Rotational Symmetry and the Transformation of Innovation Systems in a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations

Using a mathematical model, we show that a Triple Helix (TH) system contains self-interaction, and therefore self-organization of innovations can be expected in waves, whereas a Double Helix (DH) remains determined by its linear constituents. (The mathematical model is fully elaborated in the Appendices.) The ensuing innovation systems can be expected to have a fractal structure: innovation systems at different scales can be considered as spanned in a Cartesian space with the dimensions of (S)cience, (B)usiness, and (G)overnment. A national system, for example, contains sectorial and regional systems, and is a constituent part in technological and supra-national systems of innovation. The mathematical modeling enables us to clarify the mechanisms, and provides new possibilities for the prediction. Emerging technologies can be expected to be more diversified and their life cycles will become shorter than before. In terms of policy implications, the model suggests a shift from the production of material objects to the production of innovative technologies.

[1]  J. Schumpeter,et al.  Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process , 1940 .

[2]  H. Etzkowitz,et al.  The Role of Research Centres in the Collectivisation of Academic Science , 1998 .

[3]  Edgar E. Peters.  Chaos and order in the capital markets , 1991 .

[4]  F. Wilczek.  Quantum Field Theory , 1998, hep-th/9803075.

[5]  W. Stolper,et al.  The Long Waves in Economic Life , 1935 .

[6]  D. Dickson.  Technology and cycles of boom and bust. , 1983, Science.

[7]  J. Steel.  THE TRIPLE HELIX , 2003 .

[8]  Wilfred Dolfsma,et al.  Technology-push, demand-pull and the shaping of technological paradigms - Patterns in the development of computing technology , 2002 .

[9]  Franco Malerba,et al.  History friendly models of industry evolution: the case of the computer industry , 1999 .

[10]  Richard R. Nelson,et al.  The Co-evolution of Technology, Industrial Structure, and Supporting Institutions , 1994 .

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

[12]  R. Mcweeny,et al.  Symmetry: An Introduction to Group Theory and Its Applications , 2002 .

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

[14]  Hisashi Q. Higuchi.  On the nature of , 1999 .

[15]  Simon Kuznets,et al.  Secular Movements In Production And Prices , 1930 .

[16]  J. Kitchin.  Cycles and Trends in Economic Factors , 1923 .

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

[18]  R. L. Mills,et al.  Conservation of Isotopic Spin and Isotopic Gauge Invariance , 1954 .

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

[20]  Jacob Schmookler,et al.  Economic Sources of Inventive Activity , 1962, The Journal of Economic History.

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

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

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

[24]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  A Triple Helix System for Knowledge-based Regional Development : From “ Spheres ” to “ Spaces ” , 2010 .

[25]  Devendra Sahal,et al.  Technological guideposts and innovation avenues , 1993 .

[26]  R. Nallari.  MODELS OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE , 1992 .

[27]  Gerhard Mensch,et al.  Stalemate in Technology: Innovations Overcome the Depression , 1978 .

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

[29]  Chris Papenhausen,et al.  Causal mechanisms of long waves , 2008 .

[30]  J. Enns,et al.  What competition? , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[31]  S. Kuznets.  Secular movements in production and prices : their nature and their bearing upon cyclical fluctuations , 1930 .

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

[33]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The triple helix perspective of innovation systems , 2010, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

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

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

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

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

[38]  G. Dosi.  Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[39]  H. Simon,et al.  The Organization of Complex Systems , 1977 .

[40]  T. Vasko,et al.  The Long-Wave Debate , 1987 .

[41]  Xavier Tinguely,et al.  The Nature of the Innovation Process and the New Geography of Innovation , 2013 .

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

[43]  M. Porter.  The Competitive Advantage Of Nations , 1990 .

[44]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  “Spaces”: A triple helix governance strategy for regional innovation , 2012 .

[45]  S. Winter,et al.  An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.by Richard R. Nelson; Sidney G. Winter , 1987 .

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

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

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

[49]  B. Carlsson,et al.  On the nature, function and composition of technological systems , 1991 .

[50]  Howard Hunt Pattee,et al.  Hierarchy Theory: The Challenge of Complex Systems , 1973 .

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

[52]  D. North.  Competing Technologies , Increasing Returns , and Lock-In by Historical Events , 1994 .

[53]  Daniele Rotolo,et al.  Innovation as a nonlinear process, the scientometric perspective, and the specification of an ‘innovation opportunities explorer’ , 2012, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[54]  Benoit B. Mandelbrot,et al.  Fractal Geometry of Nature , 1984 .

[55]  W. Dolfsma,et al.  Lock-in and break-out from technological trajectories: Modeling and policy implications , 2009 .

[56]  E. Andersen,et al.  National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning , 1992 .

[57]  S. Klepper.  Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle , 1996 .

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

[59]  C. Edquist.  Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations , 1997 .

[60]  Clément Juglar,et al.  Des crises commerciales et de leur retour périodique , 2014 .

[61]  William R. Thompson,et al.  Leading sectors and world powers : the coevolution of global politics and economics , 1996 .