In the private sector, user innovation is used to develop innovations that better fit the needs of customers. In the public sector, interest for citizen innovation is also on the rise and new information and communication technologies seem to offer a great potential for accessing the power of citizens. At the same time these technologies offer another potential value: they can turn citizens into data sources. This data can offer governments crucial insights and may form the basis for datadriven innovation. Innovating with citizens in both different ways seems to offer great potential for broadly supported issues such as urban sustainability. This article develops a framework for studying these new developments and presents explorative research in three cities (Curitiba, Glasgow en Utrecht). The research shows that cities make different choices in their use of new technologies to innovate with or for citizens.

This essay review discusses three publications on co-creation: ‘We, the government’ by Davied van Berlo (2012), ‘Co-creation of innovation’ by Corry Ehlen (2015), and ‘New Business Models’ by Jan Jonker et al. (2014). The theme of this essay is the specific character of co-creation compared to other buzzwords (e.g. participation, co-production, social responsibility) that can be heard in the search for a new balance between the state and civil society. We suggest that the distinctive character of co-creation lies in the active engagement of parties who work together to co-create. Co-creation means raising the bar of collaboration and dialogue. Openness, trust, equality and reciprocity are emphasised as essential elements in the process. It is literally about collectively creating multiple values in which there should be plenty of room for creativity and sharing ideas. Following on the publications of Ehlen and Jonker a dual vision on co-creation arises. In general terms, the potential of co-creation depends on the know-how, commitment and values of the actors involved (microscopic perspective) and on the social capital in the wider environment that they can draw upon to bolster the co-creation process (macroscopic perspective).

In 2015, Dutch local governments have become responsible for youth care, social welfare, employment and income assistance programs, as a result of decentralization. Many municipalities have set up service delivery networks and community teams, in which they collaborate with healthcare providers and civic organizations to build integrated care services. It is assumed that these networks will improve outcomes in terms of enhanced people’s self-reliance and healthcare cost control; by operating close to citizens they are in a position to know the client, activate a client’s social network and mobilize specialized professional expertise if necessary. However, a comparative case study of 26 emerging local networks in the Arnhem area indicates that healthcare providers use the networks mainly for presentation purposes in an effort to secure business continuity, that the role of local governments is fuzzy, and that citizen participation only thrives when actively encouraged in a climate of trust.