The Barriers of Co-Creative Service Development Models in the Context of Disadvantaged Rural Areas in Hungary

• Authors: Judit Csoba , Flórian Sipos

Abstracts

EN

The paper is based on the observation of the process of reviving the forgotten culture of household economy, horticulture and livestock farming in disadvantaged rural areas and, through this, to develop a new service model for rural communities to strengthen the role of grassroots initiatives and enhancing the mechanisms of the co-operative model of local economy and democracy. Our research has shown that bottom-up models have several barriers to local governments in rural areas. The change in the political and governmental model of the last ten years has resulted in the restraint of local government autonomy and the vacancy of the role of local governments as public service providers. In this system, we can observe the strengthening of administrative dependence, the devaluation of the local elected political leadership (mayors) and the emergence of new rules of local power. In small settlements with less than 2,000 inhabitants, central state and political dependence intensified. Attempts to strengthen local communities have proved to be a major challenge in a highly centralised model of government. The present study gathers the factors that hinder the success of co-creative approaches in the local context and shows how the public service innovations organised by local governments are determined by the political and economic culture prevailing at the national level.

Keywords

EN

co-creation; system justification; paternalism; social capital; local power

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: Polish Political Science Yearbook
• Year: 2023
• Issue: Specjalny
• Pages: 85-105

Dates

published

2023

Contributors

author

Judit Csoba

• Debrecen University

• https://orcid.org/000000015285521X

author

Flórian Sipos

• Debrecen University

• https://orcid.org/0000000294399440

References

• Adamik, A., & Novicki, M. (2019). Pathologies and Paradoxes of Co-Creation: A Contribution to the Discussion about Corporate Social Responsibility in Building a Competitive Advantage in the Age of Industry 4.0. Sustainability, 11(18), 4954. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11184954
• Baptista, N., Alves, H., & Matos, N. (2020). Public Sector Organizations and Co-creation with Citizens: A Literature Review on Benefits, Drivers, and Barriers. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 32, 217–241.
• Bherer, L. (2010) Successful and Unsuccessful Participatory Arrangements: Why Is There a Participatory Movement at the Local Level? Journal of Urban Affairs, 32(3), 287–303. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9906.2010.00505.x
• Binmore, K., Hargreaves-Heap, H. S., Hollis, M., Lyons, B. R., Sugden, R., & Weale, A. (1992). The Theory of Choice: A Critical Guide. Blackwell.
• Bíró-Nagy, A. (2017). Illiberal democracy in Hungary. The social background and practical steps of building an illiberal state. In P. Morillas (Ed.), Illiberal democracies in the EU. The Visegrad Group and the risk of disintegration (pp. 31–44). CIDOB.
• Bottoni, S. (2023). A hatalom megszállotja. Orbán Viktos Magyarországa. Magyar Hang Könyvek.
• Bouchard, N. (2016). The dark side of public participation: Participative processes that legitimise elected officials’ values. Canadian Public Administration. Publique du Canada, 59(4), 516–537.
• Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond Engagement and Participation: User and Community Coproduction of Public Services. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 846–860.
• Bovaird, T., Van Ryzin, G. G., Loeffler, E., & Parrado, S. (2015). Activating citizens to participate in collective co-production of public services. Journal of Social Policy, 44(1), 1. DOI: 10.1017/S0047279414000567
• Bovaird, T., van Ryzin, G., Loeffler, E., & Parrado, S. (2015). Activating citizens to participate in collective co-production of public services. Journal of Social Policy, 44(1), 1–23.
• Bozóki, A., & Hegedűs, D. (2018). An externally constrained hybrid regime: Hungary in the European Union. Democratisation, 25(7), 1173–1189. DOI: 10.1080/13510347.2018.1455664
• Brandsen, T., Evers, A., Cattacin, S., & Zimmer, A. (2016). The Good, the Bad and the Ugly in Social Innovation. In T. Brandsen, S. Cattacin, A. Evers, & A. Zimmer (Eds.), Social Innovations in the Urban Context (pp. 303–310). Springer Cham Heidelberg.
• Brandsen, T., Steen, T., & Verschuere, B. (2018). How to encourage co-creation and co-production: some recommendations. In T. Brandsen, T. Steen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), Co-production and co-creation: engaging citizens in public services (pp. 299–302). Routledge.
• Cichocka, A., & Jost, J. T. (2014). Stripped of illusions? Exploring system justification processes in capitalist and post-Communist societies. International Journal of Psychology, 49(1), 6−29.
• Cohrs, J. C., & Stelzl, M. (2010). How ideological attitudes predict host society members’ attitudes toward immigrants: Exploring cross-national differences. Journal of Social Issues, 66(4), 673–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2010.01670.x
• Csoba, J., & Sipos, F. (2022). Politically-driven public administration or co-creation? On the possibility of modernising public services in rural Hungary. Public Money & Management, 42(5), 314–322. DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2022.2026082
• Csoba, J., & Sipos, F. (Eds.) (2021). Co-creation a közszolgáltatások modernizációjában Lokális szolgáltatásfejlesztési kísérletek a közös alkotás módszerével. Debreceni Egyetemi Kiadó.
• Diamond, L. (2002). Thinking about Hybrid Regimes. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 21–35.
• Dodge, J. (2012). Addressing Democratic and Citizenship Deficits: Lessons from Civil Society? Public Administration Review, 73(1), 203–206.
• Fledderus, J., Brandsen, T., & Honingh, M. (2014). Restoring trust through the co- production of public services: a theoretical elaboration. Public Management Review, 16(3), 424–443. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2013.848920
• Goudarzi, S., Pliskin, R., Jost, J. T. et al. (2020). Economic system justification predicts muted emotional responses to inequality. Nat Commun, 11, 383. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-14193-z
• Harding, J. F., & Sibley, C. G. (2013). The palliative function of system justification: Concurrent benefits versus longer-term costs to wellbeing. Social Indicators Research, 113(1), 401–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-012-0101-1
• Holden, B. (1993). Understanding liberal democracy. Harvester Wheatsheaf.
• Hollis, M. (1987). The Cunning of Reason. Cambridge University Press.
• Ishkanian, A. (2014). Neoliberalism and Violence: The Big Society and the Changing. Politics of Domestic Violence in England. Critical Social Policy, 34(3), 333–353.
• Jakobsen, M. (2013). Can government initiatives increase citizen co-production? Results of a randomised field experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(1), 27. DOI: 10.1093/jopart/mus036
• Jalonen, H., Kokkola, J., Laihonen, H., Kirjavainen, H., Kaartemo, V., & Vähämaa, M. (2021). Reaching hard-to-reach people through digital means – Citizens as initiators of co-creation in public services. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 34(7), 799–816. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-01-2021-0008
• Jost, J. T. (2003). Önalávetés a társadalomban: a rendszerigazolás pszichológiája. Osiris Kiadó.
• Jost, J. T. (2020). A theory of system justification. Harvard University Press.
• Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1999). A sztereotipizálás szerepe a rendszer igazolásában, a hamis tudat. In G. Hunyady, D. L. Hamilton, & Nguyen Luu Lan Anh (Eds.), A csoportok percepciója (pp. 489−518). Akadémiai Kiadó.
• Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2002). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. In W. Stroebe, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology, vol. 13 (pp. 111–153). Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.
• Jost, J. T., & van der Toorn, J. (2012). System justification theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 313–343). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n42
• Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25(6), 881–919.
• Krastev, I. (2011). Paradoxes of the New Authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 22(2), 5–16.
• Kroger, J. (2007). Identity Development. Adolescence Through Adulthood. Sage Publications.
• Lee, S. M., Olson, D. L., & Trimi, S. (2012). Co-innovation: convergenomics, collaboration, and co-creation for organisational values. Management Decision, 50(5), 817–831.
• McCoy, S. K., & Major, B. (2007). Priming meritocracy and the psychological justification of inequality. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 43, 341–351. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.009
• McCoy, S. K., Wellman, J. D., Cosley, B., Saslow, L., & Epel, E. (2013). Is the belief in meritocracy palliative for members of low status groups? Evidence for a benefit for self-esteem and physical health via perceived control. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 43, 307–318. DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.1959
• Mudde, C. (2017). Is Hungary run by the radical right? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkeycage/wp/2015/08/10/is-hungary-run-by-the-radical-right/?postshare=5821439227596961
• Nederhand, J., & Van Meerkerk, I. (2018). Case Study – Co-Production of Care Services: Co-opting Citizens in the Reform Agenda. In T. Brandsen, T. Steen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), Co-production and co-creation: engaging citizens in public services (pp. 37–40). Routledge.
• Needham, C. 2007. Realising the Potential of Co-Production: Negotiating Improvements in Public Services. Social Policy & Society, 7(2), 221–231. DOI: 10.1017/S1474746407004174
• Osborne, S. P. (2018). From Public Service-dominant Logic to Public Service Logic: Are public service organisations capable of co-production and value co-creation? Public Management Review, 20(2), 225–231. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2017.1350461
• Ostrom, A. L., Parasuraman, A., Bowen, D. E., Patrício, L., & Voss, C. A. (2015). Service Research Priorities in a Rapidly Changing Context. Journal of Service Research, 18(2), 127–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670515576315
• Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the Great Divide: Co-Production, Synergy and Development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1087. DOI: 10.1016/0305-750X(96)00023-X
• Parks, R. B., Baker, P. C., Kiser, L., Oakerson, R., Ostrom, E., Ostrom, V., Percy, S. L., Vandivort, M. B., Whitaker, G. P., & Wilson, R. (1981). Consumers as coproducers of public services: some economic and institutional. Policy Studies Journal, 9, 1001–1011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1981.tb01208.x
• Pegan, A. (2023). Strategic planning for local government co-creation: Evidence from Croatia and Slovenia. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies. DOI: 10.1080/14683857.2023.2190004
• Perks, H., Gruber, T., & Edvardsson, B. (2012). Co-creation in Radical Service Innovation: A Systematic Analysis of Microlevel Processes. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(6)935-951. DOI: 10.1111/J.1540-5885.2012.00971.X
• Pula, K., McPerson, S., & Parks, C. (2012). Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 385–389.
• Rantamäki, N. J. (2017). Co-production in the context of Finnish social services and health care: a challenge and a possibility for a new kind of democracy. Voluntas, 28(1), 248. DOI: 10.1007/s11266-016-9785-1
• Salamon, L. M. (2002). The New Governance and the Tools of Public Action: An Introduction. In L. M. Salamon (Ed.), The Tools of Government. A Guide to the New Governance (pp. 1–47). Oxford University Press.
• Sicilia, M., Sancino, A., Nabatchi, T., & Guarini, E. (2019). Facilitating co-production in public services: management implications from a systematic literature review. Public Money & Management, 39(4), 233–240. DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2019.1592904
• Sidanius, J., Devereux, E., & Pratto, F. (1992). A comparison of symbolic racism theory and social dominance theory as explanations for racial policy attitudes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 132(3), 377–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1992.9924713
• Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., Martin, M., & Stallworth, L. M. (1991). Consensual racism and career track: Some implications of social dominance theory. Political Psychology, 12(4), 691–721. https://doi.org/10.2307/3791552
• Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., van Laar, C., & Levin, S. (2004). Social dominance theory: Its agenda and method. Political Psychology, 25, 845–880.
• Steen, T., Brandsen, T., & Verschuere, B. (2018). The Dark Side of Co-Creation and Co-Production. Seven Evils. In T. Brandsen, T. Steen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), Co-production and co-creation: engaging citizens in public services (pp. 284–294). Routledge.
• Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Røiseland, A. (2019). Transforming the public sector into an arena for co-creation: Barriers, drivers, benefits, and ways forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 795–825.
• Van de Ven, A., Polley, D., Garud, S., Venkataraman, S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2008). The Innovation Journey. 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press.
• Verschuere, B., Brandsen, T., & Pestoff, V. (2012). Co-production: The State of the Art in Research and the Future Agenda. Voluntas, 23, 1083–1101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9307-8
• Virta, S., & Branders, M. (2016). Legitimate security? Understanding the contingencies of security and deliberation. British Journal of Criminology, 56(6), 1146–1164. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azw024
• Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2014.930505
• Wacquant, L. (2012). Three steps to a historical anthropology of actually existing neoliberalism. Social Anthropology, 20(1), 66–79.
• Williams, B. N., Kang, S. C., & Johnson, J. (2016). (Co)-contamination as the dark side of co-production: public value failures in co-production processes. Public Management Review, 18(5), 692. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2015.1111660
• Zakaria, F. (1997). The Rise of Illiberal Democracy. Foreign Affairs, 76(6), 22–43. https://doi.org/10.2307/20048274

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/ppsy202355

Biblioteka Nauki

21375662