Coproduction of public policy involves bringing together technical experts, practitioners, and people with lived experience of that policy to collaboratively and deliberatively codesign it. Coproduction can leverage different ways of knowing and evaluative perspectives on a policy area to enhance the legitimacy and efficaciousness of policymaking. This article argues that researcher reflexivity is crucial for getting the most out of coproduction ethically and epistemically. By reflecting on our positionality, habitus, and biases, we can gain new insights into how we affect the research design, production and analysis of data, and communication of findings. This reflexivity helps to disrupt power dynamics that underly research and policymaking, helping to realise the radical potential of coproduction to democratise practice, empower citizens, and make research more relational. We demonstrate the value of reflexivity through an analysis of our work coproducing a theory of thriving in financial hardship in partnership with the UK national anti-poverty charity Turn2us. We contextualise our advocacy for reflexivity within the practical realities of advancing coproduction in the UK today.

公共政策的共同制定涉及将技术专家、从业者和具有该政策生活经验的人们聚集在一起，共同协作、深思熟虑地共同设计该政策。联合生产可以利用对政策领域的不同认识方式和评估视角来增强政策制定的合法性和有效性。本文认为，研究人员的反身性对于在伦理和认识上充分利用合作生产至关重要。通过反思我们的立场、习惯和偏见，我们可以对我们如何影响研究设计、数据生产和分析以及研究结果的交流获得新的见解。这种反身性有助于破坏研究和政策制定背后的权力动态，有助于实现合作生产的根本潜力，使实践民主化，赋予公民权力，并使研究更具相关性。我们通过与英国国家反贫困慈善机构 Turn2us 合作，共同提出了在经济困难中蓬勃发展的理论，通过分析我们的工作来证明反身性的价值。我们将我们对反身性的倡导融入到当今英国推进联合制作的实际现实中。