Voluntary Sector Studies and Research on Coproduction: Making the Connection, Drawing the Conclusions

• In Event: New Approaches to Voluntary Sector Studies

Abstract

This paper brings together two bodies of literature—literature on the voluntary sector and literature on coproduction—to identify new areas of research and theory development. Coproduction was introduced in the United States during the 1970s and early 1980s to describe the active involvement of service recipients in the service delivery process (e.g., Brown 1976; Brudney and England 1983; Gersuny and Rosengren 1971; Ostrom et al 1973; Parks et al., 1981; Whitaker 1976). Although research on the topic seemed to languish in the late 1980s to the early 2000s, the concept of coproduction has found new currency among researchers in public administration, particularly in the United Kingdom and Europe (Alford 2009; Pestoff, Brandsen and Vesrchuere 2013). Research on the voluntary sector, as a distinct area of study, also took root in the late 1970s and over the last thirty years become institutionalized as a field of study (Hall 1992).
Over the years scholars have considered the intersections between voluntary sector studies and research on coproduction (see Warren 1987 and Verschuere, Brandsen and Pestoff 2012). This literature has considered the role of volunteers in the delivery of public services and more recently the role of voluntary sector organizations in delivery public services. This paper builds on this work. The paper focuses on three ideas central to both literatures: motivations for coproducing, capacity for coproducing and conditions of coproduction. We comment on these briefly here.
The voluntary sector literature focuses on motivations for giving where there is no perceived direct benefit whereas coproduction considers motivations for participating in ways that enhance the service one receives. We discuss motivation and participation, and how this may vary depending on the extent of direct benefits received. In examining capacity for coproduction, we discuss how the literature on the voluntary sector suggests that one of the main purposes of these organizations is to develop citizens. By contrast, the literature on coproduction mostly starts with the idea of citizens and considers how to encourage them to take greater responsibility in contributing to individual and public outcomes. We explore the lessons that people may learn about their capacity and role as citizens in helping to deliver services in voluntary organizations (Soss 2002). In considering the conditions that foster greater coproduction or participation in service delivery, the literature on the voluntary sector considers how organizational form/structure can constrain and/or facilitate participation among volunteers, members, and clients (Borkman 1999; Rothschild 1979). Recent research in coproduction and the voluntary sector lends support to these theories (Vamstead 2009). We discuss more recent research that demonstrates that organizations can successfully harness both collectivist and bureaucratic practices to foster citizen engagement (Chen 2009).

Authors

• Lehn Benjamin, Indiana University-Indianapolis

• Jeffrey Brudney, University of North Carolina Wilmington