The Transformation Of University-industry-government Relations

Leydesdorff, Loet and Etzkowitz, Henry (2001) The Transformation Of University-industry-government Relations. Electronic Journal of Sociology 5(4).

Full text available as:
HTML

Abstract

A transformation in the functions of university, industry, and government, the “triple helix,” is taking place as each institution can increasingly assume the role of the other. The Triple Helix thesis states that the knowledge infrastructure can be explained in terms of these changing relationships. Arrangements and networks among the three institutional spheres provide input and sustainance to science-based innovation processes. In this new configuration, academia can play a role as a source of firm-formation, technological, and regional development, in addition to its traditional role as a provider of trained persons and basic knowledge.

EPrint Type:	Journal (On-line/Unpaginated)
Subjects:	Science Technology Studies
ID Code:	114
Deposited On:	09 August 2002
Alternative Locations:	http://www.sociology.org/content/vol005.004/th.html
Eprint Statistics:	View statistics for this eprint
Tell A Colleague:	Tell a colleague about it.

Abramowitz, Moses (1956) “Resource and Output Trends in the United States since 1870.” American Economic Review, 46: 5-23.

Arrow, Kenneth J. (1962) “The economic implications of learning by doing.” Review of Economic Studies, 29: 155-173.

Arthur, W. Brian (1994) Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Arthur, W. Brian, Yuri M. Ermoliev, and Yuri M. Kaniovski, (1987) “Path Dependence Processes and the Emergence of Macro-Structure.” European Journal of Operational Research 30: 294-303.

Barnes, S. B., and R. G. A. Dolby (1970) “The Scientific Ethos: A deviant viewpoint.” Archives européennes de sociologie 23: 3-25.

Barras, Richard (1990) “Interactive innovation in financial and business services: The vanguard of the service revolution.” Research Policy, 19: 215-237.

Bell, Daniel (1973) The Coming of Post-Industrial Society. New York: Basic Books.

Cowan, Robin, and Dominique Foray (1997) “The Economics of Codification and the Diffusion of Knowledge.” Industrial and Corporate Change, 6: 595-622.

Cutcliffe, Stephen H. (2000) Ideas, Machines, and Values: An introduction to science, technology, and society studies. Lanham, etc.: Rowman & Littlefield.

David, Paul A. (1992) “Path-dependence and predictability in dynamic systems with local network externalities,” in: Dominique Foray and Christopher Freeman (Eds.), Technology and the Wealth of Nations. London: Pinter, pp. 208-231.

Etzkowitz, Henry (1986) “Interviews, University-Industry Relations Study.” Washington, DC: U.S. National Science Foundation.

Etzkowitz, Henry (2001) “The Second Academic Revolution and the Rise of Entrepreneurial Science.” IEEE Technology and Society, 22 (2): 18-29.

Etzkowitz, Henry (In Press) “Patents,” in: The Oxford Companion to the History of Modern Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Etzkowitz, Henry, Magnus Gulbrandsen and Janet Levitt (2001) Public Venture Capital: Sources of Government Funding for Technology Entrepreneurs. New York: Aspen/Kluwer, 2 nd edition.

Freeman, Christopher, and Carlota Perez (1988) “Structural crises of adjustment, business cycles and investment behaviour,” in: Giovanni Dosi, Chistopher Freeman, Richard Nelson, Gerald Silverberg, and Luc Soete (Eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory. London: Pinter, pp. 38-66.

Fujigaki, Yuko (1998). “Filling the Gap between Discussions on Science and Scientists’ Everyday Activities: Applying the Autopoiesis System Theory to Scientific Knowledge.” Social Science Information 37(1): 5-22.

Fujigaki, Yuko, and Loet Leydesdorff (2000). “Quality Control and Validation Boundaries in a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations: ‘Mode 2’ and the Future of University Research,” Social Science Information 39 (4): 635-655.

Galbraith, John Kenneth (1967) The New Industrial State. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Gibbons, Michael, Camille Limoges, Helga Nowotny, Simon Schwartzman, Peter Scott, and Martin Trow (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.

Giddens, Anthony (1976) New Rules of Sociological Method. London: Hutchinson.

Giddens, Anthony (1984) The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Gilbert, G. Nigel, and Michael J. Mulkay (1994) Opening Pandora’s Box. A Sociological Analysis of Scientists’ Discoures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Guston, David J. (2000) Between Politics and Science: Assuring the Integrity and Productivity of Research. Cambridge, etc.: Cambridge University Press.

Jacobs, Merle, and Tomas Hellström (Eds.) (2000) The Future of Knowledge Production in the Academy. Buckingham/Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Jencks, Christophter and David Riesman (1968) The Academic Revolution. New York: Doubleday.

Jones-Evans, Dylan, and Magnus Klofsten (1998) “The Role of the university in the technology transfer process: a European view.” Science & Public Policy 25(6): 373-380.

Kaghan, William and Gerald B. Barnett (1997) “The Desktop Model of Innovation in Digital Media,” in: Henry Etzkowitz and Loet Leydesdorff (Eds.), Universities and the Global Knowledge Economy: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. London: Cassell Academic, pp. 71-81.

Klofsten, Magnus, Dylan Jones-Evans, and Carina Schärberg (1999). “Growing the Linköping Technopole—A longitudinal study of the Triple Helix development in Sweden.” Journal of Technology Transfer 24 (2/3): 125-138.

Knorr-Cetina, Karin (1999) Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kuhn, Thomas S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Latour, Bruno (1987). Science in Action. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Leydesdorff, Loet (2000) “Are EU Networks Anticipatory Systems? An empirical and analytical approach,” in: Daniel M. Dubois (Ed.), Computing Anticipatory Systems – CASYS’99. Woodbury, NY: American Physics Institute, pp. 171-181.

Leydesdorff, Loet (2001) A Sociological Theory of Communication: The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society. Parkland, FL: Universal Publishers; at <http://www.upublish.com/books/leydesdorff.htm>.

Leydesdorff, Loet, and Peter van den Besselaar (Eds.) (1994) Evolutionary Economics and Chaos Theory: New Directions in Technology Studies. London/ New York: Pinter.

Leydesdorff, Loet, and Zeng Guoping (2001) “University-Industry-Government Relations in China: An emergent national system of innovations.” Industry and Higher Education, 15(3): 179-182.

Lissenburgh, Stephen, and Rebecca Harding (2000) Knowledge Links: Innovation in university/business partnerships. London: IPPR.

Lundvall, Bengt-Åke (1988) “Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation,” in: Giovanni Dosi, Christopher Freeman, Richard Nelson, Gerald Silverberg, and Luc Soete (Eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory. London: Pinter, pp. 349-369.

Machlup, Fritz (1952) The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press

Mansfield, E. (1991) “Academic research and industrial innovation,” Research Policy, 20(1): 1-12.

Marx, Karl (1858) Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen Oekonomie. Moscow, 1939.

Merton, Robert K. (1957) Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.

Mills, C. Wright (1957) The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.

Mills, C. Wright (1958). The Causes of World War Three. New York: Ballantine. books.

Moso, Monica, and Mikel Olazaran (forthcoming). “Regional technology policies and the emergence of an RTD system in the Basque Country,” Journal of Technology Transfer (in press).

Müller, Karel, and Henry Etzkowitz (2000) “S&T Human Resources: The comparative advantage of the post-socialist countries.” Science and Public Policy 27(4): 285-291.

Narin, F., K. S. Hamilton, and D. Olivastro (1997) “The Increasing Linkage Between U.S. Technology and Public Science.” Research Policy 26: 317-320.

Nelson, Richard R. (Ed.) (1993) National Innovation Systems: A comparative study. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

Nelson, Richard R. and Sidney G. Winter (1975) “Growth theory from an evolutionary perspective: the differential productivity growth puzzle.” American Economic Review, 65: 338-344.

Nelson, Richard R. and Sidney G. Winter (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

Nowak, Michael J., and Charles E. Grantham (2000) “The virtual incubator: managing human capital in the software industry.” Research Policy 29(2): 125-134.

Nowotny, Helga, Peter Scott, and Michael Gibbons (2001) Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.

OECD (1964) The Residual Factor and Economic Growth. Paris: OECD.

Parsons, Talcott (1951) The Social System. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul

Parsons, Talcott, and Gerald M. Platt (1975). The American University. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Pinch, Trevor J. (1985) “Towards and Analysis of Scientific Observation: The Externality and Evidential Significance of Observational Reports in Physics.” Social Studies of Science 15: 3-36.

Radosevic, Slavo (1999) “Transformation of S&T systems into systems of innovation in central and eastern Europe: the emerging patterns of recombination, path-dependency and change.” Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 10 (3-4): 277-320.

Riba, Marta, and Loet Leydesdorff (2001). “Why Catalonia cannot be considered as a Regional Innovation System.” Scientometrics 50 (2): 215-240.

Rose, C. “Organizational Technology Transfer: U.S/Japan,” SUNY Science Policy Institute, unpublished manuscript.

Sábato, J. A. (1997) “Bases para un régimen de tecnología.” Redes, 4(10): 119-137.

Sábato, J. and Botana, N. (1968) “La Ciencia y la Tecnología en el Desarrollo Futuro de America Latina.” Paper presented at The World Order Models Conference, Bellagio, Italy, 25-30 September 1968.

Schumpeter, Joseph (1943) Socialism, Capitalism and Democracy, London: Allen & Unwin.

Van den Belt, Henk, and Arie Rip (1987) “The Nelson-Winter-Dosi model and synthetic dye chemistry,” in: Wiebe Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch (Eds.) The Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press, pp. 135-58.

Van Lente, H. en A. Rip (1998), ‘The Rise of Membrane Technology. From Rhetorics to Social Reality,’ Social Studies of Science, 28 (2), 221-254.

Wouters, Paul, Loet Leydesdorff, and Jan Annerstedt (1999) The European Guide to Science, Technology, and Innovation Studies. Luxembourg: European Commission.

Zuckerman, Harriet, and Robert K. Merton (1971) “Patterns of Evaluation in Science: Institutionalisation, Structure and Functions of the Referee System.” Minerva 9(1): 66-100.