The Value of Researcher Reflexivity in the Coproduction of Public Policy: A Practical Perspective

Author:

Cinamon Nair Yamini,Fabian MarkORCID

Abstract

AbstractCoproduction of public policy involves bringing together technical experts, practitioners, and people with lived experience of that policy to collaboratively and deliberatively codesign it. Coproduction can leverage different ways of knowing and evaluative perspectives on a policy area to enhance the legitimacy and efficaciousness of policymaking. This article argues that researcher reflexivity is crucial for getting the most out of coproduction ethically and epistemically. By reflecting on our positionality, habitus, and biases, we can gain new insights into how we affect the research design, production and analysis of data, and communication of findings. This reflexivity helps to disrupt power dynamics that underly research and policymaking, helping to realise the radical potential of coproduction to democratise practice, empower citizens, and make research more relational. We demonstrate the value of reflexivity through an analysis of our work coproducing a theory of thriving in financial hardship in partnership with the UK national anti-poverty charity Turn2us. We contextualise our advocacy for reflexivity within the practical realities of advancing coproduction in the UK today.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference50 articles.

1. Alexandrova, A. & Fabian, M. (2022). Democratising measurement: Or Why thick concepts call for coproduction. European Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 12(7): 1–23.

2. Barber, R., Boote, J., Parry, G., Cooper, C. & Yeeles, P. (2012). Evaluating the impact of public involvement on research. In M. Barnes, & P. Cotterell (eds.), Critical perspectives on user involvement. Policy Press.

3. Bennett, F. & Roberts, M. (2004). From input to influence: Participatory approaches to research and inquiry into poverty. Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

4. Booth, J. (2019). Empowering disadvantaged communities in the UK: Missing the potential of co-production. Social Change, 49(2): 276–292.

5. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Routledge.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3