Examining the Trilateral Networks of the Triple Helix: Intermediating Organizations and Academy-Industry-Government Relations

Abstract

This article builds upon the concept of the trilateral networks of the triple-helix model in order to understand the role of organizations that operate in the spaces between institutions of higher education, industrial firms, and government agencies. Organizations situated in this interstitial space between public and private entities have been found to actively influence the formation of academy-industry-government relationships through the exchange of actors, resources, and commerce. These ‘intermediating organizations’ are often nonprofit organizations, including professional associations, foundations, consortia, independent research support organizations, and special interest groups. In this study a new conceptual model is proposed and illustrated through the use of examples of intermediating organizations in North America.

Intermediation for technology diffusion and user innovation in a developing rural economy: a social learning perspective

“…universities, regional government agencies and co-located agribusinesses, and play an important role in the 6 success of such policy initiatives (Vorontas 2002;Pietrobelli and Rabellotti 2004;Beddington and Farrington 2007;Metcalfe 2010 …”

“…adoption of technology with modifications), along with enhancement of supply and demand-side human capital in these sectors, is regarded as crucial (Alcorta and Peres 1998;Etzkowitz and Brisolla 1999;Cimoli, Ferraz and Primi 2005;Beddington and Farrington 2007;Saad and Zawdie 2011). Yet, these national innovation systems appear to have evolved into weak entities, with human capital remaining low and science and technology institutions, especially universities, not fully performing an enabling role (Bebbington and Thiele 1993;Bastos and Cooper 2005;Beddington and Farrington 2007;Metcalfe 2010). A multitude of challenges have been identified in the literature, covering a broad geography (Bercovitz and Feldman 2006;Anderson, Daim and Lavoie 2007;Decter, Bennett and Leseure 2007;Hervas-Oliver et al 2012;Ranga and Etzkowitz 2013).…”

“…Despite policy making efforts for a 'triple helix' of cooperative relations among university, government and rural industry, the links and interactions between these stakeholders remain tenuous (Kaimovitz 2002;Cimoli, Ferraz and Primi 2005;Beddington and Farrington 2007;Guerra Portocarrero 2013). Third sector think tanks and research and advisory (service provision) centres, are deemed as having the potential to play a significant role in addressing this problem, by coordinating stakeholders, enabling clustering and facilitating the technology transfer process in strategic sectors, such as agri-food industries (Vorontas 2002;Reece and Sumberg 2003;Pietrobelli and Rabellotti 2004;Beddington and Farrington 2007;Metcalfe 2010). …”

Untitled

“…These non-players can be further divided into facilitators and sponsors. The latter type of orchestrators have their individual goals coupled with collective goals (consider, for example, venture capitalists and business incubators; Comacchio et al, 2012;Napier et al, 2012), whereas the facilitators' main concern is the wellbeing and functioning of the network: they are not as interested in utilizing the innovation outcomes themselves, nor are they orchestrating the networks for financial gain (see Fichter, 2009;Hurmelinna-Laukkanen & Nätti, 2012;Metcalfe, 2010).…”

Intermediation in intermediation: triple helix innovation and intermediary legal organisation

“…In other words, triple helix intermediation, in current application, remains both under-planned and under-institutionalised. Similarly, the intermediation of triple helix trilateral networks remains significantly understudied (Metcalfe 2010;Suvinen et al 2010). Given the 'previously buffered … space between firms and campuses' (Metcalfe 2010: 504) and the continued institutional isolation of each of the university-industry-government helices, it further appears that the design and provision of efficient legal intermediation practices and organisations should be of paramount importance for purposes of transcending the long-standing and pervasively practised institutional separateness and resistance to innovate and transform (see Tuunainen (2002)) among the helices, as well as for developing the institutional foundations of a sustainable intra-, inter-and, in particular, supra-helical intermediation infrastructure.…”