The scientometrics of a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations (Introduction to the topical issue)

Abstract

We distinguish between an internal differentiation of science and technology that focuses on instrumentalities and an external differentiation in terms of the relations of the knowledge production process to other social domains, notably governance and industry. The external contexts bring into play indicators and statistical techniques other than publications, patents, and citations. Using regression analysis, for example, one can examine the importance of knowledge and knowledge spill-over for economic development. The relations can be expected to vary among nations and regions. The field-specificity of changes is emphasized as a major driver of the research agenda. In a knowledge-based economy, institutional arrangements can be considered as support structures for cognitive developments.

Convergence and multidisciplinarity in nanotechnology: Laboratories as technological hubs

“…However, all over the world micro-and nanotechnology centres have emerged (Kautt et al,2007). While we have here focused on a research-oriented research group, in the global context described by the triple helix model (Leydesdorff, 2000;Leydesdorff and Etzkowitz, 1998;Leydesdorff and Meyer, 2007) more industry-oriented research groups and centres have also emerged (Kautt et al, 2007). We therefore question the boundaries that are set up by public funding in order to foster multidisciplinary research and the development of N&N materialised by research centres, and the scientific boundaries that are present within these research centres.…”

“…As described by the triple helix model (Leydesdorff, 2000;Leydesdorff and Etzkowitz, 1998;Leydesdorff and Meyer, 2007), boundaries between science, government and industry have been blurred. The view of homogeneous and closed scientific communities is challenged by recent works on a shift between two ways of doing science (Bonaccorsi, 2008 ;Bonaccorsi and Thoma, 2007;Gibbons et al, 1994;Nowotny et al, 2003).…”

The early adulthood of the Asia Pacific Journal of Management: A literature review 2005–2014

“…However, collaborative patterns are limited to collaboration ties and networks among academic institutions, as active collaboration between academic institutions and firms or governmental agencies is extremely scarce. This low number of non-academic institutions involved in article authorship points to weak cooperation ties among different actors in the triple helix model of universityindustry-government relations (Leydesdorff & Meyer, 2003). In other words, firms and non-academic institutions do not collaborate with academic institutions in scientific research in a way that gives rise to co-authored works.…”

Science and technology policies: A tale of political use, misuse and abuse of traditional R&D indicators

“…Furthermore, the use of narrow input indicators as a basis for a 'policy message' regarding the system's performance, has long been criticised. According to Lundvall (1992:6) The influence of neoclassical theory on politicians remains strong and they generally assume a direct and positive relationship between GERD/GDP effort and innovation system performance, ignoring other (even more) important factors such as the relationships among the system's agents [MEYER, 2006;LEYDESDORFF and MEYER, 2007;WONG and HO, 2007;among others], whose influence on performance of the innovation system is widely acknowledged. In addition, application of this indicator is easy and to a great extent simplifies the elaboration of policy messages.…”