In recent years, there has been a growing scholarly interest in exploring citizens' involvement in public service delivery. Co-production is one of the overarching concepts that signifies the collaborative engagement between citizens engaged in co-production and the local government. Co-production is seen as a dynamic process that can evolve and change over time. However, the literature on co-production has not yet fully addressed the developmental aspects of this process. While the exact mechanisms of development are still not fully understood, it is recognized that understanding and studying this developmental trajectory is becoming increasingly important.

The interaction between these two stakeholders has emerged as a central tenet within the New Public Governance paradigm. To date, research on co-production has predominantly focused on two key themes: the potential benefits and risks associated with it, and the underlying process that facilitates it.

Noteworthy concepts such as trust, motivation and supportive culture are often associated with co-production, either as dependent or independent variables. However, these conditions primarily pertain to the initiation phase of co-production.

Consequently, our understanding of the development of these conditions in the broader context of the collaboration between co-producing citizens and the local government remains limited. The upcoming years will witness various societal transitions that necessitate collaboration and co-production, as governmental actors cannot address certain challenges. For instance, the energy transition and the search for new sustainable resources are complex and multifaceted issues that require citizens' and stakeholders' involvement. This emphasizes the importance of the development of the co-production process.

Concepts such as trust, motivation, and supportive culture have been identified in the co-production literature as necessary conditions for initiating co-production. However, it is important to acknowledge that these conditions require time to solidify and may undergo changes over time. The development of co-production and the institutionalization process can significantly impact these conditions. Therefore, this paper aims to theoretically explore the potential long-term development of co-production.

To begin, the paper reviews the definition of co-production, considering its varied usage and multiple definitions across different contexts. Next, the state of the art of the necessary conditions is described and discussed employing the AMO model (Ability, Motivation, and Organizational Settings) to create a comprehensive framework. By incorporating the AMO model, the paper aims to offer theoretical expectations regarding the evolution of the necessary conditions that impact co-production. The research objective of this paper is to propose theoretical expectations regarding the development of the necessary conditions affecting co-production, which can be empirically tested in future research.

Deliberative forms of citizen participation are criticized for their lack of impact on decision-making and their small number of participants. Adding an element of voting by the maxi-public to deliberative procedures is one way of solving this disconnect from the larger public. Despite convincing theoretical arguments for why adding maxi-public voting should lead to a high rate of participation and therefore pressure decision-makers to impact policy, in practice, this is not always the case. There are several recent examples where the outcomes are accepted and promised to be implemented by decision-makers and, yet, rates of participation are low – some even in the single digit percentages of the local population.

This proposed research examines this puzzle to explain why local-level cases of democratic innovation combining mini-public deliberation with maxi-public voting impact decision-making on policy despite low rates of participation in the process. As part of the proposed research design, I develop a hypothesized causal mechanism which focuses attention on local-level decision-makers and why they accept the outcomes of participation. Using the methodology of process tracing, I plan to test this hypothesized mechanism in a typical case comprised of both deliberative and voting elements that leads to impact on decision-making: participatory budgeting in the City District of Amsterdam East. The benefit of using process tracing is its use of detailed empirical data to explain a process-level mechanism: in this case how citizen participation impacts decision-making on policy. The findings can provide insights into how this process actually works in practice, which can be translated into design recommendations for achieving effective impact in similar processes.

Citizen participation is far wider than participation in political decisions. As this paper will show it can take many forms. Less interactive approaches involve a one-way flow of information from policymakers and public service managers to the public. More interactive approaches include consultation – a two-way flow of information, views and perspectives between policymakers/managers and users/citizens – and participation in policy making. The most interactive approach is co-production, in which providers and the public harness each others’ resources to improve services and outcomes.

While the Arnstein Ladder of Participation suggests that more intense forms of citizen participation are better than others or tokenistic forms of citizen participation our proposition is that which form of citizen participation is more suitable depends on the impact to be achieved. . We are undertaking a systematic literature review in order to analyse the existing evidence and also use a qualitative case study approach in order to analyse the impacts of different forms of citizen participation on society, the economy, public policies and public services.