Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Triple helix in the science and technology innovation centers of China from the perspective of mutual information: a comparative study between Beijing and Shanghai

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we measure the systemness of the triple helix (TH) relationship of universities, industries, and governments (UIGs) of Beijing and Shanghai science and technology innovation centers from the perspectives of horizontal comparison and vertical evolution. Information entropy theory and TH indicators are used to measure the author’s institutional information based on the Web of Science core collection database from 2008 to 2017. The TH network is measured by mutual information among institutions. Research reveals that relative to governments and industries, universities are the main force of innovation. University–government bilateral cooperation represents the tightest type of network in Shanghai. By contrast, university–industry bilateral cooperation in Beijing is the tightest in latest years. The innovation system of UIG cooperation in Beijing and Shanghai has started to take shape. However, the tightness of TH relationships in both cities displayed long-term trends of weakening, and the centrifugal force of each innovation subject was greater than the centripetal force. Accordingly, we propose policy recommendations to optimize the TH innovation network of science and technology innovation centers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Sources: Howlett et al. (2009) and Li and Lin (2011)

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In November 1995, China announced the plans for the twenty-first century to focus on the construction of 100 universities and a number of key disciplines.

  2. In May 1998, Zemin Jiang, President of the state, announced at the 100th anniversary celebration of the Peking University: “To achieve modernization, China must have a number of first-class universities with advanced world standards.” Then, the “985 project” began to start the construction.

  3. In April 2011, President Jintao Hu established the concept and requirement of “promoting collaborative innovation” in his speech at the centennial celebration of Tsinghua University. On this basis, the “2011 plan,” which aimed to enhance the capability of universities to cooperate with other main bodies, was launched.

  4. In November 2015, the Chinese government decided to co-ordinate the construction of world-class universities and first-class disciplines, or “Double First-Class Project” A total of 137 universities were built by the first batch of world-class universities.

References

  • Auerswald, P. E., & Branscomb, L. M. (2003). Valleys of death and Darwinian seas: Financing the invention to innovation transition in the United States. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(3–4), 227–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, X., & Liu, X. (2012). Relationship among university, industry and government based on the perspective of SCI. Forum on Science & Technology in China, 8, 16–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-C. (2008). Why do multinational corporations locate their advanced R&D centres in Beijing? The Journal of Development Studies, 44(5), 622–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Q., & Liu, X. (2015). The measurement of urban innovation system based on triple helix theory——Comparative study between Shanghai and Tokyo. Forum on Science & Technology in China, 9, 17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, S., Yang, J. S., & Park, H. W. (2015). The triple helix and international collaboration in science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(1), 201–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, C. J. (2014). An analysis of the status of the triple helix and university–industry–government relationships in Asia. Scientometrics, 99(1), 139–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, P. (1992). Regional innovation systems: Competitive regulation in the new Europe. Geoforum, 23(3), 365–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, P., & Memedovic, O. (2003). Strategies for regional innovation systems: Learning transfer and applications. Vienna: United Nations Industrial Development Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, P., Uranga, M. G., & Etxebarria, G. (1997). Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions. Research Policy, 26(4–5), 475–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diez, J. R. (2002). Metropolitan innovation systems: A comparison between Barcelona, Stockholm, and Vienna. International Regional Science Review, 25(1), 63–85.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2002). Networks of innovation: Science, technology and development in the triple helix era. International Journal of Technology Management & Sustainable Development, 1(1), 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Social Science Information, 42(3), 293–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The triple helix–university–industry–government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 14(1), 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1997). Universities in the global knowledge economy: A triple helix of academic–industry–government relations. London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagerberg, J., & Srholec, M. (2008). National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development. Research Policy, 37(9), 1417–1435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, M. M., Diez, J. R., Snickars, F., & Varga, A. (2001). Metropolitan innovation systems: Theory and evidence from three Metropolitan Regions in Europe. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C. (1987). Technology and economic performance: Lessons from Japan, edn. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gassmann, O., & Han, Z. (2004). Motivations and barriers of foreign R&D activities in China. R&D Management, 34(4), 423–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossain, M. D., Moon, J., Kang, H. G., Lee, S. C., & Choe, Y. C. (2012). Mapping the dynamics of knowledge base of innovations of R&D in Bangladesh: Triple helix perspective. Scientometrics, 90(1), 57–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., & Perl, A. (2009). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystems (Vol. 3). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (1969). The economy of cities. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan, G. F., Cho, S. E., & Han, W. P. (2012). A comparison of the Daegu and Edinburgh musical industries: A triple helix approach. Scientometrics, 90(1), 85–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, G. F., & Han, W. P. (2011). Measuring the triple helix on the web: Longitudinal trends in the university–industry–government relationship in Korea. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2443–2455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., Huang, M., Jin, F., Bodoff, D., Moon, J., & Choe, Y. C. (2012). Triple helix in the agricultural sector of Northeast Asian countries: A comparative study between Korea and China. Scientometrics, 90(1), 101–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0517-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, K.-S., Park, H. W., So, M., & Leydesdorff, L. (2012). Has globalization strengthened South Korea’s national research system? National and international dynamics of the triple helix of scientific co-authorship relationships in South Korea. Scientometrics, 90(1), 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lebeau, L.-M., Laframboise, M.-C., Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2008). The effect of university–industry collaboration on the scientific impact of publications: The Canadian case, 1980–2005. Research Evaluation, 17(3), 227–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. H., & Kim, Y. (2016). Analyzing interaction in R&D networks using the triple helix method: Evidence from industrial R&D programs in Korean government. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 110, 93–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2003). The mutual information of university–industry–government relations: An indicator of the triple helix dynamics. Scientometrics, 58(2), 445–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The triple helix, quadruple helix,…, and an N-tuple of helices: Explanatory models for analyzing the knowledge-based economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3(1), 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Dolfsma, W., & Van der Panne, G. (2006). Measuring the knowledge base of an economy in terms of triple-helix relations among ‘technology, organization, and territory’. Research Policy, 35(2), 181–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (1996). Emergence of a triple helix of university—industry—government relations. Science and Public Policy, 23(5), 279–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The triple helix as a model for innovation studies. Science and Public Policy, 25(3), 195–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Fritsch, M. (2006). Measuring the knowledge base of regional innovation systems in Germany in terms of a triple helix dynamics. Research Policy, 35(10), 1538–1553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Park, H. W., & Lengyel, B. (2014). A routine for measuring synergy in university–industry–government relations: Mutual information as a Triple-Helix and Quadruple-Helix indicator. Scientometrics, 99(1), 27–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Perevodchikov, E., & Uvarov, A. (2015). Measuring triple-helix synergy in the Russian innovation systems at regional, provincial, and national levels. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(6), 1229–1238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Sun, Y. (2009). National and international dimensions of the triple helix in Japan: University–industry–government versus international coauthorship relations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 60(4), 778–788.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Zhou, P. (2014). Measuring the knowledge-based economy of China in terms of synergy among technological, organizational, and geographic attributes of firms. Scientometrics, 98(3), 1703–1719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, S., & Lin, N. (2011). The changes of University–Industry Collaboration Policy Analysis in China. Science of Science & Management of S & T, 32(11), 21–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, F., Zhang, X., & Qin, W. (2007). Review on the theory of urban innovation system. Urban Problems, 10, 29–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M.-C., & Chen, S.-H. (2012). MNCs’ offshore R&D networks in host country’s regional innovation system: The case of Taiwan-based firms in China. Research Policy, 41(6), 1107–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E., Jr. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B.-Å., Johnson, B., Andersen, E. S., & Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research Policy, 31(2), 213–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marceau, J. (2008). Innovation in the city and innovative cities. Innovation: Management, Policy and Practice, 10(2-3), 136–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGill, W. J. (1954). Multivariate information transmission. Psychometrika, 19(2), 97–116.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M., Grant, K., Morlacchi, P., & Weckowska, D. (2014). Triple helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: A bibliometric perspective. Scientometrics, 99(1), 151–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ni, P.-F., Bai, J., & Xu, Y. (2011). The key factors and mechanism of city innovation system——Based on the SEM with the data of 436 sample cities worldwide. China Industrial Economics, 2, 16–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, H. W., Hong, H. D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). A comparison of the knowledge-based innovation systems in the economies of South Korea and the Netherlands using triple helix indicators. Scientometrics, 65(1), 3–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Longitudinal trends in networks of university–industry–government relations in South Korea: The role of programmatic incentives. Research Policy, 39(5), 640–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pei-Feng, L. I., & Rui-Min, M. A. (2015). International comparative study on the institutional mechanism of collaborative innovation based on triple helix——Biology and Chemistry discipline group as a case. R & D Management, 27(4), 85–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranga, M., & Etzkowitz, H. (2013). Triple helix systems: An analytical framework for innovation policy and practice in the knowledge society. Industry & Higher Education, 27(4), 237–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Razak, A. A., & Saad, M. (2007). The role of universities in the evolution of the triple helix culture of innovation network: The case of Malaysia. International Journal of Technology Management & Sustainable Development, 6(3), 211–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupika, A. U., & Singh, V. K. (2016). Measuring the university–industry–government collaboration in Indian research output. Current Science, 110(10), 1904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(4), 379–423.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, M. (2007). The triple helix paradigm in Korea: A test for new forms of capital. International Journal of Technology Management & Sustainable Development, 6(3), 171–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, J. C., Lee, S. J., & Kim, Y. (2012). Knowledge-based innovation and collaboration: A triple-helix approach in Saudi Arabia. Scientometrics, 90(1), 311–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swar, B., & Khan, G. F. (2013). An analysis of the information technology outsourcing domain: A social network and triple helix approach. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 64(11), 2366–2378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor Buck, N., & While, A. (2017). Competitive urbanism and the limits to smart city innovation: The UK Future Cities initiative. Urban Studies, 54(2), 501–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theil, H. (1972). Statistical decomposition analysis: With applications in the social and administrative sciences. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 136(3), 462.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608–1618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, K. (2013). University–industry–government relations based on mutual information: Comparative study between China and South Korea. Journal of Intelligence, 32(4), 187–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ye, F. Y., Yu, S. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2013). The triple helix of university–industry–government relations at the country level and its dynamic evolution under the pressures of globalization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(11), 2317–2325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yimin, Z., & Zhixiong, Z. (2013). A review of measuring the triple helix using quantitative approach. Journal of Intelligence, 32(4), 85–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, S., Cacciolatti, L., Lee, S. H., & Song, W. (2015). Regional collaborations and indigenous innovation capabilities in China: A multivariate method for the analysis of regional innovation systems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 94, 202–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China Youth Science Fund Project (No. 71701191) and the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2016M602041). At the same time, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to Editor-in-Chief, Wolfgang Glänzel, and the three anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments, which has improved the quality of this research. Finally, we are very grateful to the University of Science and Technology of China for providing good research resources and environment.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Public Affairs, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, 230026, China

    Weimin Kang, Shuliang Zhao & Wei Song

  2. Research Center for Scientific and Technological Innovation and Regional Development, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, 230026, China

    Weimin Kang, Shuliang Zhao & Wei Song

  3. School of Economics and Management, Weifang University, Weifang, 261061, China

    Tao Zhuang

Authors
  1. Weimin Kang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shuliang Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wei Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tao Zhuang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuliang Zhao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kang, W., Zhao, S., Song, W. et al. Triple helix in the science and technology innovation centers of China from the perspective of mutual information: a comparative study between Beijing and Shanghai. Scientometrics 118, 921–940 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03017-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03017-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation