for Co-Production: Theory, Practice and Change, edited by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson, 157 – 66. Bristol: Policy Press.10.2307/j.ctt1t896qg.21
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Isett, Kimberley R, and Jeanne Miranda. 2015. “Watching Sausage Being Made: Lessons Learned from the Co-Production of Governance in a Behavioural Health System.” Public Management Review 17(1), 35 – 56. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.881536.10.1080/14719037.2014.881536
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Järvi, Henna, Anni Kaisa Kähkönen, and Hannu Torvinen. 2018. “When Value Co-Creation Fails: Reasons That Lead to Value Co-Destruction.” Scandinavian Journal of Management 34(1), 63 – 77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2018.01.002.10.1016/j.scaman.2018.01.002
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jereb, E, M Bohanec, and V Rajkovič. 2003. DEXi – Računalniški Program Za Večparametrsko Odločanje. Kranj: Moderna organizacija.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jones, Phil, Colin Lorne, and Chris Speed. 2016. “Using Technology to Help Communities Shout Louder.” In Designing Public Policy for Co-Production: Theory, Practice and Change, edited by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson, 141 – 48. Bristol: Policy Press.10.1332/policypress/9781447316695.003.0013
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jukić, Tina, Primož Pevcin, Jože Benčina, Mitja Dečman, and Sanja Vrbek. 2019. “Collaborative Innovation in Public Administration: Theoretical Background and Research Trends of Co-Production and Co-Creation.” Administrative Sciences 9(4), 90. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci9040090.10.3390/admsci9040090
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kane, Lisa, and Michael Boulle. 2018. “‘This Was Different’: Transferring Climate Mitigation Knowledge Practices South to South with the MAPS Programme.” Climate Policy 18(9), 1177 – 88. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1421520.10.1080/14693062.2017.1421520
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kekez, Anka. 2018. “Public Service Reforms and Clientelism: Explaining Variation of Service Delivery Modes in Croatian Social Policy.” Policy and Society 37(3), 386 – 404. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2018.1436505.10.1080/14494035.2018.1436505
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kempa, Jarosław, and Artur Roland Kozłowski. 2020. “Participatory Budget as a Tool Supporting the Development of Civil Society in Poland.” NISPAceeJournal of Public Administration and Policy 13(1), 61 – 79. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2020-0003.10.2478/nispa-2020-0003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kershaw, Anne, Kerrie Bridson, and Melissa A Parris. 2017. “Encouraging Writing on the White Walls: Co-Production in Museums and the Influence of Professional Bodies.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 77(1), 19 – 34. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12245.10.1111/1467-8500.12245
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kleinhans, Reinout. 2017. “False Promises of Co-Production in Neighbourhood Regeneration: The Case of Dutch Community Enterprises.” Public Management Review 19(10), 1500 – 1518. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1287941.10.1080/14719037.2017.1287941
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kok, Kasper. 2009. “The Potential of Fuzzy Cognitive Maps for Semi-Quantitative Scenario Development, with an Example from Brazil.” Global Environmental Change 19(1), 122 – 33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.08.003.10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.08.003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Koprić, Ivan., and Polonca Kovač. 2016. European Administrative Space: Spreading Standards, Building Capacities. Bratislava: NISPAcee.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Koprić, Ivan, Gordana Marčetić, Anamarija Musa, Vedran Đulabić, and Goranka Lalić Novak. 2014. Upravna Znanost – Javna Uprava u Suvremenom Europskom Kontekstu (Administrative Science – Public Administration in Contemporary European Context). Zagreb: Institute of PA.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kovač, Polonca. 2014. “Integrative Approach to the Reorganization of Self-Government and Local State Administration.” Trans-European Dialogue (TED) 7 -Strong Local Governments: Community, Strategy, Integration. Cluj-Napoca, Romania.10.2478/nispa-2014-0006
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kovač, Polonca, and Mantas. Bileišis. 2017. Public Administration Reforms in Eastern European Union Member States: Post-Accession Convergence and Divergence. Ljubljana, Vilnius: Faculty of Administration, Mykolas Romeris University.10.24193/tras.2017.0008
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kovač, Polonca, and Tina Jukić. 2017. “Declarations and Reality of Europeanized Public Administration in Eastern Europe: Journals Content Analysis in Slovenia and Croatia.” Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences 2017(50E), 127 – 45. https://doi.org/10.24193/tras.2017.0008.10.24193/tras.2017.0008
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kovač, Polonca, and Tina Sever. 2015. “Collaborative Public Administration and Administrative Procedures: The Administrative Consultation Wiki.” Teorija in Praksa 52(5), 971–92.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kuhlmann, Sabine, and Hellmut Wollmann. 2019. Introduction to Comparative Public Administration: Administrative Systems and Reform in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kukučková, Soňa, and Eduard Bakoš. 2019. “Does Participatory Budgeting Bolster Voter Turnout in Elections ? The Case of the Czech Republic.” NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy 12(2), 109 – 29. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2019-0016.10.2478/nispa-2019-0016
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lam, Wai Fung, and Xiaoqi Wang. 2014. “The Cognitive Foundation of a Co-Production Approach to Performance Measurement: How Do Officials and Citizens Understand Government Performance in China ?” Public Administration and Development 34(1), 32 – 47. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1669.10.1002/pad.1669
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lindsay, Colin, Sarah Pearson, Elaine Batty, Anne Marie Cullen, and Will Eadson. 2018a. “Co-Production and Social Innovation in Street-Level Employability Services: Lessons from Services with Lone Parents in Scotland.” International Social Security Review 71(4), 33 – 50. https://doi.org/10.1111/issr.12188.10.1111/issr.12188
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lindsay, Colin, Sarah Pearson, Elaine Batty, Anne Marie Cullen, and Will Eadson. 2018b. “Co-Production as a Route to Employability: Lessons from Services with Lone Parents.” Public Administration 96(2), 318 – 32. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12408.10.1111/padm.12408
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lindsay, Colin, Sarah Pearson, Elaine Batty, Anne Marie Cullen, and Will Eadson. 2018c. “Street-Level Practice and the Co-Production o Third Sector-Led Employability Services.” Policy and Politics 46(4), 571 – 87. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557317X15120417452025.10.1332/030557317X15120417452025
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lum, Janet M, John Shields, and Bryan Evans. 2016. “Co-Constructing Performance Indicators in Home and Community Care: Assessing the Role of NGOs in Three Canadian Provinces.” Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research 7(1), 46 – 67. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjnser.2016v7n1a215.10.22230/cjnser.2016v7n1a215
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Marchi, Giada De, Giulia Lucertini, and Alexis Tsoukiàs. 2016. “From Evidence-Based Policy Making to Policy Analytics.” Annals of Operations Research 236(1), 15 – 38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-014-1578-6.10.1007/s10479-014-1578-6
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Martin, Douglas. 2018. “Lean in a Cold Fiscal Climate: The Public Sector in an Age of Reduced Resources.” Public Money and Management 38(1), 29 – 36. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2018.1389501.10.1080/09540962.2018.1389501
]Search in Google Scholar
[
McCabe, Paul. 2016. “Challenges in Policy Redesign.” In Designing Public Policy for Co-Production: Theory, Practice and Change, edited by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson, 63 – 70. Bristol: Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.1332/policy-press/9781447316695.003.0006.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Meričkova, Beata Mikušova, Juraj Nemec, and Maria Svidronova. 2015. “Co-Creation in Local Public Services Delivery Innovation: Slovak Experience.” Lex Localis 13(3), 521 – 35. https://doi.org/10.4335/13.3.521-535(2015).10.4335/13.3.521-535(2015)
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Meyer-Sahling, Jan-Hinrik. 2009. “Varieties of Legacies: A Critical Review of Legacy Explanations of Public Administration Reform in East Central Europe.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(3), 509 – 28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852309337670.10.1177/0020852309337670
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Murray Svidronova, Maria, Beata Mikušová Meričková, and Juraj Nemec. 2019. “Inclusion by Co-Production of Social Housing: The Slovak Experience.” Central European Public Administration Review 17(2), 205 – 18. https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2019.2.10.10.17573/cepar.2019.2.10
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nemec, Juraj, Mária Murray Svidroňová, and Éva Kovács. 2019. “Welfare Co-Production: Hungarian and Slovak Reality.” NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy 12 (2), 195 – 215. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2019-0019.10.2478/nispa-2019-0019
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nesti, Giorgia. 2018. “Co-Production for Innovation: The Urban Living Lab Experience.” Policy and Society 37(3), 310 – 25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035. 2017.1374692.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
OECD. 2011. Together for Better Public Services: Partnering with Citizens and Civil Society. OECD Public Governance Reviews. Paris: OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264118843-en.10.1787/9789264118843-en
]Search in Google Scholar
[
OECD. 2017. “The Principles of Public Administration.” Paris: OECD. Available at http://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/Principles-of-Public-Administration_Overview2017_ENG.pdf (last accessed 17 March 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oertzen, Anna-Sophie. 2018. “Co-Creating Offerings A Maturity Model.” In The 10th SERVSIG Conference on the Topic “Opportunities for Services in a Challenging World.” Paris: IÉSEG School of Management.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Olazabal, Marta, Marc B. Neumann, Sébastien Foudi, and Aline Chiabai. 2018. “Transparency and Reproducibility in Participatory Systems Modelling: The Case of Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping.” Systems Research and Behavioral Science 35(6), 791 – 810. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2519.10.1002/sres.2519
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oldfield, Chrissie. 2016. “In Favour of Co-Production.” In Developing Public Managers for a Changing World, edited by K. Majgaard, JCR. Nielsen, B. Quinn, and JW. Raine, 83–102. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2045-794420160000005005.10.1108/S2045-794420160000005005
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ongaro, E. 2019. “Why and How Context Matters in Public Administration Innovation and Strategic Change.” In The 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference. Prague: NISPAcee. Available at https://www.nispa.org/files/conferences/2019/e-proceedings/system_files/papers/why-and-how-context-matters-ongaro.pdf (last accessed 17 March 2020)
]Search in Google Scholar
[
OPSI. 2020. “About OPSI – Observatory of Public Sector Innovation Observatory of Public Sector Innovation.” Available at https://oecd-opsi.org/about-observatory-of-public-sector-innovation/ (last accessed 17 March 2020).
]Search in 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 – 53. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1111927.10.1080/14719037.2015.1111927
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ostling, Alina. 2017. “Social Innovation in Practice: Opportunities for Citizens and Governments.” Beyond Bureaucracy, Public Administration and Information Technology 25, 117 – 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54142-6_2.10.1007/978-3-319-54142-6_2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Özesmi, Uygar, and Stacy L. Özesmi. 2004. “Ecological Models Based on People’s Knowledge: A Multi-Step Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping Approach.” Ecological Modelling 176(1 – 2), 43 – 64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2003.10.027.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2003.10.027
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Painter, Martin, and Guy B. Peters. 2010. Tradition and Public Administration. Edited by Martin Painter and B. Guy Peters. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230289635.10.1057/9780230289635
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Papageorgiou, Elpiniki, and Areti Kontogianni. 2012. “Using Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping in Environmental Decision Making and Management: A Methodological Primer and an Application.” In International Perspectives on Global Environmental Change, edited by Stephen Young and Steven Silvern, 427 – 50. InTech. https://doi.org/10.5772/29375.10.5772/29375
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Parrado, Salvador, Gregg G. Van Ryzin, Tony Bovaird, and Elke Löffler. 2013. “Correlates of Co-Production: Evidence From a Five-Nation Survey of Citizens.” International Public Management Journal 16(1), 85 – 112. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2013.796260.10.1080/10967494.2013.796260
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pearson, Charlotte, Nicholas Watson, and Kainde Manji. 2018. “Changing the Culture of Social Care in Scotland: Has a Shift to Personalization Brought about Transformative Change ?” Social Policy & Administration 52(3), 662 – 76. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12352.10.1111/spol.12352
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pestoff, Victor. 2014. “Collective Action and the Sustainability of Co-Production.” Public Management Review 16(3), 383 – 401. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841460.10.1080/14719037.2013.841460
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pill, Madeleine, and Nick Bailey. 2012. “Community Empowerment or a Strategy of Containment ? Evaluating Neighbourhood Governance in the City of Westminster.” Local Government Studies 38(6), 731 – 51. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2012.679934.10.1080/03003930.2012.679934
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Plé, Loïc, and Rubén Chumpitaz Cáceres. 2010. “Not Always Co-Creation: Introducing Interactional Co-Destruction of Value in Service-Dominant Logic.” Journal of Services Marketing 24(6), 430 – 37. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041011072546.10.1108/08876041011072546
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pluchinotta, Irene, Dario Esposito, and Domenico Camarda. 2019. “Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping to Support Multi-Agent Decisions in Development of Urban Policymaking.” Sustainable Cities and Society 46, 1 – 36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.12.030.10.1016/j.scs.2018.12.030
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pluchinotta, Irene, and Ewan Ferlie. 2019. “Deliverable 2.1 Template for Case Study Selection, Fieldwork and Analysis.” London: King’s College.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pluchinotta, Irene, Akin O. Kazakçi, Raffaele Giordano, and Alexis Tsoukiàs. 2019. “Design Theory for Generating Alternatives in Public Decision Making Processes.” Group Decision and Negotiation 28(2), 341 – 75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-018-09610-5.10.1007/s10726-018-09610-5
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pluchinotta, Irene, Hannah Williams, and Ewan Ferlie. 2019. “Welsh Water’s Water Resilient Community’ Project.” In Deliverable 2.1 Template for Case Study Selection, Fieldwork and Analysis, edited by Irene Pluchinotta and Ewan Ferlie, 16 – 31. London: King’s College London.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pollitt, Christopher, and Geert Bouchaert. 2011. Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis – New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Putro, Utomo Sarjono. 2016. “Value Co-Creation Platform as Part of an Integrative Group Model-Building Process in Policy Development in Indonesia.” In Systems Science for Complex Policy Making: A Study of Indonesia, edited by K. Mangkusubroto, U.S. Putro, S. Novani, and K. Kijima, 10:17 – 28. Translational Systems Science. Tokyo: Springer-Verlag Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55273-4_2.10.1007/978-4-431-55273-4_2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Reed, Mark S., Anil Graves, Norman Dandy, Helena Posthumus, Klaus Hubacek, Joe Morris, Christina Prell, Claire H. Quinn, and Lindsay C. Stringer. 2009. “Who’s in and Why ? A Typology of Stakeholder Analysis Methods for Natural Resource Management.” Journal of Environmental Management 90(5), 1933 – 49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.01.001.10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.01.001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
regionalni.weebly.com. 2018. “Urban Areas.” Urban Areas in Act on Regional Development. September 10, 2020. Available at http://regionalni-en.weebly.com/urban-areas.html (last accessed 10 September 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rexhepi, Artan, Sonja Filiposka, and Vladimir Trajkovik. 2017. “Youth E-Participation as a Pillar of Sustainable Societies.” Journal of Cleaner Production 174, 114 – 22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.327.10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.327
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Röcke, Anja. 2014. Framing Citizen Participation. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137326669.10.1057/9781137326669
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ropret, Marko, Aleksander Aristovnik, and Polonca Kovac. 2018. “A Content Analysis of the Rule of Law within Public Governance Models: Old vs. New Eu Member States.” NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy 11(2), 129 – 52. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2018-0016.10.2478/nispa-2018-0016
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rose, Maura. 2016. “Using Mediation to Resolve Conflict.” In Designing Public Policy for Co-Production: Theory, Practice and Change, edited by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson, 167 – 75. Bristol: Policy Press.10.2307/j.ctt1t896qg.22
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rutherfoord, Robert, and Lucy Spurling. 2016. “Designing Policy for Localism.” In Designing Public Policy for Co-Production: Theory, Practice and Change, edited by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson, 81 – 90. Bristol: Policy Press.10.2307/j.ctt1t896qg.14
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ryan, Bill. 2012. “Co-Production: Option or Obligation ?” Australian Journal of Public Administration 71(3), 314 – 24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2012.00780.x.10.1111/j.1467-8500.2012.00780.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Saaty, R. W. 1987. “The Analytic Hierarchy Process-What It Is and How It Is Used.” Mathematical Modelling 9(3 – 5), 161 – 76. https://doi.org/10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8.10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Saha, Pallab. 2012. “Connected Government as the New Normal.” In Enterprise Architecture for Connected E-Government, 1 – 55. Hersey. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-1824-4.ch001.10.4018/978-1-4666-1824-4.ch001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Santoro, Stefania, Irene Pluchinotta, Alessandro Pagano, Polona Pengal, Blaž Cokan, and Raffaele Giordano. 2019. “Assessing Stakeholders’ Risk Perception to Promote Nature Based Solutions as Flood Protection Strategies: The Case of the Glinščica River (Slovenia).” Science of the Total Environment 655, 188 – 201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.116.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.116
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Selloni, Daniela. 2017. “Codesign for the Public Interest.” In Codesign for Public-Interest Services, edited by Daniela Selloni, 177–89. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53243-1_11.10.1007/978-3-319-53243-1_11
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sevin, Efe. 2016. “Branding Cities in the Age of Social Media: A Comparative Assessment of Local Government Performance.” In Social Media and Local Governments: Theory and Practice, edited by MZ Sobaci, 301–20. Berlin: Springer-verlag Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17722-9_16.10.1007/978-3-319-17722-9_16
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sicilia, Mariafrancesca, Enrico Guarini, Alessandro Sancino, Martino Andreani, and Renato Ruffini. 2016. “Public Services Management and Co-Production in Multi-Level Governance Settings.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 82(1), 8 – 27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314566008.10.1177/0020852314566008
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Statskontoret. 2005. “Principles of Good Administration in the Member States of the European Union.” Stockholm: Statskontoret. March 17, 2020. https://www.statskontoret.se/globalassets/publikationer/2000-2005-english/200504.pdf (last accessed 17 March 2020).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Strokosch, Kirsty, and Stephen P Osborne. 2016. “Asylum Seekers and the Co-Production of Public Services: Understanding the Implications for Social Inclusion and Citizenship.” Journal of Social Policy 45(4), 673–90. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279416000258.10.1017/S0047279416000258
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Surva, Laidi, Piret Tõnurist, and Veiko Lember. 2016. “Co-Production in a Network Setting: Providing an Alternative to the National Probation Service.” International Journal of Public Administration 39(13), 1031 – 43. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2016.1193752.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thijssen, Peter, and Wouter Van Dooren. 2016. “Who You Are / Where You Live: Do Neighbourhood Characteristics Explain Co-Production ?” International Review of Administrative Sciences 82(1), 88 – 109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315570554.10.1177/0020852315570554
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tomaževič, N. 2019. “Social Responsibility and Consensus Orientation in Public Governance: A Content Analysis.” Central European Public Administration Review 17(2), 189 – 204.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Torfing, Jacob. 2019. “Collaborative Innovation in the Public Sector: The Argument.” Public Management Review 21(1), 1 – 11. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1430248.10.1080/14719037.2018.1430248
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Torfing, Jacob, and Eva Sørensen. 2019. “Interactive Political Leadership in Theory and Practice: How Elected Politicians May Benefit from Co-Creating Public Value Outcomes.” Administrative Sciences 9(3), 1 – 18.10.3390/admsci9030051
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Torfing, Jacob, Eva Sørensen, and Asbjørn Røiseland. 2019. “Transforming the Public Sector Into an Arena for Co-Creation: Barriers, Drivers, Benefits, and Ways Forward.” Administration & Society 51(5), 795 – 825. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399716680057.10.1177/0095399716680057
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Torfing, Jacob, and Peter Triantafillou. 2013. “What’s in a Name ? Grasping New Public Governance as a Political-Administrative System.” International Review of Public Administration 18(2), 9 – 25. https://doi.org/10.1080/12294659.2013.10805250.10.1080/12294659.2013.10805250
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Torvinen, Hannu, and Lotta Haukipuro. 2018. “New Roles for End-Users in Innovative Public Procurement: Case Study on User Engaging Property Procurement.” Public Management Review 20(10), 1444 – 64. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1400581.10.1080/14719037.2017.1400581
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Touati, Nassera, and Lara Maillet. 2018. “Co-Creation within Hybrid Networks: What Can Be Learnt from the Difficulties Encountered ? The Example of the Fight against Blood- and Sexually-Transmitted Infections.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 84(3), 469 – 85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852317741679.10.1177/0020852317741679
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tsoukiàs, Alexis. 2007. “On the Concept of Decision Aiding Process: An Operational Perspective.” Annals of Operations Research 154(1), 3 – 27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-007-0187-z.10.1007/s10479-007-0187-z
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tsoukiàs, Alexis. 2008. “From Decision Theory to Decision Aiding Methodology.” European Journal of Operational Research 187(1), 138 – 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.02.039.10.1016/j.ejor.2007.02.039
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tu, Xuan. 2016. “Conditions for the Co-Production of New Immigrant Services in Hong Kong.” International Journal of Public Administration 39(13), 1067 – 76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2016.1177838.10.1080/01900692.2016.1177838
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tuurnas, Sanna. 2016. “Looking beyond the Simplistic Ideals of Participatory Projects: Fostering Effective Co-Production ?” International Journal of Public Administration 39(13), 1077 – 87. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2016.1178284.10.1080/01900692.2016.1178284
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Uppström, Elin, and Carl Mikael Lönn. 2017. “Explaining Value Co-Creation and Co-Destruction in e-Government Using Boundary Object Theory.” Government Information Quarterly 34(3), 406 – 20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.08.001.10.1016/j.giq.2017.08.001
]Search in 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 – 68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315570553.10.1177/0020852315570553
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vintar, Mirko., Allan Rosenbaum, Gyorgy Jenei, and Wolfgang Drechsler. 2013. The Past, Present and the Future of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratilsava: NISPAcee Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Voorberg, William. H., Victor. J. J. M. Bekkers, and Lars. G. Tummers. 2015. “A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the Social Innovation Journey.” Public Management Review 17(9), 1333–57. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505.10.1080/14719037.2014.930505
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Voorberg, William, Victor Bekkers, Sophie Flemig, Krista Timeus, Piret Tõnurist, and Lars Tummers. 2017. “Does Co-Creation Impact Public Service Delivery ? The Importance of State and Governance Traditions.” Public Money and Management 37(5), 365 – 72. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2017.1328798.10.1080/09540962.2017.1328798
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Voorberg, William, Victor Bekkers, Krista Timeus, Piret Tonurist, and Lars Tummers. 2017. “Changing Public Service Delivery: Learning in Co-Creation.” Policy and Society 36(2), 178 – 94. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1323711.10.1080/14494035.2017.1323711
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vrbek, Sanja. 2020. “Service for Citizens’ Initiatives in the City of Ljubljana.” In Deliverable 2.3: Patterns of Strategic Renewals, edited by B. Regal and E. Ferlie, 312–29. King’s College London.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vrbek, Sanja, and Irena Pluchinotta. 2021. “Is Culture a Special ‘Hub’ Policy Area for Co-Creation?” Journal of Comparative Politics 14 (2), Article in print.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wiid, Ria, and Paulo Mora-Avila. 2018. “Arts Marketing Framework: The Arts Organisation as a Hub for Participation.” Journal of Public Affairs 18(2), 1 – 8. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1657.10.1002/pa.1657
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Williams, Brian N, Seong-Cheol Kang, and Japera Johnson. 2016. “(Co)-Contamination as the Dark Side of Co-Production: Public Value Failures in Co-Production Processes.” Public Management Review 18(5), 692 – 717. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1111660.10.1080/14719037.2015.1111660
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Winterfeldt, Detlof Von, and Gregory W. Fischer. 1975. “Multi-Attribute Utility Theory: Models and Assessment Procedures.” Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making, no. Xi, 47 – 85. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_3.10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_3
]Search in Google Scholar
