Challenging the triple helix model of regional innovation systems: A venture-centric model (original) (raw)
Related papers
Challenging the Triple Helix model of regional innovation systems
We offer a critical analysis of the triple helix model as a preferred basis for innovation systems. From a review of the research on innovation systems, it is argued that most models fail to include the entrepreneur and the innovator, as those models are macro-level concepts. It is suggested that this exclusion is a reason for low levels of entrepreneurial activity. We argue that the concepts of the entrepreneur and the innovator need to be treated as separate constructs. Structured interviews show that the key elements of the triple helix model such as governments, universities, and industries are not well integrated despite various efforts. The study shows that entrepreneurs and potential innovators (scientists and researchers) feel excluded or avoid involvement with government actors. The study questions the existing topdown triple helix model of innovation systems, as it discards the entrepreneurs. We offer a competing model based on reversed causation (a true bottom-up) double helix model.
Metaphors matter. Conventional wisdom argues that best practices in developing a regional innovation system dictate a bottom-up focus that emphasizes innovators and entrepreneurs, yet we see considerable resources deployed in top-down approaches that emphasize institutional actors. The rise of a potent metaphor, the "Triple Helix" has contributed this seeming disconnect. We argue here for a more bottom-up Double Helix model by re-visiting a larger qualitative study aimed at developing a regional innovation system in Scandinavia to increase growth venture development, one that has chosen an approach more consistent with the "triple helix" metaphor. Results based on in-depth interviews show that entrepreneurs and potential innovators (scientists and researchers) feel excluded, or even avoid, involvement with governmental actors. Technology-based business concepts are not emerging and new firms are not being created. The study questions the existing top-down Triple Helix model of innovation systems as, by necessity, it discards the entrepreneurs, as opposed to the competing model, a true bottom-up (or supervenient) double helix model.
Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 2018
This paper investigates the influence of entrepreneurs' characteristics on innovation in regions with different levels of development. By doing so, this work seeks to contribute to a better understanding of the role of entrepreneurs in the functioning and performance of regional innovation systems. The influence of entrepreneurs' personal characteristics and their perceptions of the business environment on firm innovation are investigated via a survey of companies carried out in six Spanish regions. The results allow the identifying of significant differences in the main determinants of innovation in the high-income regions and low-income regions studied. Entrepreneurs' generalized trust stimulates innovation only in high-income regions, where necessity motivation has also a negative effect on innovation. Growth ambition seems to play a highly positive role only in the case of low-income regions. Human capital and infrastructure are perceived by the entrepreneurs as the main bottlenecks for innovation in low-income regions, whereas in the case of highincome regions the legal, fiscal and financial systems are considered the key institutional barriers. These differences in the entrepreneurial factor should be taken into account in order to design and implement policies to stimulate and foster innovation in different regional contexts.
Entrepreneurship and innovation : the modern concept of regional development
2018
Experiences from innovative regions demonstrate that a proven model for regional development is a development model associated with a leading university (universities), focused upon technologically advanced innovations, revealing another innovative technology, innovative product, innovative service which will exert influence upon the markets and transform the entire branches of industry. This model has a chance to prove itself in large regional centres (metropolises) that ought to possess a number of essential advantages. Regional centres ought to bring together a significant population, be characterised by the high level of Gross Domestic Product, the high level of Gross Domestic Product per capita, and need to concentrate the leading enterprises of innovative industries, enterprises fulfilling the requirements of large customers, business centres, as well as health and public sector institutions
Entrepreneurial Universities and Regional Innovation
Advances in higher education and professional development book series, 2020
Universities are expected to play a leading role in the smart specialisation strategy process. However, a gap between discourse and practice is marking the RIS3related regional development programmes, which can be extended to the involvement of universities in the process. A mismatch can be speculated between the expectations towards universities' roles in RIS3 implementation and actual practice, and its repercussions on a regional innovation ecosystem. This chapter addresses the extent to which the role played by universities in a region's innovation and entrepreneurial practice aligns with the smart specialisation strategic outline. As an in-depth case-study of the University of Aveiro (Portugal), it draws on both quantitative and qualitative data, with an analysis of RIS3 approved projects in the Portuguese NUTS II Centro region, and interviews with key actors within the university and the regional administration. Through this, it weighs the contribution of entrepreneurial universities to the RIS3 goals, drawing lessons for public policy and discussing the future of RIS3.
Entrepreneurial Universities in Regional Innovation
2021
Rhoda was a RUNIN research fellow at the University of Lincoln and has a PhD on the 'Microfoundations of Academics Networks: Initiation, Evolution and Context'. She also holds a BSc. in Biochemistry from the University of Ghana and an MSc. in Innovation and Entrepreneurship from the University of Oslo. She has industrial experience working as a supply chain quality specialist in Nestle Ghana. She is a visiting researcher at the University of Lincoln's International Business School and currently works as a business development manager at a startup company, Wattero AS in the Oslo area.
Regional Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management: Actors, Helices and Consensus Space
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy
European Smart Specialization (S3) policies aim to mobilize innovation and entrepreneurial capabilities and to deliver job creation and economic growth through interregional cooperation. The foundation principles for this policy initiative are an entrepreneurial discovery process that aims to mobilize all stakeholders throughout all stages from conception to strategy implementation; government-led policy initiatives for selecting strategic investment priorities; and building triple helix consensus space for regional policy and strategy implementation. However, the key existing gap resides in a proper investigation of such a consensus space that would fulfill the S3 mission. In this context, this paper outlines the key developments in regional innovation and entrepreneurship that have emerged through the process of S3 development and implementation. The discussion starts with an overview of the challenges and barriers and policy response for building place-based consensus space. We look at critical questions that are addressed by national and regional authorities and the localized mobilization of entrepreneurial and innovation capabilities. Our analysis of the regional innovation and entrepreneurial systems focuses on individual actors within the triple helix model of university-industry and government and their interaction for building a consensus space. We conclude the paper with recommendations for enhanced facilitation and orchestration of interregional value chains.