Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective

This contribution explores how work on Triple Helix (TH) indicators has evolved. Over the past 15 years a body of literature has emerged that brings together a variety of approaches to capture, map or measure the dynamics of TH relationships. We apply bibliographic coupling and co-citation in combination with content analysis to develop a better understanding of this literature. We identify several clusters that can be aggregated to two broad streams of work—one ‘neo-evolutionary’, the other ‘neo-institutional’ in nature. We make this observation both for bibliographic coupling and co-citation analyses which we take as indication of an emerging differentiation of the field. Our content analysis underlines this observation about the ‘two faces’ of the TH. We conclude this paper with a discussion of future opportunities for research. We see great potential in developing the application side of TH indicators.

[1]  Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie,et al.  What Patent Data Reveal about Universities: The Case of Belgium , 2003 .

[2]  L. Leydesdorff.  The triple helix: an evolutionary model of innovations , 2000 .

[3]  H. Etzkowitz,et al.  The Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm , 2000 .

[4]  Gavin J. Wright.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1982 .

[5]  Ulrich Schmoch,et al.  Tracing the knowledge transfer from science to technology as reflected in patent indicators , 2005, Scientometrics.

[6]  Olle Persson,et al.  The measurement of international scientific collaboration , 1993, Scientometrics.

[7]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  The Endless Transition: A "Triple Helix" of University-Industry-Government Relations , 2014 .

[8]  William J. McGill.  Multivariate information transmission , 1954, Trans. IRE Prof. Group Inf. Theory.

[9]  R. Whitley.  The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences (Second Edition: with new introductory chapter entitled 'Science Transformed? The Changing Nature of Knowledge Production at the End of the Twentieth Century') , 1984 .

[10]  Takao Furukawa,et al.  Quantitative analysis of collaborative and mobility networks , 2011, Scientometrics.

[11]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The mutual information of university-industry-government relations: An indicator of the Triple Helix dynamics , 2003, Scientometrics.

[12]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The scientometrics of a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations (Introduction to the topical issue) , 2007, Scientometrics.

[13]  K. Pavitt.  Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change : Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory : Research Policy , 1984 .

[14]  David L. Deeds,et al.  An Analysis of the Critical Role of Public Science in Innovation: The Case of Biotechnology , 2000 .

[15]  M. Storper.  The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy , 1997 .

[16]  Mikel Gómez Uranga,et al.  The Dynamics of Commercialization of Scientific Knowledge in Biotechnology and Nanotechnology , 2007 .

[17]  Elizabeth Garnsey,et al.  The Genesis of the High Technology Milieu: A Study in Complexity , 1998 .

[18]  Yuan Sun,et al.  Measuring the relationships among university, industry and other sectors in Japan’s national innovation system: a comparison of new approaches with mutual information indicators , 2010, Scientometrics.

[19]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Why Catalonia cannot be considered as a regional innovation system , 2004, Scientometrics.

[20]  Arnold Joseph Toynbee.  A study of history, Geneses of Civilizations, Volume 2 , 1934 .

[21]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Triple Helix indicators of knowledge-based innovation systems, Research Policy (forthcoming) , 2006, 0911.3407.

[22]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  Longitudinal trends in networks of university-industry-government relations in South Korea: The role of programmatic incentives , 2009, 0912.3100.

[23]  Manuel Acosta,et al.  Science–technology flows in Spanish regions: An analysis of scientific citations in patents , 2003 .

[24]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Regional Innovation Systems in Hungary: The Failing Synergy at the National Level , 2009, 0912.3101.

[25]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[26]  Bethany S. Dohleman.  Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek , 2006 .

[27]  Apresentação Paulo Bastos Tigre.  Bengt-Åke Lundvall - Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation , 2009 .

[28]  Carrie B. Sanders,et al.  Reframing norms: boundary maintenance and partial accommodations in the work of academic technology transfer , 2010 .

[29]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and , 2000 .

[30]  Diana Lucio-Arias,et al.  The dynamics of exchanges and references among scientific texts, and the autopoiesis of discursive knowledge , 2009, J. Informetrics.

[31]  J. Youtie,et al.  Building an innovation hub: A case study of the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic development , 2008 .

[32]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Becoming an entrepreneurial university? A case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university , 2008 .

[33]  H. Maturana,et al.  Autopoiesis and Cognition : The Realization of the Living (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Scie , 1980 .

[34]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  National and international dimensions of the Triple Helix in Japan: University–industry–government versus international coauthorship relations , 2009 .

[35]  Sven Hemlin,et al.  The Shift in Academic Quality Control , 2006 .

[36]  M. Feldman,et al.  Entpreprenerial Universities and Technology Transfer: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Knowledge-Based Economic Development , 2006 .

[37]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Linking science to technology: Using bibliographic references in patents to build linkage schemes , 2004, Scientometrics.

[38]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  BIBLIOMETRICS AS A RESEARCH FIELD , 2014 .

[39]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  National and international dimensions of the Triple Helix in Japan: University-industry-government versus international coauthorship relations , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[40]  A. Geuna,et al.  The Governance of University Knowledge Transfer: A Critical Review of the Literature , 2009 .

[41]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Traces of Prior Art: An analysis of non-patent references found in patent documents , 2006, Scientometrics.

[42]  Peter Nijkamp,et al.  Evaluating social science and humanities knowledge production: an exploratory analysis of dynamics in science systems , 2009 .

[43]  Stelvia Matos,et al.  Indicators and outcomes of Canadian university research: Proxies becoming goals? , 2006 .

[44]  B. Clark,et al.  Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation. Issues in Higher Education. , 1998 .

[45]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980 , 2001 .

[46]  H. Etzkowitz.  The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages , 1998 .

[47]  N. Baldini,et al.  University Patenting and Licensing Activity: A Review of the Literature , 2006 .

[48]  Henry Etzkowi,et al.  The Triple Helix of University - Industry - Government , 2002 .

[49]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[50]  Francis Narin,et al.  Is technology becoming science? , 1985, Scientometrics.

[51]  Gohar Feroz Khan,et al.  Editorial: Triple Helix and innovation in Asia using scientometrics, webometrics, and informetrics , 2011, Scientometrics.

[52]  Olle Persson,et al.  The Intellectual Base and Research Fronts of JASIS 1986-1990 , 1994, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[53]  P. David,et al.  AN INTRODUCTION TO THE ECONOMY OF THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY , 2001 .

[54]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The Challenge of Scientometrics: The Development, Measurement, and Self-Organization of Scientific Communications , 2001 .

[55]  Gaston Heimeriks,et al.  Mapping communication and collaboration in heterogeneous research networks , 2004, Scientometrics.

[56]  R. Nelson,et al.  National Innovation Systems , 1993 .

[57]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  A Triple Helix of University—Industry—Government Relations , 1998, Scientometrics.

[58]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology , 2006 .

[59]  Liming Liang,et al.  The role of Chinese universities in enterprise–university research collaboration , 2011, Scientometrics.

[60]  Ann Robertson,et al.  Ethics or Politics?:The Emergence of ELSI Discourse in Canada* , 2008 .

[61]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[62]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations (February 2012) , 2012 .

[63]  Manuel Acosta,et al.  Exploring the quality of environmental technology in Europe: evidence from patent citations , 2009, Scientometrics.

[64]  B. Clark.  Creating entrepreneurial universities : organizational pathways of transformation , 1998 .

[65]  M. M. Kessler.  Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers , 1963 .

[66]  H. Maturana,et al.  Autopoiesis and Cognition , 1980 .

[67]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations , 2003, Scientometrics.

[68]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Commonalities and differences between scholarly and technical collaboration , 2004, Scientometrics.

[69]  Jesús Sebastián,et al.  ANILLOS DE CRECIMIENTO EN EL ÁRBOL DE LA CIENCIA. La evolución institucional del Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas , 2009 .

[70]  Terry Shinn,et al.  The Triple Helix and New Production of Knowledge , 2002 .

[71]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  A comparison of the knowledge-based innovation systems in the economies of South Korea and the Netherlands using Triple Helix indicators , 2005, Scientometrics.

[72]  Magnus Gulbrandsen,et al.  A baseline for the impact of academic patenting legislation in Norway , 2007, Scientometrics.

[73]  M. Gibbons,et al.  Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty , 2003 .

[74]  A. House,et al.  ‘Impact’ in the proposals for the UK's Research Excellence Framework: Shifting the boundaries of academic autonomy , 2011 .

[75]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The Triple Helix, Indicators, and Knowledge-Based Innovation Systems , 2006 .

[76]  O. Persson,et al.  How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis , 2009 .

[77]  R. Nelson.  National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis , 1993 .

[78]  Denys Ilnytskyy,et al.  Universities in the global knowledge economy: the eclectic paradigm* , 2015 .

[79]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Knowledge integrators or weak links? An exploratory comparison of patenting researchers with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology , 2006, Scientometrics.

[80]  P. Cooke,et al.  Regional innovation systems : the role of governances in a globalized world , 1998 .

[81]  H. Etzkowitz.  Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations , 2002 .

[82]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Tracing knowledge flows in innovation systems , 2002, Scientometrics.

[83]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Tracking techno-science networks: A case study of fuel cells and related hydrogen technology R&D in Norway , 2007, Scientometrics.

[84]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  On the normalization and visualization of author co-citation data: Salton's Cosine versus the Jaccard index , 2008 .

[85]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  National research profiles in a changing Europe (1983–2003) An exploratory study of sectoral characteristics in the Triple Helix , 2007, Scientometrics.

[86]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  Emergence of a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations , 1996 .

[87]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  The Triple Helix as a model for innovation studies , 1998 .

[88]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  A Sociological Theory of Communication: The Self-Organization of the Knowledge Society , 2002, J. Documentation.

[89]  D. Price.  Is Technology Historically Independent of Science? A Study in Statistical Historiography , 1965 .

[90]  A. Elzinga.  The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1997 .

[91]  U. Schmoch,et al.  Science-based technologies: university-industry interactions in four fields , 1998 .

[92]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[93]  Henri Theil,et al.  Statistical Decomposition Analysis: With Applications in the Social and Administrative Sciences , 1972 .

[94]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Towards hybrid Triple Helix indicators: A study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors , 2003, Scientometrics.

[95]  Loet Leydesdorff.  The Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix, …, and an N-Tuple of Helices: Explanatory Models for Analyzing the Knowledge-Based Economy? , 2010 .

[96]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Entrepreneurial universities and the dynamics of academic knowledge production: A case study of basic vs. applied research in Belgium , 2003, Scientometrics.

[97]  Olle Persson,et al.  Regional R&D activities and interactions in the Swedish Triple Helix , 2003, Scientometrics.

[98]  Larry L. Leslie,et al.  Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University , 1997 .

[99]  Roberta Capello,et al.  Universities, Cities and Regions. Loci for Knowledge and Innovation Creation , 2012 .

[100]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  AS A SOURCE OF COMMERCIAL TECHNOLOGY : A DETAILED ANALYSIS OF UNIVERSITY PATENTING , 1965 – 1988 , 1995 .

[101]  G. Dosi,et al.  Technical Change and Economic Theory , 1989 .

[102]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Measuring the knowledge base of an economy in terms of triple-helix relations among 'technology, organization, and territory' , 2004, 0911.3414.

[103]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Developing Technology in the Vicinity of Science: An Examination of the Relationship between Science Intensity (of Patents) and Technological Productivity within the Field of Biotechnology , 2006 .

[104]  Dennis A. Rondinelli,et al.  National innovation systems: A comparative analysis , 1993 .

[105]  J G Daugman,et al.  Information Theory and Coding , 1998 .

[106]  Benedetto Lepori,et al.  New perspectives and challenges for the design and production of S&T indicators , 2008 .

[107]  Mike Thelwall,et al.  UK academic web links and collaboration - an exploratory study , 2007, J. Inf. Sci..

[108]  Jorge A. Sabato,et al.  La producción de tecnología : autónoma o transnacional , 1988 .

[109]  Freiberger Arbeitspapiere,et al.  Measuring the Knowledge Base of Regional Innovation Systems in Germany in terms of a Triple Helix Dynamics , 2005 .

[110]  M. Meyer.  Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature , 2000 .

[111]  Satoru Kawai,et al.  An Algorithm for Drawing General Undirected Graphs , 1989, Inf. Process. Lett..

[112]  Keun Lee,et al.  Explaining the “University-run enterprises” in China: A theoretical framework for university–industry relationship in developing countries and its application to China☆ , 2006 .

[113]  Mika Nieminen,et al.  University research funding and publication performance--An international comparison , 2010 .

[114]  E. Carayannis,et al.  Mode 3 Knowledge Production in Quadruple Helix Innovation Systems: 21st-Century Democracy, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship for Development , 2011 .

[115]  Gohar Feroz Khan,et al.  Measuring the triple helix on the web: Longitudinal trends in the university-industry-government relationship in Korea , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[116]  P. Collins,et al.  Citations in patents to the basic research literature , 1988 .

[117]  Henry G. Small,et al.  Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents , 1973, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..