3 - Transdisciplinary Co-Production

Summary

Evolution of the Concept of Co-Production

Co-Production for Economic Development in International Relations by Maurice Byé and Henri Bourguinat

The concept of co-production is not new; since the beginning of the twentieth century, the term is used to refer to the industrial production of chemicals, armaments or films. In the economic aspect, it probably began to be used with the work of Maurice Byé, in 1965, which points out co-production as an essential element of international relations, since international co-production means producing in common and, therefore,

bring together projects, choices, means of action at the level of industry and markets […] in addition to market equilibrium or imbalance compensation, a true ‘federation of decision-making centers’. Thus, more directly than any other formula, ‘co-production’ can be an instrument of solidarity. (Byé 1965, n.p)

It was also in France that the term continued to be used in the economic sense of international relations for developing countries with the work of Henri Bourguinat (1968, 1969). The author argued that the concept of co-production is the bedrock of regional markets, and only when co-productions have multiplied, when irreversible links between partners have been built, can real integration be considered to exist.

Co-Production in Public Service Compiled by Jeffrey Brudney and Robert England

In the late 1970s until the mid–1990s, the term appeared in the United States associated with the Public Service, for example, in the works of Percy (1978), Whitaker (1980), Sharp (1980), Kiser and Percy (1980) and Brudney and England (1983), among others. Clearly, there are two perspectives in these two decades: in the first, ‘the concept of co-production is based on the recognition that public services are the joint product of the activities of citizens and government officials’ (Whitaker 1980, p. 242).

Brudney and England (1983) pointed to another perspective, that of economic relevance, particularly by Kiser and Percy (1980), who reopened the discussion about the distinction between ‘regular producers’ and ‘consumer producers’ introduced by Parks et al. (1981). While the former group is responsible for producing goods and services for the purpose of exchange (usually money), the latter group is responsible for producing services to consume the resulting production.