THE TRIPLE HELIX MODEL OF INNOVATION: THE ROLES OF POLITICAL STABILITY, UNIVERSITIES AND CLUSTERS IN DEVELOPING A SMART ECONOMY
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
The necessity to strengthen institutions within the knowledge triad (Triple Helix) and to intensify their interactions is a pressing issue in contemporary scientific research. The purpose of this article is to examine the mutual influence of institutions such as political and operational stability, university-generated knowledge, and the development of science and technology clusters in fostering the smart economy within the Triple Helix model of innovation. Accordingly, the primary objectives of the study are as follows: firstly, to analyse scholarly sources and factual data in order to define the theoretical framework of the research; and secondly, to use as a sample the countries that host the world's top 100 science and technology clusters (STCs), conducting an empirical investigation to identify the key factors influencing the development of science and technology clusters and to quantify their impact. The research methodology is grounded in a systemic approach that combines general scientific and specific research methods. The qualitative component of the study is dependent on the analysis of scientific literature and factual data on the topic. The quantitative component is based on the standardisation of statistical data, graphical analysis, correlation-regression analysis, and econometric modelling. The information base for the quantitative analysis consists of the Global Innovation Index (GII) pillars and indicators, examined for the countries that host the world's top 100 STCs. This enables a focus on economies that are already demonstrating success in developing a smart economy. The analysis confirms the relevance of the Triple Helix model, in which each actor plays a significant role both for the functioning of the model itself and for shaping the dynamics and character of societal development. The interpretation of the results confirms the systemic importance of factors such as institutional stability and the presence of highly ranked universities for the development of science and technology clusters and the smart economy. The positional map developed in the study enables the visualisation of the positions of key innovation-leading countries, and the design of a priority roadmap based on the identified asymmetries. The empirical model confirms the statistical significance of levers such as political and operational stability and the level of cluster development. Moreover, the impact of political and operational stability is somewhat stronger than that of the university ranking indicator (QS university ranking, top 3). The consolidation of these positions facilitates the establishment of robust cluster ecosystems, and their synergistic integration becomes an effective catalyst for accelerated science-and-technology and economic development at the national level. General recommendations for countries seeking to develop a smart economy include achieving institutional predictability and stable business regulation, building a robust intellectual property protection system, ensuring transparent public–private research and development (R&D), fostering the entrepreneurial functions of universities, managing professional clusters, and strategically focusing on creating powerful cluster ecosystems capable of shaping national development.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
science and technology clusters, entrepreneurial universities, cluster ecosystems, knowledge ecosystem, knowledge chain
Benneworth, P., & Sanderson, A. (2009). The regional engagement of universities: Building capacity in a sparse innovation environment. Higher Education Management and Policy, 21(1), 131–148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/hemp-v21-art2-en
Caccamo, M., &Beckman, S. (2022) Leveraging accelerator spaces to foster knowledge communities. Technovation, Volume 113, 102421. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102421
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2009). Mode 3 and Quadruple Helix: toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. Journal of Technology Transfer, 46(3/4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2009.023374
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2010). Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix and Quintuple Helix and how do knowledge, innovation and the environment relate to each other? International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1):41–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/jsesd.2010010105
Delgado, M., and Porter M. (2021). Clusters and the great recession. Available at SSRN 3819293. SSRN Electronic Journal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3819293
Díez-Vial, I., & Montoro-Sánchez, A. (2016) How knowledge links with universities may foster innovation: The case of a science park. Technovation, Volumes 50–51, Pages 41–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.001
Forliano, C., De Bernardi, P., & Yahiaoui, D. (2020). Entrepreneurial universities: A bibliometric analysis within the business and management domains. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 165: 120522–120522. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120522
Gao, Q., Cui, L., Lew, Y. K., Li, Z., & Khan, Z. (2021) Business incubators as international knowledge intermediaries: Exploring their role in the internationalization of start-ups from an emerging market. Journal of International Management, Volume 27, Issue 4, 100861. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2021.100861
Garcia, A. J. G., & Tuesta, Y. N. (2025) The third mission of universities towards knowledge transfer, innovation, entrepreneurship, and sustainable development: a systematic literature review. Revista de Administração de Empresas. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020250301x
Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship. 17th ed. Geneva: WIPO, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/34667/tind.50062
Järvi, K., Almpanopoulou, F., & Ritala, P. (2018) Organization of knowledge ecosystems: Prefigurative and partial forms. Research Policy. Volume 47, Issue 8, October 2018, Pages 1523–1537. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.05.007
Jucevičius, G. (2022) Knowledge Ecosystem Approach to Addressing the Wicked Problems. Vol. 23 No. 1: Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Knowledge Management. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34190/eckm.23.1.810
Kalenyuk, I., Djakona, A., & Panchenko, Y. (2024). Understanding the knowledge ecosystem: core and forms. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 10(4), 229–244. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2024-10-4-229-2445
Leitão, J., Pereira, D., & Gonçalves, Â. (2022). Business Incubators, Accelerators, and Performance of Technology-Based Ventures: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, Volume 8, Issue 1, 46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010046
Mian, S., Lamine, W., & Fayolle, A. (2016). Technology Business Incubation: An overview of the state of knowledge. Technovation, Volumes 50-51, Pages 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.02.005
Millette, S., Hull, C. E., & Williams, E. (2020). Business incubators as effective tools for driving circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 266, 121999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121999
Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and competition. On competition. Т. 7. 54 p. Available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54fe01fde4b068b128045b78/t/568a998c25981d3d913bba04/1451923852664/Clusters+and+the+economy.1998.pdf
Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Free Press. AVAILABLE AT: https://economie.ens.psl.eu/IMG/pdf/porter_1990_-_the_competitive_advantage_of_nations.pdf
Reichert, S. (2019). The Role of Universities in Regional Innovation Ecosystems. https://www.eua.eu/images/pdf/eua_innovation_ecosystem_report.pdf
Romanovski, O. O. (2012). The Phenomenon of Entrepreneurship in Universities of the World: Monograph. Vinnitsa : Nova Kniga, 504 p. (in Ukrainian)
Rosli, A., & Rossi, F. (2016). Third-mission policy goals and incentives from performance-based funding: Are they aligned? Research Evaluation, 25: 427–441. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvw012
Ryabokon, M., & Pikalov, Y. (2018). Innovative clusters of business accelerators in the sphere of science and technology entrepreneurship. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(5), 291–296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2018-4-5-291-296
Rybnicek, R., & Königsgruber, R. (2019) What makes industry-university collaboration succeed? A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Business Economics, 89: 221–250. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11573-018-0916-6
Schulte, P. (2004). The Entrepreneurial University: a Strategy for Institutional Development. Higher Education in Europe, Vol. 29, no 2, P. 187–193.
Slaughter S. Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University / S. Slaughter, L. Leslie. Baltimore; L.: John Hopkins University Press, 1997.
Soetanto, D., & Jack, S. (2016). The impact of university-based incubation support on the innovation strategy of academic spin-offs. Technovation, Volumes 50-51, 2016, Pages 25–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.11.001
Tijssen, R., Edwards, J., & Jonkers, K. (2021). Regional Innovation Impact of Universities. Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839100536
Trencher, G., Yarime, M., McCormick, K., Doll, C., & Kraines, S. (2014). Beyond the third mission: Exploring the emerging university function of co-creation for sustainability. Science and Public Policy, 41: 151–179. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scipol/sct044
Umanskyi, О. (2025). Institutional framework for developing globally significant science and technology clusters: leading practices for Ukraineʼs smart economy. Scientific Notes, 40(3), р. 326–341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33111/vz_kneu.40.25.03.28.192.198
Vidican, G. (2009). The role of universities in innovation and sustainable development. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 120, Sustainable Development and Planning IV, Vol. 1, 131–139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP090131
Vodă, A. I., Bortoş, S., & Şoitu, D. T. (2023). Knowledge Ecosystem: A Sustainable Theoretical Approach. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 12(2), 47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2023.v12n2p47
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Global Innovation Index 2022: What is the future of innovation-driven growth? 15th ed. Geneva: WIPO, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34667/tind.46596
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Global Innovation Index 2023: Innovation in the face of uncertainty. 16th ed. Geneva: WIPO, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34667/tind.48220
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship. 17th ed. Geneva: WIPO, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34667/tind.50062
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.