Decomposing the Triple-Helix synergy into the regional innovation systems of Norway: firm data and patent networks

The Triple Helix model of university-industry-government relations allows us to use mutual information among geographical, sectorial, and size distribution of firms to measure synergy at various geographical scales in a nation. In this paper we decompose the synergy in Triple Helix relations and analyze the decomposition at the county level. We use micro-level data for all Norwegian firms from 2002 to 2014. This provides new and more detailed insight into the factors explaining the previously reported variation in synergy at county level in Norway. Furthermore, we analyze the county and city level distributions of all national as well as USPTO granted patents with at least one Norwegian inventor. Co-inventor networks for Norwegian USPTO patents are visualized using Google maps. The counties with technology-dominated synergies and strong knowledge institutions have a higher level of international co-inventor networks. Sectorial and geographical networks characterize the oil and gas dominated county, Rogaland. In contrast the knowledge institution dominated county of Sør-Trøndelag has broader networks both with regard to sectors and geography. In the small industry dominated county of Møre og Romsdal with high synergy, the lack of international co-inventor network is striking. This might be interpreted as a sign of industrial lock-in. The use of both firm level and patent data together give a broader and more precise picture of the innovation systems under study. The use of both national and international patent data also broadens the picture of the innovation activity of the nation.

[1]  M. V. Geenhuizen,et al.  Measuring the dynamics of an innovation system using patent data: a case study of South Korea, 2001–2010 , 2015 .

[2]  H. Park,et al.  Quantifying the Triple Helix relationship in scientific research: statistical analyses on the dividing pattern between developed and developing countries , 2015 .

[3]  Markus Grillitsch,et al.  Innovation in peripheral regions: Do collaborations compensate for a lack of local knowledge spillovers? , 2015 .

[4]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Synergy Cycles in the Norwegian Innovation System: The Relation between Synergy and Cycle Values , 2014, ArXiv.

[5]  H. Park,et al.  Interaction among Networks in the age of "Big Data": Social, Knowledge, Innovation, and Triple-Helix Networks , 2014 .

[6]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Can synergy in Triple Helix relations be quantified? A review of the development of the Triple Helix indicator , 2014, ArXiv.

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

[8]  Han Woo Park,et al.  An interview with Loet Leydesdorff: the past, present, and future of the triple helix in the age of big data , 2013, Scientometrics.

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

[10]  H. Etzkowitz,et al.  Triple Helix Systems: An Analytical Framework for Innovation Policy and Practice in the Knowledge Society , 2013 .

[11]  A. Rodríguez‐Pose.  In Economics and Social Sciences Working Papers Series Do Institutions Matter for Regional Development? Do Institutions Matter for Regional Development? § Do Institutions Matter for Regional Development? , 2022 .

[12]  A. Isaksen,et al.  Can small regions construct regional advantages? The case of four Norwegian regions , 2013 .

[13]  Stéphane Robin,et al.  Cooperation with public research institutions and success in innovation: Evidence from France and Germany , 2013 .

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

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

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

[17]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Publish or Patent: Bibliometric evidence for empirical trade-offs in national funding strategies , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[18]  Jang Hyun Kim.  A Hyperlink and Semantic Network Analysis of the Triple Helix (University-Government-Industry): The Interorganizational Communication Structure of Nanotechnology , 2012, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

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

[20]  A. Rodríguez‐Pose,et al.  In Economics and Social Sciences Working Papers Series Firm Collaboration and Modes of Innovation in Norway Firm Collaboration and Modes of Innovation in Norway Firm Collaboration and Modes of Innovation in Norway , 2022 .

[21]  Ki-Seok Kwon.  Are scientific capacities and industrial funding critical for universities' knowledgetransfer activities? - A case study of South Korea , 2011 .

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

[23]  Ben R. Martin,et al.  Synergy or separation mode: the relationship between the academic research and the knowledge-transfer activities of Korean academics , 2011, Scientometrics.

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

[25]  A. Isaksen,et al.  Regions, networks and innovative performance: The case of knowledge-intensive industries in Norway , 2010 .

[26]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Mapping the geography of science: Distribution patterns and networks of relations among cities and institutes , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

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

[28]  A. Isaksen.  Innovation Dynamics of Global Competitive Regional Clusters: The Case of the Norwegian Centres of Expertise , 2009 .

[29]  S. Breschi,et al.  Mobility of Skilled Workers and Co-Invention Networks: An Anatomy of Localized Knowledge Flows , 2009 .

[30]  B. Lundvall,et al.  Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation , 2007 .

[31]  L. Bettencourt,et al.  Invention in the city: Increasing returns to patenting as a scaling function of metropolitan size , 2007 .

[32]  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.

[33]  Gerald A. Carlino,et al.  Urban Density and the Rate of Invention , 2006 .

[34]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek: Revised and Expanded Edition for Updated Software , 2018 .

[35]  Bj⊘rn Asheim,et al.  Knowledge bases and Regional Innovation Systems: Comparing Nordic Clusters. , 2005 .

[36]  Magnus Gulbrandsen,et al.  Industry funding and university professors' research performance , 2005 .

[37]  R. Boschma.  Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment , 2005 .

[38]  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.

[39]  S. Breschi,et al.  Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data , 2004 .

[40]  James Simmie,et al.  Innovation and Urban Regions as National and International Nodes for the Transfer and Sharing of Knowledge , 2003 .

[41]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy , 2002 .

[42]  Rajneesh Narula,et al.  Innovation systems and ‘inertia’ in R&D location: Norwegian firms and the role of systemic lock-in , 2002 .

[43]  Jeffrey L. Furman,et al.  The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity , 2000 .

[44]  Ulf Sandström,et al.  Institutionalizing the triple helix: research funding and norms in the academic system , 2000 .

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

[46]  B. Kogut,et al.  Localization of Knowledge and the Mobility of Engineers in Regional Networks , 1999 .

[47]  J G Daugman,et al.  Information Theory and Coding , 2005 .

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

[49]  B. Asheim,et al.  Location, agglomeration and innovation: Towards regional innovation systems in Norway? , 1997 .

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