While by no means a new form of citizen participation, research on coproduction has flourished in recent years. Much of the extant research however, has focused on organizational determinants of coproduction and factors in the operating environment that drive this practice, rather than outcomes of coproduction (Voorberg et al, 2015). While there a been studies focusing on the outcomes of coproduction (Zambrano-Gutierrez, 2017; Garlatti et al, 2020) there remains a need for more research examining the consequences of coproduction, and more specifically how different types of coproduction shape organizational performance. This paper helps to fill this gap through a mixed-methods study of veteran and military service organizations in the United States. Implicit in the notion of coproduction is that is positively contributes to public or nonprofit organizations in some way, either increasing efficiency, effectiveness, responsiveness, or some combination thereof. In this paper, we examine three specific forms of co-production from Nabatchi’s et al’s framework: co-commissioning, co-planning, and co-delivery. We ask in this study, whether these forms of coproduction shape organizational financial performance, and if so, how and why? We answer these questions through a two-phase study. Phase one relied on survey data from 39 military and veteran-serving nonprofit organizations, paired with independently obtained data on the organization’s finances. Given the small sample size, we use qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to identify the causal pathways between these various forms of coproduction and financial performance, while accounting for some other factors that may shape financial performance such as organizational size. Phase two of this study relied on qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with leaders of 13 of these organizations. These interviews reveal several themes that allow us to better unpack the pathways revealed in our QCA, and help to better understand how and why various forms of coproduction shape organizational financial performance. While our study is set in the context of military and veteran-serving nonprofit organizations, we believe there are some findings that have theoretical generalization about coproduction and performance and we highlight these in the conclusions of our paper.

Garlatti, Andrea, Fedele, Paolo, Iacuzzi, Silvia, Garlatti Costa, Grazia (2020). Coproduction and cost efficiency: a structured literature review. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting, & Financial Management. March 2020: pg 114-135.

Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & Sicilia, M. (2017). Varieties of Participation in Public Services: The Who, When, and What of Coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766-776. https://doi-org.proxy.cc.uic.edu/10.1111/puar.12765

Voorberg, W.H, V. J. J. M. Bekkers & L. G. Tummers (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

Zambrano-Gutiérrez, J. C., Rutherford, A., and Nicholson-Crotty, S. (2017). Types of coproduction and differential effects on organizational performance: Evidence from the New York City school system. Public Admin. 2017; 95: 776– 790. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12351

The aim of the paper is to present the impact of the different digital tools on citizen participation in participatory budget voting practices in Slovenia. The reason why we chose the topic is that in Slovenia the Local Self-Government Act has given explicit legal ground for the use of facultative participatory budgeting (PB) on the municipal level since 2018. The act implements a constitutional understanding of the financial autonomy of municipalities, leaving the discretion to municipalities on deciding the number of funds intended for PB, deciding on who and how can propose projects and vote on them, etc. as far as the public finance rules are obeyed. This means municipalities and their inhabitants have absolute discretion regarding the nature of proposed and later (if chosen) implemented projects in a certain municipality if the projects fall under municipal authority. The latest research shows that only 30 - out of 212 - municipal governments being at some time, during the period from 2015 until 2021, engaged in PB projects.

The theoretical part will use a descriptive method of writing, where the focus will be mainly on presenting the existing legislation and different literature on the subject to describe and explain the concepts and already-known facts, while the quantitative method that will be used will be based on a survey system (the survey will be sent to all municipalities practicing PB), with which we will obtain primary data regarding three research questions:

RQ1: Which voting practices were used in your municipality in the voting phase of PB?

If the municipality offered the possibility of voting via different digital tools (different applications, email, etc.) the municipality (or the person in charge of the PB process in a certain municipality) would be asked to answer two (2) more questions.

RQ2: What was the voter turnout in your last PB?

RQ3: How many of the voters who voted used digital tools to cast their votes and decide on proposed PB projects?

Our paper will focus on voter turnout in deciding which proposed project will be implemented via PB. Voting practices vary between municipalities. In some municipalities, people voted in person (similar to general local elections), in the general assembly of municipal residents, via different online tools (applications), or by ordinary mail or email. The analysed results will show if the use of digital tools in PB voting practice has any effect on voter turnout and the use of voting tools.

The aim of this study is examining and explaining an emerging type of networked participation as mapping information by volunteers in disasters. This study assumes that this type of participation is a budding form of political participation in digital era, and volunteers’ roles as political actors within the global public sphere are diversifying. This study aims to understand how this novel type of networked participation has developed, its unique properties and dimensions, and why this type of participation is increasingly observed in disaster settings. The first question is answered by focusing on theories of digital revolution, network society and risk society. To answer this first question, the authors use the approaches of Jan van Dijk, Manuel Castells and Ulrich Beck. This analysis uses the following concepts: citizen electronic participation, personalized participation, networked participation, new political challenges, digital voluntarism and civil society/humanitarian organizations. The second question is analyzed by the help of the observations on the activity of mapping information by volunteers in digital era during the disasters, especially in terms of the latest dual earthquakes in Türkiye in February 6, 2023. This section analyzes the activity of information mapping in online platforms and its relation to collaboration and the crowdsourced information production. In this context, the authors observe the data from six projects titled “M7.8 Earthquake Türkiye” started after the Kahramanmaraş earthquakes at the platform of Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT). HOT uses OpenStreetMap, an open and free mapping platform, providing geospatial data by volunteers from all around the world. The last question is answered by studying the role of digital technologies and the nature of collaboration in disasters. In the final analysis, this study aims to explain the importance of bottom-up empowerment of social actors and the emergence of collaboration as digital voluntarism versus the top-down types of citizen participation.