The Triple Helix in the context of global change: dynamics and challenges

Understanding how economies change through interactions with science and government as different spheres of activity requires both new conceptual tools and methodologies. In this paper, the evolution of the metaphor of a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations is elaborated into an evolutionary model, and positioned within the context of global economic changes. We highlight how Triple Helix relations are both continuing and mutating, and the conditions under which a Triple Helix might be seen to be unraveling in the face of pressures on each of the three helices – university, industry, and government. The reciprocal dynamics of innovation both in the Triple Helix thesis and in the global economy are empirically explored: we find that footlooseness of high technology manufacturing and knowledge-intensive services counteract the embeddedness prevailing in medium technology manufacturing. The geographical level at which synergy in Triple Helix relations can be expected and sustained varies among nations and regions.

[1]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  A simulation model of the Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations and the decomposition of the redundancy , 2014, Scientometrics.

[2]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Mutual redundancies in interhuman communication systems: Steps toward a calculus of processing meaning , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[3]  Kevin Grant,et al.  Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective , 2014, Scientometrics.

[4]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Redundancy Generation in University-Industry-Government Relations: The Triple Helix Modeled, Measured, and Simulated , 2013, ArXiv.

[5]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Measuring the knowledge-based economy of China in terms of synergy among technological, organizational, and geographic attributes of firms , 2013, Scientometrics.

[6]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The Swedish System of Innovation: Regional Synergies in a Knowledge-Based Economy , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[7]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Rotational Symmetry and the Transformation of Innovation Systems in a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations , 2012, ArXiv.

[8]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Mapping (USPTO) Patent Data using Overlays to Google Maps , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[9]  Ki-Seok KwonHan,et al.  Has globalization strengthened South Korea's national research system? National and international dynamics of the Triple Helix of scientific co-authorship relationships in South Korea , 2012 .

[10]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Disclosure of university research to third parties: A non-market perspective on an Italian university , 2011, 1111.5684.

[11]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Where is synergy indicated in the Norwegian innovation system? Triple-Helix relations among technology, organization, and geography , 2011, 1109.6597.

[12]  F. Tödtling,et al.  Regional Innovation Systems , 2011 .

[13]  Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli,et al.  The impact of technological relatedness, prior ties, and geographical distance on university-industry collaborations: A joint-patent analysis , 2011 .

[14]  P. Lundin.  Is silence still golden? Mapping the RNAi patent landscape , 2011, Nature Biotechnology.

[15]  M. Deakin,et al.  The Triple-Helix Model of Smart Cities: A Neo-Evolutionary Perspective , 2011 .

[16]  Andreas Pyka,et al.  A new model for university-industry links in knowledge-based economies , 2011 .

[17]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Local emergence and global diffusion of research technologies: An exploration of patterns of network formation , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[18]  Louise Kempton,et al.  Connecting Universities to Regional Growth:A Practical Guide , 2011 .

[19]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Has globalization strengthened South Korea’s national research system? National and international dynamics of the Triple Helix of scientific co-authorship relationships in South Korea , 2011, Scientometrics.

[20]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The knowledge-based economy and the triple helix model , 2012, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[21]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  How Do Emerging Technologies Conquer the World? An Exploration of Patterns of Diffusion and Network Formation , 2010, ArXiv.

[22]  Rosa Maria Dangelico,et al.  A system dynamics model to analyze technology districts' evolution in a knowledge-based perspective , 2010 .

[23]  Tommaso Ciarli,et al.  [Review] Andreas Pyka and Andrea Scharnhorst (eds.) (2009): Innovation networks: new approaches in modelling and analyzing , 2010 .

[24]  Dr Tony McCall,et al.  Regional Innovation Systems , 2010 .

[25]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The decline of university patenting and the end of the Bayh–Dole effect , 2010, Scientometrics.

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

[27]  A. Berryman,et al.  A Third Window: Natural Life Beyond Newton and Darwin.ByRobert E. Ulanowicz; foreword by, Stuart A. Kauffman. West Conshohocken (Pennsylvania): Templeton Foundation Press. $24.95 (paper). xxviii + 196 p.; ill.; name and subject indexes. 978‐1‐59947‐154‐9. 2009. , 2009 .

[28]  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..

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

[30]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Information of interactions in complex systems , 2009, Int. J. Gen. Syst..

[31]  Raymond Vernon,et al.  The Product Cycle Hypothesis in a New International Environment , 2009 .

[32]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Innovation, Path Dependency, and Policy: The Norwegian Case , 2009 .

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

[34]  Elias G. Carayannis,et al.  'Mode 3' and 'Quadruple Helix': toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem , 2009, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[35]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Innovation, Path Dependency, and Policy , 2009 .

[36]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Ross Ashby's information theory: a bit of history, some solutions to problems, and what we face today , 2009, Int. J. Gen. Syst..

[37]  Raymond W. Yeung,et al.  Information Theory and Network Coding , 2008 .

[38]  G. Zawdie,et al.  The triple helix strategy for universities in developing countries: the experiences in Malaysia and Algeria , 2008 .

[39]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action , 2008 .

[40]  Philip Mirowski,et al.  The Commercialization of Science and the Response of STS , 2008 .

[41]  H. Maibom.  Social Systems , 2007 .

[42]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  Regional Development in the Knowledge-Based Economy: The Construction of Advantage , 2009, 0911.3425.

[43]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  Measuring the knowledge base of regional innovation systems in Germany in terms of a Triple Helix dynamics, Research Policy (forthcoming). , 2006, 0911.3412.

[44]  H. Lawton Smith,et al.  Measuring the performance of Oxford University, Oxford Brookes University and the government laboratories’ spin-off companies , 2006 .

[45]  Merle Jacob,et al.  Utilization of social science knowledge in science policy: Systems of Innovation, Triple Helix and VINNOVA , 2006 .

[46]  L. Leydesdorff.  The Knowledge-Based Economy: Modeled, Measured, Simulated , 2006 .

[47]  Michael M. Hopkins,et al.  Towards a method for evaluating technological expectations: Revealing uncertainty in gene silencing technology discourse , 2006, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[48]  B. Carlsson.  Internationalization of innovation systems: A survey of the literature ☆ , 2006 .

[49]  L. 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.

[50]  Mariza Almeida,et al.  The evolution of the incubator movement in Brazil , 2005 .

[51]  W. Powell,et al.  Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational Collaboration in the Life Sciences1 , 2005, American Journal of Sociology.

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

[53]  Andreas Pyka,et al.  Innovation Networks. New Approaches in Modelling and Analyzing , 2005 .

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

[55]  M. Narasimham,et al.  The economics of knowledge , 2003, Int. J. Inf. Technol. Manag..

[56]  Daniel Hallencreutz,et al.  Spatial Clustering and the Potential for Policy Practice: Experiences from Cluster-building Processes in Sweden , 2003 .

[57]  Marco Bellandi,et al.  From Industrial Districts to Local Development: An Itinerary of Research , 2003 .

[58]  A. Drejer.  Innovation and learning , 2003 .

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

[60]  Riccardo Viale,et al.  An evolutionary Triple Helix to strengthen academy-industry relations: Suggestions from European regions , 2002 .

[61]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  MIT and the Rise of Entrepreneurial Science , 2002 .

[62]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  A Comparison of U.S. and European University-Industry Relations in the Life Sciences , 2001 .

[63]  P. Hall,et al.  Varieties of Capitalism , 2001 .

[64]  Antony M. Jose,et al.  The Triple Helix: Gene, Organism, and Environment , 2001, The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine.

[65]  Elias G. Carayannis,et al.  Leveraging knowledge, learning, and innovation in forming strategic government–university–industry (GUI) R&D partnerships in the US, Germany, and France , 2000 .

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

[67]  Y. Gingras,et al.  The place of universities in the system of knowledge production , 2000 .

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

[69]  P. Windrum,et al.  Simulation Models of Technological Innovation , 1999 .

[70]  F. Malerba.  'History-friendly' Models of Industry Evolution: The Computer Industry , 1999 .

[71]  E. Carayannis.  Fostering synergies between information technology and managerial and organizational cognition: the role of knowledge management , 1999 .

[72]  L. Soete,et al.  Schumpeter and the Knowledge-Based Economy: On Technology and Competition Policy , 1999 .

[73]  Paul Windrum,et al.  Simulation models of technological innovation: a review , 1999 .

[74]  A. Fire,et al.  Potent and specific genetic interference by double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans , 1998, Nature.

[75]  Kenzo Fujisue,et al.  Promotion of academia-industry cooperation in Japan — establishing the “law of promoting technology transfer from university to industry” in Japan , 1998 .

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

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

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

[79]  E. Andersen.  Evolutionary economics and chaos theory: New directions in technology studies: (Pinter, London, 1994) xiii + 215 pp., £35.00, paperback £14.99. Loet Leydesdorff, Peter Van den Besselaar (Editors) , 1996 .

[80]  K. Green.  National innovation systems: a comparative analysis , 1996 .

[81]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The Triple Helix -- University-Industry-Government Relations: A Laboratory for Knowledge Based Economic Development , 1995 .

[82]  I. Nonaka,et al.  The Knowledge Creating Company , 2008 .

[83]  S. Schwartzman,et al.  The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1994 .

[84]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  Evolutionary Economics and Chaos Theory: New Directions in Technology Studies , 1994 .

[85]  L. Branscomb.  Empowering technology: Implementing a U.S. strategy , 1993 .

[86]  L. Branscomb.  The national technology policy debate , 1993 .

[87]  P. Cooke.  Regional innovation systems: Competitive regulation in the new Europe , 1992 .

[88]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D , 1989 .

[89]  M. Trevor.  Technology Policy and Economic Performance. Lessons from Japan , 1989 .

[90]  S. Kostof.  America by Design , 1987 .

[91]  B. Latour.  Science in Action , 1987 .

[92]  C. Freeman.  Technology policy and economic performance : lessons from Japan , 1987 .

[93]  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 .

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

[95]  Lowe Cu,et al.  The triple helix--NIH, industry, and the academic world. , 1982 .

[96]  R. Burt.  Toward a structural theory of action , 1982 .

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

[98]  C. Lowe,et al.  The triple helix--NIH, industry, and the academic world. , 1982, The Yale journal of biology and medicine.

[99]  C. Freeman.  Economics of Industrial Innovation , 1975 .

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

[101]  O. Morgenstern,et al.  Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process. , 1940 .