Search results

Purpose: Economic development agendas usually drive innovation, and it is an essential tool for government institutions to promote economic growth. The Quadruple Helix Model of Innovation captures the process by integrating and overlapping knowledge and technology, forming an aggregate output invested in producing more products and services, innovation, and technology. This chapter focuses on how the quadruple helix supports the linkage between knowledge creation, innovation output, and enhancing regional and national competitiveness.

Design/methodology/approach: The chapter also illustrates the triple helix concept and then the quadruple helix model of innovation, focusing on the four main aspects, i.e., Government, Universities, Industry, and Civil society. The authors aim to simulate the economic significance of evolving, rapidly adaptive, and interdisciplinary knowledge and innovation ecosystems.

Findings: The findings and examples stated in several different MENA regions can boost the economy as various platforms provide digital transformation, encourage culture awareness in schools, encourage youth empowerment, and support tech start-ups. They can drive forward the index of creativity and innovation within entrepreneurs and the general members of society. Recommendations include a further study to modify the model and customize it based on the country’s needs.

Originality/value: This chapter of the book focuses on the four main aspects of the quadruple helix model of innovation with specific examples in several countries. The chapter would be beneficial for the upcoming entrepreneurs and students who progress in developing tech start-ups and digitization.

This study aims to evaluate the potential of using the components of the quadruple helix and quintuple helix models, which are extensions of the triple helix university-private sector-public sector cooperation model. Thus, the triple helix model shaped by university-private-public sector cooperation has transformed into a quadruple helix innovation model with the inclusion of the media and culture-oriented public helix. In this context, while the triple helix emphasizes tripartite networks and hybrid organizations, the quadruple helix system focuses on intertwined collaborations, coevolution, and specialization within the framework of firms, institutions, and stakeholders. In the quadruple helix innovation system, the coevolution of art and innovation has assumed a central role in knowledge generation and innovation. In the quintuple helix innovation model, the natural environment of society is added to the quadruple helix. This study consists of three parts. In the first part, the literature on triple helix, quadruple helix, and quintuple helix models is reviewed. In the second part, digital transformation and technological innovations from Industrial Revolution 1.0 to Industry 5.0 are analyzed. In the third section, the contribution of the quintuple helix model to Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 is explained.

An increasingly crucial role is played by nonprofit organizations (NPOs) as actors of collaborative governance arrangements for both the prioritization and direct provision of public interest services. Ever since the seminal study by Salamon and Anheier (1996), the drivers behind the rise in dimension and relevance of the third sector have been analyzed from different standpoints. It is now relevant to also analyze nonprofits not only as substitutes or complements to “classical” economic sectors such as government, but also the private for-profit sector. The types of relationships between socio-economic actors can be recognized as preconditions for explaining structural developments in knowledge-based economies, with a transformative impact on production modes and specifically on innovation ecosystems. With specific reference to analyses suiting the knowledge society, it is particularly interesting to consider the roles of outcome-oriented organizations as key actors for social innovation.

A relevant explanatory framework, which has gained recognition in recent years, is the triple helix model (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000). This approach was originally employed in analyzing the existing dynamics between key actors (government, businesses, and universities) in fostering innovation and knowledge transfer. The model is rising to be a key reference also for social innovation processes.

In this chapter, we enquire to what extent the triple helix approach to social innovation is diffused in the Italian context, and whether this affects the financial sustainability, collaborative orientation, accountability and readiness for innovation of Italian NPOs. To pursue these research objectives, we employ recent data produced by the National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) – specifically, the Nationwide Census of Industry and Services carried out in 2011 and published in July 2013. We intersect this secondary data with a nationwide survey of Italian NPOs conducted in 2013, specifically designed in order to gain deeper understanding of the revenue structures, organizational characteristics and features of collaborative relationships of such organizations – that is, highly contingent aspects at the meso- and micro-level which the ISTAT census does not cover.

Our results highlight significant differences in the behavior and outcomes for those NPOs who adopt a systemic collaboration approach with other actors in the socio-economic system. Based on this exploratory evidence, we propose reflections and indications for future research in the discussion section.

The 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) has reinvigorated the policy focus on sustainable transport. Automated and Connected Transport (ACT) has been featured as a promising technology-based option to aid in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Despite progress in certain areas of sustainability, there are still a lot of SDGs where limited progress has been observed since the 2015 Paris Agreement, particularly regarding the social pillar of sustainability which is reflected from the user perspective. This chapter will set the scene for this edited volume first by contrasting ACT potential with the SDGs and then by highlighting the requirement to focus more on addressing user needs through ACT. Remarkably, scholars have been increasingly sceptical about the transition to fully automated and connected vehicles, thus it is pertinent to highlight relevant opportunities and risks. Chapter recommendations foster the promotion of a Quadruple Helix approach to operationalise the inclusion of social concerns (e.g. gender balance and equity) in Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMP) across the world.

The chapter analyzed the knowledge transfer processes of the Latin American academy to the actors in its environment, and the Science, Technology, and Innovation policy that facilitates or inhibits the processes of generation and use of this university knowledge. The cases of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Mexico were analyzed to understand the practice of the university knowledge transfer model at different levels – strategic, organizational, and operational – and the complexities involved in the process. It was evidenced by the urgent demand for the transformation of the Latin American University through sustainability and digitalization approaches to be a catalyst for development in the region. The chapter closes with a critical analysis of the phenomenon, future lines of research, and implications of the praxis.

The purpose of this chapter is to contribute to the theory building of transformative university by delivering two conceptual models for legitimizing entrepreneurial university with a transformative role in quadruple helix for sustainability governance structures as being nominated as “responsible facilitator.” This chapter draws many theoretical insights sourced from Entrepreneurial University (Etzkowitz, 1988), Institutional Theory (Scott, 1987), quadruple/quintuple helix (Carayannis & Campbell, 2009a, b) and Responsible Innovation (Owen, Macnaghten, & Stilgoe, 2012) in order to frame the resulting conceptual models of transformative university for sustainability and quadruple helix for sustainability governance. The conceptual models offer a new paradigm discussion for the changing role of universities in knowledge economy and opens up for further investigation of quadruple helix actors namely as transformative university, society, industry and government for strategic capital, social capital, economic capital and culture–human capital interventions in sustainability governance. The second model illustrates the key interventions of quadruple helix actors in four pillars of capital delivering concrete examples of activities. The originality of this chapter lies in its discourse articulating a multilayered approach for the institutionalization of entrepreneurial university embedded in a responsible innovation ecosystem based on individual, organizational and macro-level perspectives. Quadruple helix actors are nominated as “responsible facilitator,” “hybrid hub,” “agile regulator” and “pressure beneficiary” roles for their relevant place in sustainability governance structure.

The evolution of capitalism has gone through four major epochs, from the first tangible exchanges of goods and resources, to the generation of wealth by entrepreneurs held personally accountable for their actions, to cost-cutting measures for increasing efficiencies and maximizing wealth for the few, and finally to a socially irresponsible form. The fourth epoch dispatched the last remaining shards of capitalist responsibility to anyone but investors, as the basis of wealth appropriation shifted to manipulating the speculative future worth of intangible or fictitious capital. This evolution through four epochs has sadly been a process of diminishing value creation (Boje et al., 2017).

We are trapped in an era of socially irresponsible capitalism with little respect for humankind. But, it was not always this way. The earliest references to entrepreneurial behavior emerged in the east during the Han Dynasty and in the west in the eighteenth century. Somewhat like the fourth epoch of the twenty-first century, these global beginnings of early capitalism were also directed by opportunistic desires to pursue wealth generation by taking advantage of people’s needs and wants. Although capitalists have consistently been the prime directors of resources and the distributors of wealth, in the early epochs of capitalism they were different. The early epoch entrepreneurs bore personal risks of business failure, consequences that might impact them for a lifetime.

The antenarrative generative mechanisms, or spirals, help us understand the interconnectivities of “real” and “actual” domains of reality (Bhaskar, 1975; Boje, 2016). Socially irresponsible capitalism is pulling global societies into a downward spiral toward an addiction of speculative destruction and dehumanization, transforming “real” into “actual” realities. We need a force to pull us back up toward a revitalized form of socially responsible capitalism. This force is called the socio-economic approach to management (SEAM), and in the responsible entrepreneurial spirit of earlier epochs, the path to recovery can be accomplished by accountably working with one organization or entity at a time.

This chapter first investigates the historical double-spiral-helix footsteps of socially irresponsible capitalism in the making. Then through a SEAM project example, we discuss how the micro-societal perspective of an organization places it at a deeper level of reality, deeper within the double-spiral-helix meta-reality of macro-societal capitalism. Finally, we demonstrate how the socioeconomic approach can help diagnose the deeper realities with an organization, beyond the evident narratives, to reveal the third spiral of deficiencies. This third spiral disenables the organization’s ability to activate the micro forces of socially responsible capitalism.

Based on a single case approach, this chapter empirically explores the triple helix configuration of Centurion University of Technology and Management (CUTM) and its social innovation programme. The study uses case files and web available material to consider the nature of the university’s relationship with industry and government. The findings show that triple helix social innovation has yet to be studied in an Indian context. Also, CUTM’s human and social orientation is a driver of its triple helix interaction. The university’s pursuit and trust in employers’ participation in the curriculum and campus experience is the hallmark of its social and pedagogic success. To advance the literature, this chapter draws attention to a much-overlooked Indian context and, for practitioners, it demonstrates the inner-workings of a functioning triple helix system.