<?xml version="1.0"?>
<metadata xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><dc:title>Collaborative innovation in public administration</dc:title><dc:creator>Jukić,	Tina	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Pevcin,	Primož	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Benčina,	Jože	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Dečman,	Mitja	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Vrbek,	Sanja	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>collaborative innovation</dc:subject><dc:subject>co-creation</dc:subject><dc:subject>co-production</dc:subject><dc:subject>content analysis</dc:subject><dc:subject>Web of Science</dc:subject><dc:description>This paper presents the results of the content analysis of 139 Web of Science papers focused on collaborative innovation with external stakeholders of public administration, specifically on co-production and co-creation. The analysis included papers published between 2009 and 2018 and was based on a coding scheme consisting of 12 parameters grouped into four groups: paper descriptors, financial support of the research, methodological framework, and co-creation characteristics. The results reveal a considerable increase in researchers' interest in co-production and co-creation in the context of public administration in the last few years. This is particularly the case in Northern and Western Europe, where Anglo-Saxon and Nordic administrative traditions dominate. Furthermore, the results show that co-creation is most often placed in the contexts of social policy and welfare, as well as health care. Over the selected period, research seldom addressed companies as a target group in the co-creation of public services—in comparison to citizens and internal users. More than three quarters of the papers observed were empirical and less than 20% were quantitative. In general, a lack of conceptual clarity was often identified through the interchangeable usage of the terms co-creation and co-creation and the low level of international comparison—the majority of the papers focused on case descriptions at a national level, even though collaborative innovation is strongly related to administrative traditions dominating in specific regions.</dc:description><dc:date>2019</dc:date><dc:date>2021-11-02 13:05:05</dc:date><dc:type>Članek v reviji</dc:type><dc:identifier>132759</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>UDK: 35</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>ISSN pri članku: 2076-3387</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>DOI: 10.3390/admsci9040090</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>COBISS_ID: 5373614</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></metadata>
