Co-Production and Collaborative Networking In The Public Entrepreneurship Ecosystem
An Analysis of Hetero Space in Central Java
DOI:
10.47353/ecbis.v4i5.494Published:
2026-07-10Downloads
Abstract
Public service innovation in the development of micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in Indonesia has been historically dominated by the managerial logic of New Public Management, which positions efficiency and quantitative targets as the measure of success. This approach fails to build long-term relational capacity among entrepreneurs, government, and the broader supporting ecosystem. This article analyses HETERO SPACE (House of Entrepreneurs, Technology-driven Ecosystem, Resource Optimization, Supportive Programs, Accessible Network, Collaborative Environment), a public service innovation developed by the Cooperatives and SME Office of Central Java Province, which received outstanding recognition in the 2025 Public Service Innovation Competition. The analysis applies a New Public Governance framework with emphasis on two sub-theoretical dimensions, namely co-production and collaborative networking. The research approach is a qualitative case study drawing on secondary data from the official Public Service Innovation System, implementation reports of the Central Java Cooperatives and SME Office, and relevant academic literature. The central argument is that HETERO SPACE is not merely an expanded MSME assistance programmed but a transition in the role of government from a sole service provider to an ecosystem orchestrator that mobilizes resources across actors. Findings indicate that HETERO SPACE success rests on three interrelated conditions, namely a platform design that facilitates inter-actor encounters, trust built through repeated interaction, and institutional commitment from the provincial government to share authority with non-state partners. The article contributes to Indonesian public administration literature by shifting the analytical arena of co-production from the social and health sectors to economic governance, and by demonstrating that New Public Governance principles can be operationalized concretely at the subnational level.
Keywords:
Co-Production Collaborative Networking Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Hetero Space New Public Governance MSMEsReferences
Alford, J. (2009). Engaging public sector clients: From service-delivery to co-production. Palgrave Macmillan.
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543 sampai 571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2015). Designing and implementing cross sector collaborations: Needed and challenging. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 647 sampai 663. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12432
Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2015). The new public service revisited. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 664 sampai 672. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12347
Isenberg, D. (2011). The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economic policy: Principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Babson Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Project, Babson College.
Klijn, E. H., Koppenjan, J., Spekkink, W., & Warsen, R. (2025). Governance networks in the public sector. Routledge.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2025). Pengumuman outstanding public service innovations Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik tahun 2025. Sistem Inovasi Pelayanan Publik (SINOVIK). https://sinovik.menpan.go.id
Osborne, S. P. (Ed.). (2010). The new public governance: Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. Routledge.
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public management reform: A comparative analysis into the age of austerity (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229 sampai 252. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum015
Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: A sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759 sampai 1769. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484
Steen, T., Brandsen, T., & Verschuere, B. (2018). The dark side of co-creation and co-production: Seven evils. Dalam T. Brandsen, T. Steen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), Co-production and co-creation: Engaging citizens in public services (hlm. 284 sampai 293). Routledge.
Torfing, J., Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., & Sørensen, E. (2012). Interactive governance: Advancing the paradigm. Oxford University Press.
Undang Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 20 Tahun 2008 tentang Usaha Mikro, Kecil, dan Menengah.
Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333 sampai 1357. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Deni Wicaksono, Bistoro Wardiyanto

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.




