Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix and Quintuple Helix and How Do Knowledge, Innovation and the Environment Relate To Each Other?: A Proposed Framework for a Trans-disciplinary Analysis of Sustainable Development and Social Ecology

This article develops an inter-disciplinary and trans-disciplinary framework of analysis that relates knowledge, innovation and the environment (natural environments) to each other. For that purpose the five-helix structure model of the Quintuple Helix is being introduced. The Triple Helix model, designed by Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (2000), focuses on the relations of universities, industry and governments. The Quadruple Helix (Carayannis & Campbell, 2009) blends in the perspective of a media-based and culture-based public. The Quintuple Helix finally frames knowledge and innovation in the context of the environment (natural environments). Therefore, the Quintuple Helix can be interpreted as an approach in line with sustainable development and social ecology. “Eco-innovation†and “eco-entrepreneurship†should be processed in such a broader understanding of knowledge and innovation.

[1]  M. Fischer-Kowalski,et al.  Society's Metabolism , 1998 .

[2]  Heinz Schandl,et al.  The Global Sociometabolic Transition , 2008 .

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

[4]  Guillermo O’Donnell,et al.  Human Development, Human Rights, and Democracy , 2004 .

[5]  Jorge Vargas Cullell.  Democracy and the Quality of Democracy:: Empirical Findings and Methodological and Theoretical Issues Drawn from the Citizen Audit of the Quality of Democracy in Costa Rica , 2004 .

[6]  R. Kasperson,et al.  Sustainability Science , 2019, Critical Skills for Environmental Professionals.

[7]  L. Hooghe,et al.  Multi-Level Governance and European Integration , 2001 .

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

[9]  W. Adams.  The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and Development in the Twenty-first Century , 2006 .

[10]  Helmut Haberl,et al.  Progress towards sustainability? What the conceptual framework of material and energy flow accounting (MEFA) can offer , 2004 .

[11]  Mathis Wackernagel,et al.  Establishing national natural capital accounts based on detailed Ecological Footprint and biological capacity assessments , 2004 .

[12]  Yukio Miyata,et al.  An Analysis of Research and Innovative Activities of Universities in the United States , 2003 .

[13]  Carl Martin Allwood,et al.  Creative knowledge environments. The influences on creativity in research and innovation , 2004 .

[14]  V. Bush.  Science, the Endless Frontier , 1999, Science, the Endless Frontier.

[15]  Michelle Rowe.  The Role of Multinationals in Recent IT Developments in China , 2005 .

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

[17]  Malin Lindberg,et al.  Women Resource Centres—A Creative Knowledge Environment of Quadruple Helix , 2012 .

[18]  Leonardo Morlino,et al.  The Quality of Democracy: An Overview , 2004 .

[19]  Wolfgang H. Güttel,et al.  Knowledge production of firms: research networks and the "scientification" of business R&D , 2005, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[20]  David J. Rapport,et al.  Sustainability science: an ecohealth perspective , 2006, Sustainability science.

[21]  Thierry Verdier,et al.  Education, Democracy and Growth , 1993 .

[22]  Bengt-Åke Lundvall,et al.  National Systems of Innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning London: Pint , 1995 .

[23]  Igor N. Dubina,et al.  Managing creativity: theoretical approaches to employees' creativity development and regulation , 2005 .

[24]  Marcus Foth,et al.  Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time City , 2008 .

[25]  Michael Gibbons,et al.  Introduction: `Mode 2' Revisited: The New Production of Knowledge , 2003 .

[26]  Helmut Haberl,et al.  A socio‐metabolic transition towards sustainability? Challenges for another Great Transformation , 2011 .

[27]  Stefan Kuhlmann,et al.  Future governance of innovation policy in Europe — three scenarios , 2001 .

[28]  Georg Pölzlbauer,et al.  The Democracy Ranking 2008 of the Quality of Democracy: Method and Ranking Outcome , 2008 .

[29]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[30]  H. Etzkowitz.  Research groups as ???quasi-firms???: the invention of the entrepreneurial university , 2003 .

[31]  R. Inglehart.  Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society , 1991 .

[32]  R. Florida.  The Rise of the Creative Class : And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life , 2003 .

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

[34]  J. Schumpeter.  Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy , 1943 .

[35]  N. Das.  Human Development Report 2007/2008 Fighting Climate Change: Human Solidarity in a Divided World, UNDP, New York , 2009 .

[36]  Robert Kaiser,et al.  The reconfiguration of National Innovation Systems—the example of German biotechnology , 2004 .

[37]  Helmut Haberl,et al.  Socioecological Transitions and Global Change , 2007 .

[38]  Coden Stjsao,et al.  Influence of Polyvalence Professionals on Product Development Process Efficiency , 2009 .

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

[40]  Richard R. Nelson,et al.  Capitalism as an engine of progress , 1990 .

[41]  Elias G. Carayannis,et al.  Rediscovering Schumpeter : creative destruction evolving into "Mode 3" , 2007 .

[42]  Amy M. Hightower,et al.  Science and Engineering Indicators , 1993 .

[43]  Stuart A. Umpleby.  What I learned from Heinz von Foerster about the construction of science , 2005 .

[44]  R. Dahl.  Polyarchy; participation and opposition , 1971 .

[45]  David F. J. Campbell,et al.  Wie können Demokratie und Demokratiequalität gemessen werden? Modelle, Demokratie-Indices und Länderbeispiele im globalen Vergleich , 2009 .

[46]  G. O’Brien,et al.  Sustainable development: mapping different approaches , 2005 .

[47]  Edward G. Carmines,et al.  The Two Faces of Issue Voting , 1980, American Political Science Review.

[48]  J. Schumpeter,et al.  The Theory of Economic Development , 2017 .

[49]  Elias G. Carayannis,et al.  Creativity Economy and a Crisis of the Economy? Coevolution of Knowledge, Innovation, and Creativity, and of the Knowledge Economy and Knowledge Society , 2012 .

[50]  Dagmar Schröter,et al.  Socioecological transitions and global change: trajectories of social metabolism and land use , 2009 .

[51]  Gregory Tassey,et al.  R&D Policy Models and Data Needs , 2001 .

[52]  Paul Israel,et al.  The Sources of Innovation , 1990 .

[53]  David F. J. Campbell,et al.  The Basic Concept for the Democracy Ranking of the Quality of Democracy , 2008 .

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

[55]  Fritz Plasser,et al.  Global Political Campaigning: A Worldwide Analysis of Campaign Professionals and Their Practices , 2002 .