The co-production spectrum: conceptual blurs in theory and practice

Abstract Although there is an important body of work that aims to define the conceptual boundaries between co-production, co-creation, and related terms, there is often a significant mismatch between scholarly definitions and how these practices and processes are described by practitioners. Drawing upon research from Australia, England, France, Quebec, and Scotland, we analyze the narratives and discourses of co-production/ co-creation. This article highlights how practitioner terminology often diverges from more mainstream and accepted scholarly definitions of dominant “co-” concepts, with different terminology used between the five contexts to differentially focus on collaboration between organizations or between citizens and professionals, and divergence between a focus on design/ planning of services or delivery/ implementation. Simultaneously, there is convergence around arguments for engaging in these collaborative processes and norms attached to them. This article argues that focusing on the underpinning norms for collaborative engagement instead of the overt terminological labels ascribed to these processes will more productively advance public management theory. The article thus makes an important contribution to our understanding of concepts along a non-linear co-production spectrum and offers other narrative and discursive lenses through which they might be studied.