000			01906nab a2200253 4500
003			OSt
005			20220801204250.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			220719b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aGaluszka, Jakub _949033
245			_aWhat makes urban governance co-productive? Contradictions in the current debate on co-production /
260			_bSage, _c2019.
300			_aVol 18, Issue 1, 2019 : (143-160 p.).
520			_aFollowing a number of prominent concepts in urban planning, like participatory planning or self-help housing, co-production has started to gain momentum in the global South context. While it is has been long discussed as a means of service provision, the term is more and more often used in the broader sense of urban governance and policy planning. This understanding goes beyond the aspect of scaling-up successful co-productive infrastructure focused projects; rather, it indicates a different format of engagement for prompting urban stakeholders into planning citywide urban solutions. This article discusses the distinction between the different levels of co-production and their inter-linkages, and it investigates the relevance of positioning co-production as a factor framing urban governance. This includes a discussion on three main contradictions that can be identified within the current discussion on co-production. Finally, it identifies a set of arguments for elaborating the role of co-production in a policy and urban governance setting.
650			_acivil society, _949034
650			_a co-production, _949035
650			_a institutionalisation, _949036
650			_athe urban poor, _949037
650			_aurban governance, _949038
650			_a urban planning _948993
773	0		_08831 _916470 _dLondon Sage Publications Ltd. 2002 _tPlanning theory _x1473-0952
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/1473095218780535
942			_cART _2ddc
999			_c12393 _d12393