What is it about?
This paper is a response to a paper by Leydesdorff and Lawton Smith (2022) who, among other things, warn about adding too many other actors to the "Triple Helix" (university-industry-government) innovation model. We argue that additional strands should be added to better understand large socio-technological changes. We also point out that a "Quadruple Helix" model (with four strands) can be easily visualized, suggesting it can also be measured in the real world.
Featured Image
Photo by Daniele Levis Pelusi on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Concepts and ideas about innovation influence policy-making and ultimately, development outcomes. It is important that these ideas are backed-up by real-world data. We suggest that this can be done for more complex innovation models like the "Quadruple Helix".
Perspectives
The Triple Helix innovation model is very powerful because it is simple and easy to understand, yet it can be measured with real-world data. If you expand the model with a fourth dimension ("strand"), it still appears relatively simple and measurable. I hope that idea inspires others to work on empirical Quadruple Helix research.
Pieter Stek
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Measuring Helix Interactions in the Context of Economic Development and Public Policies: From Triple to Quadruple and N-Tuple Helix vs. N-Tuple and Quadruple Helix to Triads, Triple Helix Journal, March 2022, Brill,
DOI: 10.1163/21971927-bja10026.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
