[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/isp/journl/v13y2019i1p407-424.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving Digitalization Through Co-Creation: Case Of The Citadel Project

Author

Listed:
  • Zane Zeibote
  • Tatjana Muravska
  • Romans Putans
Abstract
This article examines problems related to digitalization and use of digital services provided by the government. The study is based on the research work and results of the CITADEL project, which has tested co-creation methods in Latvia considering requirements and interests of society and businesses in decision making processes of public administration. It appears that in many cases people aren’t willing to accept proposed services as they haven’t been involved in the processes of their creation. While enjoying benefits provided by information technologies, electronic services and artificial intellect people still need an exchange between human beings to make a good use of existing advanced solutions. This is especially important for electronic services widely used by a large part of the population and enterprises, which need to be easy, fast and friendly. The concept of co-creation or co-production has been initially developed in the 1970s emerging from theoretical and empirical analysis of urban service delivery. Nowadays the co-creation is becoming a priority of many governments in the world and scholars in public administration see the potential of ICTs in this exchange process. Governments around the world are promoting an increased use of ICTs to predict and understand the complexity of public services, as well as to improve the transparency and efficiency of government practices and facilitate democratic practices using e-government solutions. This paper aims at contributing to the concept of co-creation and the impact of digitalisation of public services. The article concludes that efficient decision-making for improving economic development, as well as social welfare at regional, national and local levels needs implementation of digitalised services applying new modern approaches, such as the co-creation as they inevitably become more important due to the increased digital competitiveness of countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Zane Zeibote & Tatjana Muravska & Romans Putans, 2019. "Improving Digitalization Through Co-Creation: Case Of The Citadel Project," Economy & Business Journal, International Scientific Publications, Bulgaria, vol. 13(1), pages 407-424.
    • Handle: RePEc:isp:journl:v:13:y:2019:i:1:p:407-424
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.scientific-publications.net/get/1000037/1570291906837153.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reinout Kleinhans, 2017. "False promises of co-production in neighbourhood regeneration: the case of Dutch community enterprises," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(10), pages 1500-1518, November.
    2. van Eijk & Steen, 2014. "Why People Co-Produce: Analysing citizens' perceptions on co-planning engagement in health care services," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 358-382, April.
    3. W. H. Voorberg & 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, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(9), pages 1333-1357, October.
    4. Stephen P Osborne & Zoe Radnor & Kirsty Strokosch, 2016. "Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A suitable case for treatment?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 639-653, May.
    5. Victor Bekkers, 2003. "Reinventing government in the information age. International practice in IT-enabled public sector reform," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 133-139, March.
    6. Marius PETRESCU & Delia POPESCU & Ionut BARBU & Roxana DINESCU, 2010. "Public Management: between the Traditional and New Model," REVISTA DE MANAGEMENT COMPARAT INTERNATIONAL/REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 11(3), pages 408-415, July.
    7. Hendrik Hielkema & Patrizia Hongisto, 2013. "Developing the Helsinki Smart City: The Role of Competitions for Open Data Applications," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 4(2), pages 190-204, June.
    8. Ines Mergel, 2018. "Open innovation in the public sector: drivers and barriers for the adoption of Challenge.gov," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 726-745, May.
    9. Szkuta, Katarzyna & Pizzicannella, Roberto & Osimo, David, 2014. "Collaborative approaches to public sector innovation: A scoping study," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 558-567.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jinpeng Wu & Jing Xiong, 2022. "How Governance Tools Facilitate Citizen Co-Production Behavior in Urban Community Micro-Regeneration: Evidence from Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Manuel Alméstar & Sara Romero-Muñoz & Nieves Mestre & Uriel Fogué & Eva Gil & Amanda Masha, 2023. "(Un)Likely Connections between (Un)Likely Actors in the Art/NBS Co-Creation Process: Application of KREBS Cycle of Creativity to the Cyborg Garden Project," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-25, May.
    3. Aurelio Tommasetti & Riccardo Mussari & Gennaro Maione & Daniela Sorrentino, 2020. "Sustainability Accounting and Reporting in the Public Sector: Towards Public Value Co-Creation?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-19, March.
    4. Floriana Fusco & Marta Marsilio & Chiara Guglielmetti, 2018. "La co-production in sanit?: un?analisi bibliometrica," MECOSAN, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(108), pages 35-54.
    5. Noella Edelmann & Ines Mergel, 2021. "Co-Production of Digital Public Services in Austrian Public Administrations," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, February.
    6. Ada Scupola & Lars Fuglsang & Faiz Gallouj & Anne Vorre Hansen, 2021. "Understandings of Social Innovation within the Danish Public Sector: A Literature Review," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, May.
    7. Aldona Fraczkiewicz-Wronka & Anna Kozak, 2021. "Facilitating Co-production in Health Promotion: Study of Senior Councils in Poland," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4B), pages 182-201.
    8. Anassaya Chawviang & Supaporn Kiattisin, 2022. "Sustainable Development: Smart Co-Operative Management Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-25, March.
    9. Anna Francesca Pattaro & Marco Ranuzzini & Luca Bonacini, 2019. "Inter-municipal cooperation as a solution for public services delivery? The case of Unioni di Comuni in Emilia-Romagna Region," Department of Economics 0144, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    10. Suparak Suriyankietkaew & Krittawit Krittayaruangroj & Nacharee Iamsawan, 2022. "Sustainable Leadership Practices and Competencies of SMEs for Sustainability and Resilience: A Community-Based Social Enterprise Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-36, May.
    11. Desmarchelier, Benoît & Djellal, Faridah & Gallouj, Faïz, 2021. "Which innovation regime for public service innovation networks for social innovation (PSINSIs)? Lessons from a European cases database," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    12. Andrea BASSI & Alessandro FABBR, 2022. "Co-production paradigm: Threat or Opportunity for Social Economy?," CIRIEC Studies Series, in: Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING & CIRIEC (ed.), New perspectives in the co-production of public policies, public services and common goods, volume 3, chapter 5, pages 99-123, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    13. Jim Broch Skarli, 2021. "Creating or Destructing Value in Use? Handling Cognitive Impairments in Co-Creation with Serious and Chronically Ill Users," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, February.
    14. Pwint Kay Khine & Jianing Mi & Raza Shahid, 2021. "A Comparative Analysis of Co-Production in Public Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.
    15. Rocco Palumbo & Stefania Vezzosi & Paola Picciolli & Alessandro Landini & Carmela Annarumma & Rosalba Manna, 2018. "Fostering organizational change through co-production. Insights from an Italian experience," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 15(3), pages 371-391, September.
    16. Tina Jukić & Primož Pevcin & Jože Benčina & Mitja Dečman & Sanja Vrbek, 2019. "Collaborative Innovation in Public Administration: Theoretical Background and Research Trends of Co-Production and Co-Creation," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, November.
    17. McMullin, Caitlin, 2018. "Co-production and the third sector: A comparative study of England and France," Thesis Commons 578d3, Center for Open Science.
    18. Aldona Frączkiewicz-Wronka & Martyna Wronka-Pośpiech, 2018. "How Practices of Managing Partnerships Contributes to the Value Creation—Public–Social Partnership Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-25, December.
    19. Gianluca Misuraca & Csaba Kucsera & Giulio Pasi & Dimitri Gagliardi & Fabienne Abadie, 2017. "Mapping and Analysis of ICT-enabled Social Innovation initiatives promoting social investment across the EU: IESI Knowledge Map 2016," JRC Research Reports JRC105556, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Manila Bonciani & Ilaria Corazza & Sabina Rosis, 2022. "The COVID-19 emergency as an opportunity to co-produce an innovative approach to health services provision: the women's antenatal classes move on the web," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2022(1), pages 59-85, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    digitalization; ict; co-creation; citadel;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A - General Economics and Teaching

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:isp:journl:v:13:y:2019:i:1:p:407-424. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Svetoslav Ivanov (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.scientific-publications.net/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.