Coproduction and the third sector in France: Governmental traditions and the French conceptualization of participation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Research on coproduction has tended to assume a coherence of conceptualizations of coproduction across borders, and little analysis of the framing and discourse of coproduction in different contexts has been undertaken. In the French language literature on citizen participation and the social and solidarity economy, the term coproduction is little used. This paper investigates the narratives of French academics, public, and third sector actors in order to identify what, if anything, is different about the French context that explains this gap. Drawing on semistructured interviews, I identify four key narratives that distinguish the French conceptualizations of coproduction and the third sector from the dominant English language coproduction literature: (a) a mainstreaming of coproduction as part of organizational purpose in the social and solidarity economy, (b) an emphasis on formalized involvement of citizens in organizational governance, (c) the motivation of citizen empowerment and democracy over cost and efficiency, and (d) the use of the term coconstruction rather than coproduction. I argue that these narratives are shaped by the governmental traditions of France, which emphasize formal rules, hierarchy, representative democracy, and a suspicion of particularistic interests. I conclude by questioning the universality of some of the axioms of coproduction theory in the English language literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it