ABSTRACT
Despite growing interest in the motivations behind co-production, uncertainty persists regarding the effectiveness of financial incentives, particularly in non-Western contexts. This study replicates Voorberg et al. experiments within Chinese urban settings to test their generalizability across cultural contexts and co-production types. Through two experiments that mirror the original study’s design, our results reveal that modest financial rewards consistently enhance willingness to engage in co-commissioning, with higher rewards yielding no additional gains. Conversely, co-delivery shows minimal response to monetary incentives, with a marginal effect emerging only at higher reward levels. These findings challenge the universality of both the “economic incentives hypothesis” and the “crowding-out hypothesis,” suggesting that incentives’ efficacy varies by co-production stage. By extending the original study to a collectivist, state-led governance context, this research enriches co-production theory with stage-specific and cross-cultural insights, while offering practical guidance for policymakers in non-Western urban environments to tailor incentive strategies for citizen engagement.
摘要
尽管学术界对民众参与合供动机的关注日益增长，但关于金钱激励的有效性，尤其是该结论在跨文化背景中的适用性，仍存在一定争议。于是，本研究在中国情境中复制了Voorberg等人(2018)的研究，以检验其结论在不同文化背景与合供类型中的适用性。本研究严格对照原始研究设计有效开展了2项实验，结果表明:适度金钱奖励能明显提升民众参与“共同委托”的意愿，但更高额度的金钱奖励却未带来额外收益。相较之下，“共同交付”对金钱激励的反应极为有限，仅在高额奖励条件下才出现边际效应。这些研究发现挑战了“经济激励”假说与“挤出效应”假说的适用性，表明金钱激励的有效性会因合供阶段/类型的成本差异而变化。通过将原始研究扩展至集体主义取向、政府主导的治理背景，本研究从阶段类型与跨文化视角丰富了合供理论，并为非西方背景下政策制定者在设计民众参与合供的激励策略提供了实证参考.