Introduction
The focus of this policy brief is to explore the case for user-centered policy design and implementation by arguing reasons why policymakers should consider involving citizens in the process of designing and implementing public policies (Cottam, 2021). Recently, there has been a growing concern among various policy stakeholders on the recognition among policymakers of the limitations of traditional ‘top-down’ approaches to policy design and implementation, which has led to the need for a transition towards a more inclusive method that involves citizens and users (Asara, 2019). Therefore, the policy brief is set to explore arguments on user-centered policy design and implementation, hence advocating for the adoption of the co-production principle in public policy design and implementation.
- The paper will advocate for co-production to solve the challenges of the hierarchical decision-making process by taking Finland as a case study.
Problem Statement
The traditional means of policy making is usually characterized by a hierarchical decision-making process, which in most cases does not take into consideration the needs of the citizens (Cottam, 2020). The design and implementation of the top-down approach have failed to connect realities and people’s realities, hence leading to inefficiencies in the delivery of public services. However, it has been established that the top co-production approach is essential to address these challenges and ensure that citizens are engaged in the decision-making processes.
Policy Options
The real-life case study in support of co-production that can help solve the hierarchical decision-making process is the case of Finland’s democratic principles and openness, which is made possible through the digital space. The government of Finland has established a Government Project Register where all essential information regarding matters that affect the public is made available for any person to access (kuorum.org, 2024). The government has also gone ahead to put in place a website where citizens can hold public online debates based on the proposals presented by the government and enable citizens to comment on the governmental suggested initiatives, hence being in a position to influence the decision-making process (demokratia. fi, 2024).
The advantage associated with the co-production initiative carried out in Finland is that it enhances policy relevance for the Finish to have a deeper understanding of the policies, for they were part of its design, hence resulting in a policy which is more responsive to the needs of the citizens. The Finish directly engages with key governmental officials through the “otakanta.fi” website, where they make their contributions and raise concerns about proposals (Ministry of the Interior, 2024). The quality of public services is also enhanced for the better when co-production is put in place, as evident in Finland, where citizens contribute to providing innovative solutions to public service challenges (Cottam, 2018). Co-production has also been attributed to enhancing trust among the citizens and the authorities for the Finish to develop a sense of ownership and accountability in governance. As a result of co-production, more employment opportunities have been added to the Finish job market, making it one of the nations with the highest public employment at 25.4% as shares of total employment compared to 18.6% Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries average (OECD, 2023).
On the other hand, poorly implemented co-production, as practiced in Finland, is argued to not have implemented an inclusive approach that captures the full participation of the public. Finland engages the public in policy design and implementation through the digital space, but not all citizens have access to digital platforms or technology literacy, hence creating a sense of bias in policy design. The country should have instead formulated a means of traditional engagement and a digital approach to cover the business. Co-production also proves to be an ineffective approach, especially in cases characterized by time and resource constraints, for it may be costly to engage the ideas from diverse stakeholders and implement their various inputs in the design of a policy (Sorrentino et al., 2018). For instance, it has been most of the participatory budgeting, and most vital initiatives have involved citizens from the major city of Helsinki alone, but in smaller projects, other cities such as Turku, Espoo, Vantaa, and Tampere are involved (OECD iLibrary, 2024). Finland is resource-constrained; hence, the co-production approach presents challenges of balancing the practical realities of limited resources with the benefits of co-production.
Moreover, the following are concrete user-centered policy examples in Finland;
- The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has put in place user feedback in its development communication strategy to ensure that the communication channel in which the audience raises their concerns and contributions aligns with their preferences.
- Finland has also engaged in collaboration with various external stakeholders, such as civil society organizations, in co-production development.
- The digital engagement platform has also been established to ensure an effective platform where citizens can offer real-time feedback on policies and initiatives.
The application of the co-production policy in Finland has created an understanding of the diverse needs and preferences of the Finish and helped in coming up with transforming policies. The engagement of users and citizens in policy design and implementation has established a sense of ownership, hence resulting in a more sustainable outcome.
Conclusion
The case brief, which was focused on user-centered policy design and implementation based on the principles of co-production, has proved that policymakers can gather the creativity and knowledge of citizens to develop more effective, responsive, and inclusive policies. By exploring Finland’s case, co-production has proved to be capable of offering a means for transformative policy-making that places people at the heart of decision-making processes even as the nation is focused on navigating through complex societal challenges. However, co-production still presents a number of challenges that need to be considered before designing and implementing policies based on a user-centered approach.
References
Asara, V. (2019). The redefinition and co-production of public services by urban movements. The can batlló social innovation in Barcelona. Partecipazione e conflitto, 12(2), 539-565.
Cottam, H. (2018). Radical Help: How we can remake the relationships between us and revolutionize the welfare state. Hachette UK.
Cottam, H. (2020). Welfare 5.0: Why we need a social revolution and how to make it happen. UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose.
Cottam, H. (2021). REAL Centre: A radical new vision for social care.
demokratia.fi(2024). READ ABOUT THE DIFFERENT DEMOCRACY SERVICES AVAILABLE. (2024). demokratia.fi. https://www.demokratia.fi/en/home/
kuorum.org(2024). Countries that are global benchmarks in citizen participation. https://www.kuorum.org/en/post/global-benchmarks-in-citizen-engagement
Ministry of the Interior. (2024). Request for information – Sisäministeriö. https://intermin.fi/en/contact/request-for-information
OECD iLibrary. (2024). Civic participation in Finland. Civic Space Scan of Finland | OECD iLibrary. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/c323b805-en/index.html?itemId=%2Fcontent%2Fcomponent%2Fc323b805-en#section-d1e19043
OECD. (2023). Finland | country notes | OECD government at a glance. https://www.oecd.org/publication/government-at-a-glance/2023/country-notes/finland-d1080a88
Sorrentino, M., Sicilia, M., & Howlett, M. (2018). Understanding co-production as a new public governance tool. Policy and Society, 37(3), 277–293.
write