Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Working with Others and ‘Coproduction’

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Mad Knowledges and User-Led Research

Part of the book series: The Politics of Mental Health and Illness ((PMHI))

Abstract

This chapter deals with the practical reality that right now survivors in research and other settings have little option but to ‘cooperate’ with others in their work. I will end the book with something more radical but need to be realistic. So this chapter will explore what this means, organisationally and in terms of knowledge generation in the light of all the arguments so far and anticipating a little what is to come. The ‘buzzword’ of the moment is ‘coproduction’ so I will examine this in quite a lot of detail. As before, I try to include a theoretical base and as before there is a focus on understanding and misunderstanding of different knowledges as this, I argue, is a matter of power and is required to understand the dynamics of ‘collaboration’, ‘partnership’, cooperation’ and all those other terms that reference the relation between survivors and the so-called mainstream.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adeponle, A., Whitley, R., & Kirmayer, L. J. (2012). Cultural contexts and constructions of recovery. In Recovery of people with mental illness: Philosophical and related perspectives (pp. 109–132). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, D., Cree, L., Dawson, P., El Naggar, S., Gibbons, B., Gibson, J., … Jones, B. (2020). Exploring patient and public involvement (PPI) and co-production approaches in mental health research: Learning from the PARTNERS2 research programme. Research Involvement and Engagement, 6(1), NA–NA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banfield, M., Randall, R., O’Brien, M., Hope, S., Gulliver, A., Forbes, O., … Griffiths, K. (2018). Lived experience researchers partnering with consumers and carers to improve mental health research: Reflections from an Australian initiative. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 27(4), 1219–1229.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beresford, P. (2020). PPI or user involvement: Taking stock from a service user perspective in the twenty first century. Research Involvement and Engagement, 6(1), 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonnington, O., & Rose, D. (2014). Exploring stigmatisation among people diagnosed with either bipolar disorder or borderline personality disorder: A critical realist analysis. Social Science & Medicine, 123, 7–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, L. (2013). A grounded theory study of lived experience mental health practitioners within the wider workforce. Central Queensland University, Division og Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cahn, E. S. (2000). No more throw-away people: The co-production imperative. Edgar Cahn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., & Rabeharisoa, V. (2003). Research “in the wild” and the shaping of new social identities. Technology in Society, 25(2), 193–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotterell, P., Lim, J., Habte-Mariam, Z., Newbigging, K., Fleming, J., Staddon, P., … Paine, M. (2012). Social care, service users and user involvement. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cusack, P., Cusack, F. P., McAndrew, S., McKeown, M., & Duxbury, J. (2018). An integrative review exploring the physical and psychological harm inherent in using restraint in mental health inpatient settings. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 27(3), 1162–1176.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daya, I., Hamilton, B., & Roper, C. (2020). Authentic engagement: A conceptual model for welcoming diverse and challenging consumer and survivor views in mental health research, policy, and practice. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 29(2), 299–311.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, L., & Wykes, T. (2013). Impact of patient involvement in mental health research: Longitudinal study. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 203(5), 381–386.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Farmer, P. (1996). On suffering and structural violence: A view from below. Daedalus, 125(1), 261–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaines, J., Jones, D. L., Honneth, A., & Joas, H. (1991). Communicative action: Essays on Jürgen Habermas’s The theory of communicative action. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gault, I., Pelle, J., & Chambers, M. (2019). Co-production for service improvement: Developing a training programme for mental health professionals to enhance medication adherence in Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Service Users. Health Expectations, 22, 813–823.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, A., McGarty, C., & Banfield, M. (2016). Barriers to genuine consumer and carer participation from the perspectives of Australian systemic mental health advocates. Journal of Mental Health, 25(3), 231–237.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (2009). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, S., & O’Brien, A. J. (2018). Co‐production: Power, problems and possibilities. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 27(4), 1201–1203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Happell, B., Gordon, S., Bocking, J., Ellis, P., Roper, C., Liggins, J., … Scholz, B. (2018). How did I not see that? Perspectives of nonconsumer mental health researchers on the benefits of collaborative research with consumers. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 27(4), 1230–1239.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Happell, B., Gordon, S., Bocking, J., Ellis, P., Roper, C., Liggins, J., … Platania-Phung, C. (2019). “Chipping away”: Non-consumer researcher perspectives on barriers to collaborating with consumers in mental health research. Journal of Mental Health, 28(1), 49–55.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Happell, B., & Roper, C. (2006). The myth of representation: The case for consumer leadership. Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health, 5(3), 177–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Happell, B., & Scholz, B. (2018). Doing what we can, but knowing our place: Being an ally to promote consumer leadership in mental health. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 27(1), 440–447.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Happell, B., Scholz, B., Gordon, S., Bocking, J., Ellis, P., Roper, C., … Platania-Phung, C. (2018). “I don’t think we’ve quite got there yet”: The experience of allyship for mental health consumer researchers. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 25(8), 453–462.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Happell, B., Waks, S., Bocking, J., Horgan, A., Manning, F., Greaney, S., … Allon, J. (2019). ‘There’s more to a person than what’s in front of you’: Nursing students’ experiences of consumer taught mental health education. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 28(4), 950–959.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, S., Barnes, M., & Mort, M. (1997). Praise and damnation: Mental health user groups and the construction of organisational legitimacy. Public Policy and Administration, 12(2), 4–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henkel, H., & Stirrat, R. (2001). Participation as spiritual duty; empowerment as secular subjection. In Participation: The new tyranny? (pp. 168–184). Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollis, C., Sampson, S., Simons, L., Davies, E. B., Churchill, R., Betton, V., … Gronlund, T. A. (2018). Identifying research priorities for digital technology in mental health care: Results of the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership. The Lancet Psychiatry, 5(10), 845–854.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hook, D. (2007). Discourse, knowledge, materiality, history: Foucault and discourse analysis. In Foucault, psychology and the analytics of power (pp. 100–137). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hookway, C. (2010). Some varieties of epistemic injustice: Reflections on Fricker. Episteme, 7(2), 151–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, H., Slade, M., Bates, P., Munday, E., & Toney, R. (2018). Best practice framework for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in collaborative data analysis of qualitative mental health research: Methodology development and refinement. BMC Psychiatry, 18(1), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keating, F., Robertson, D., McCulloch, A., & Francis, E. (2002). Breaking the circles of fear: A review of the relationship between mental health services and African and Caribbean communities. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, C., & Gillard, S. (2019). Bringing together coproduction and community participatory research approaches: Using first person reflective narrative to explore coproduction and community involvement in mental health research. Health Expectations, 22(4), 701–708.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leblanc, S., & Kinsella, E. A. (2016). Toward epistemic justice: A critically reflexive examination of ‘sanism’and implications for knowledge generation. Studies in Social Justice, 10(1), 59–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lidz, C. W., Hoge, S. K., Gardner, W., Bennett, N. S., Monahan, J., Mulvey, E. P., & Roth, L. H. (1995). Perceived coercion in mental hospital admission: Pressures and process. Archives of General Psychiatry, 52(12), 1034.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lukes, S. (2004). Power: A radical view. Macmillan International Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C. A., & Wyborn, C. (2020). Co-production in global sustainability: Histories and theories. Environmental Science & Policy, 113, 88–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Needham, C., & Carr, S. (2009). Co-production: An emerging evidence base for adult social care transformation. Social Care Institute for Excellence.

    Google Scholar 

  • New Economics Foundation (2019). Coproduction. MIND.

    Google Scholar 

  • NSUN, S. o. L. a. (2019). The future of user-led organisations NSUN. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, K., Kothari, A., & Mays, N. (2019). The dark side of coproduction: Do the costs outweigh the benefits for health research? Health Research Policy and Systems, 17(1), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, S. R., Rees, R. W., Clarke-Jones, L., Milne, R., Oakley, A. R., Gabbay, J., … Gyte, G. (2008). A multidimensional conceptual framework for analysing public involvement in health services research. Health Expectations, 11(2), 204–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perestelo-Perez, L., Gonzalez-Lorenzo, M., Perez-Ramos, J., Rivero-Santana, A., & Serrano-Aguilar, P. (2011). Patient involvement and shared decision-making in mental health care. Current Clinical Pharmacology, 6(2), 83–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pols, J. (2013). The patient 2. Many: About diseases that remain and the different forms of knowledge to live with them. Science & Technology Studies, 26(2), 80–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, N., Bromage, B., & Rowe, M. (2020). Collective citizenship: From citizenship and mental health to citizenship and solidarity. Social Policy & Administration, 54(3), 361–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renedo, A., Marston, C. A., Spyridonidis, D., & Barlow, J. (2015). Patient and public involvement in healthcare quality improvement: How organizations can help patients and professionals to collaborate. Public Management Review, 17(1), 17–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roper, C., Grey, F., & Cadogan, E. (2018). Co-production: Putting principles into practice in mental health contexts. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, D. (2003). Collaborative research between users and professionals: Peaks and pitfalls. Psychiatric Bulletin, 27(11), 404–406. https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.27.11.404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, D. (2017). Service user/survivor-led research in mental health: Epistemological possibilities. Disability & Society, 32(6), 773–789. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2017.1320270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, D., & Kalathil, J. J. (2019). Power, privilege and knowledge: The untenable promise of co-production in mental ‘health’. Frontiers in Sociology, 4, 57.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, N. (2018). Our psychiatric future. John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • SCIE. (2013). Co-production in social care: What it is and how to do it. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L. T. (2021). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zed Books Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, R. J., Caird, J., Oliver, K., & Oliver, S. (2011). Patients’ and clinicians’ research priorities. Health Expectations, 14(4), 439–448.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Telford, R., & Faulkner, A. (2004). Learning about service user involvement in mental health research. Journal of Mental Health, 13(6), 549–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd, Z. (2016). An indigenous feminist’s take on the ontological turn: ‘Ontology’is just another word for colonialism. Journal of Historical Sociology, 29(1), 4–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallerstein, N. B., & Duran, B. (2006). Using community-based participatory research to address health disparities. Health Promotion Practice, 7(3), 312–323.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. A. (2018). Decolonising knowledge: Reflections on colonial anthropology and a humanities seminar at the University of the Free State. J Strategic Review for Southern Africa, 40(1), 82–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, O., Robert, G., Martin, G. P., Hanna, E., & O’Hara, J. (2020). Is co-production just really good PPI? Making sense of patient and public involvement and co-production networks. In Decentring health and care networks (pp. 213–237). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, O., Sarre, S., Papoulias, S. C., Knowles, S., Robert, G., Beresford, P., … Palmer, V. J. (2020). Lost in the shadows: Reflections on the dark side of co-production. Health Research Policy and Systems, 18, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1996). A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide. In Risk, environment and modernity: Towards a new ecology (pp. 40–44). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zittoun, T. (2004). Symbolic competencies for developmental transitions: The case of the choice of first names. Culture & Psychology, 10(2), 131–161.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Diana Susan Rose

Authors
  1. Diana Susan Rose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rose, D.S. (2022). Working with Others and ‘Coproduction’. In: Mad Knowledges and User-Led Research . The Politics of Mental Health and Illness. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07551-3_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation