Gauging Readiness for the Quadruple Helix: A Study of 16 European Organizations

Journal of the Knowledge Economy

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 173-190

  MacGregor, Steven P ^a   Marques Gou, Pilar ^a   Simon Villar, Alexandra ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GIRONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Entrepreneurship; Innovation; Medium sized cities; Policy design; Quadruple helix; SMEs

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873247590     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18687873     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13132-010-0012-9     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Audretsch D, Grimm H, Schuetze S (2009) Local strategies within a European policy framework. Eur Plan Stud 17(3): 463-486.
2. Carayannis E, Alexander J (2002) Is technological learning a firm core competence, when, how and why? A longitudinal, multi-industry study of firm technological learning and market performance. Technovation 22: 625-643.
3. Carayannis E, Campbell D (2009) Knowledge creation, diffusion and use in innovation networks and knowledge clusters: a comparative systems approach across the United States, Europe and Asia. Praeger, Westport.
4. Castro E, Anselmo de C, Rodrigues H, Nogueira F, da Rosa Pires A (1998) Regional innovation systems-the analysis of the Portuguese case based on the triple helix concept. Paper presented at the Triple Helix II Conference, New York/Purchase, January 1998.
5. Chesbrough H (2003) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
6. Delman J, Madsen ST (2007) Nordic triple helix collaboration in knowledge, innovation, and business in China and India: a preliminary study. NIAS-Nordic Institute of Asian Studies, Copenhagen.
7. Dosi G, Llerena P, Labini MS (2005) Evaluating and comparing the innovation performance of the United States and the European Union. Expert report prepared for the TrendChart Policy Workshop.
8. Galbraith B, McAdam R (eds) (2009) Technology analysis and strategic management (TASM). Call for papers. Special issue: managing open innovation in current and emerging intermediaries in the technology transfer process.
9. Gulbrandsen M (1997) Universities and industrial competitive advantage. In: Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L (eds) Universities and the global knowledge economy: a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Printer, London, pp 121-131.
10. Isaksen A (2001) Building regional innovation systems: is endogenous industrial development possible in the global economy? Can J Reg Sci 24(1): 101-120.
11. Khan MR, Al-Ansari M (2005) Sustainable innovation as a corporate strategy. Intellectual Assets Management, Saudi Aramco, Dharan.
12. Kostiainen J, Sotarauta M (2007) Great leap or long march to knowledge economy: institutions, actors and resources in the Development of Tampere, Finland. Eur Plan Stud 10: 5.
13. Leydesdorff L, Etzkowitz H (1998) The triple helix as a model for innovation studies. Sci Public Policy 25(3): 195-203.
14. Liljemark T (2004) Innovation policy in Canada Strategy and realities. Swedish Institute for Growth Policy Studies, Östersund.
15. Lundvall BÅ (ed) (1992) National Systems of Innovation. Pinter, London.
16. MacGregor SP, Marquès P, Simon A, Bikfalvi A, Llach J (2008) CLIQBoost. Creating local innovations for SMEs through a quadruple helix. Baseline research for CLIQ InterregIVC Documenta Universitaria Girona. ISBN: 978-84-92707-34-8.
17. Nelson R (ed) (1993) National innovation systems: a comparative study. New York, Oxford University Press.
18. OECD (2009) Policy responses to the economic crisis: investing in innovation for long-term growth. June 2009.
19. Pavitt K (1984) Sectoral patterns of technical change: towards a taxonomy and a theory. Res Policy 13(6): 343-373.
20. Von Hippel E (2005) Democratizing innovation. The MIT Press, Cambridge.