"Open Innovation" and "Triple Helix" Models of Innovation: Can Synergy in Innovation Systems Be Measured?

The model of "Open Innovations" (OI) can be compared with the "Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations" (TH) as attempts to find surplus value in bringing industrial innovation closer to public R&D. Whereas the firm is central in the model of OI, the TH adds multi-centeredness: in addition to firms, universities and (e.g., regional) governments can take leading roles in innovation eco-systems. In addition to the (transversal) technology transfer at each moment of time, one can focus on the dynamics in the feedback loops. Under specifiable conditions, feedback loops can be turned into feedforward ones that drive innovation eco-systems towards self-organization and the auto-catalytic generation of new options. The generation of options can be more important than historical realizations ("best practices") for the longer-term viability of knowledge-based innovation systems. A system without sufficient options, for example, is locked-in. The generation of redundancy -- the Triple Helix indicator -- can be used as a measure of unrealized but technologically feasible options given a historical configuration. Different coordination mechanisms (markets, policies, knowledge) provide different perspectives on the same information and thus generate redundancy. Increased redundancy not only stimulates innovation in an eco-system by reducing the prevailing uncertainty; it also enhances the synergy in and innovativeness of an innovation system.Comment: Journal of Open Innovations: Technology, Market and Complexity, 2(1) (2016) 1-12; doi:10.1186/s40852-016-0039-

The Triple Helix in the context of global change: dynamics and challenges

Understanding how economies change through interactions with science and government as different spheres of activity requires both new conceptual tools and methodologies. In this paper, the evolution of the metaphor of a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations is elaborated into an evolutionary model, and positioned within the context of global economic changes. We highlight how Triple Helix relations are both continuing and mutating, and the conditions under which a Triple Helix might be seen to be unraveling in the face of pressures on each of the three helices – university, industry, and government. The reciprocal dynamics of innovation both in the Triple Helix thesis and in the global economy are empirically explored: we find that footlooseness of high technology manufacturing and knowledge-intensive services counteract the embeddedness prevailing in medium technology manufacturing. The geographical level at which synergy in Triple Helix relations can be expected and sustained varies among nations and regions

La cuestión tecnológica y la organización de la investigación agropecuaria en América Latina Procesos sociales e innovación tecnológica en la agricultura de América Latina

80 páginasA fines de la década de 1950, se crearon en América Latina, instituciones públicas de gran dimensión, dedicadas a la investigación y difusión de nuevas tecnologías para el agro. Estas instituciones constituyeron durante los últimos 25 años, las principales fuentes de oferta tecnológica para el sector agropecuario y estuvieron presentes directamente o indirectamente, en todos los procesos de cambio técnico. Se examina en este trabajo, lo acontecido en estas instituciones. El análisis no se circunscribe a lo que ocurrió en su interior, situación que es imposible comprender sin antes ubicar a las instituciones dentro de una evolución histórica y en el contexto donde actúan. Esta doble imagen, dinámica y contextual, permite discernir mejor sus problemas, las tendencias a las que están sometidas y sus posibilidades futuras. La información analítica es presentada en cuatro secciones: (1) la creación y evolución de los institutos nacionales de investigación agrícola en algunos países de América Latina; (2) participación del sector público en la generación y difusión de tecnología en las ocho situaciones específicas referidas a los estudios de caso presentados en otros análisis; (3) procesos históricos descritos; y (4) comentarios generales sobre la funcionalidad de los institutos nacionales en América Latina