Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quintuple helix structure of Sino-Korean research collaboration in science

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Triple Helix Model has been used for science-mapping in research collaboration since the 1980s. As knowledge-producing activities have rapidly expanded and become interrelated, the triple helix framework is limited in uncovering a broader range of stakeholders and multilateral collaborative activities. In this vein, the present study employs the N-tuple Helix Model as a suitable alternative to analyze the structure of scientific collaboration networks beyond university–industry–government (UIG) relations. The networks of N-tuple Helix relations embedded in Sino-Korean research collaboration are examined in terms of five actors, such as universities, industries, governments, hospitals, and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). The results found that the quintuple helical network exists in Sino-Korean research collaboration. While traditional UIG actors play a pivotal role, hospital and NGO sectors emerge as new drivers for knowledge production and innovation. Each sector is significantly associated with the others and plays distinctive roles and functions. The overall findings provide new insight into a possible change in the traditional Triple Helix framework by demonstrating an alternative “five-helix model” of innovation as a new evolving structure and new dynamic of international collaboration in science.

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
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, P. (2017). More than half of China’s research includes international co-authors. Publishing perspective. https://publishingperspectives.com/2017/05/nature-index-china-research-international-co-authors/. Accessed May 8, 2017.

  • Arntzen-Bechina, A. A., & Leguy, C. A. D. (2007). An insight into knowledge flow in biomedical engineering science. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(2), 153–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonacich, P. (1972). Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 2(1), 113–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (1997). Network analysis of 2-mode data. Social Networks, 19, 243–269.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET for windows: Software for social network. Massachusetts: Analytic Technologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Barth, T. D., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2012). The quintuple helix innovation model: Global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2009). ‘Mode 3’ and ‘Quadruple Helix’: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3/4), 201–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, I., Kim, D., & Chun, C. (2016). Web-based consumer involvement indices and vegetable consumption: The quantification of unstructured information and an exploration of a causal relationship. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society, 18(3A), 1259–1270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, S. E., & Park, H. W. (2012). Comparative analysis of Twitter use between South Koreans and Russians: An exploratory study. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society, 14(4), 1827–1838.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, S. J. (2012). Core-periphery, new clusters, or rising stars? International scientific collaboration among ‘‘Advanced’’ countries in the era of globalization. Scientometrics, 90, 25–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, S. J., Yang, J. S. W., & Park, H. W. (2015b). Quantifying the triple helix relationship in scientific research: Statistical analyses on the dividing pattern between develop and developing countries. Quality & Quantity, 49, 1381–1396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, C. J., Barnett, G. A., Lim, Y. S., Kim, J. H., Moon, S., & Park, H. W. (2016). A structural analysis of international migration: Focusing on social, cultural, and historical Factors. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society, 18(2A), 671.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corpakis, D. (2016). Global crises-searching for solution. Presented at the Triple Helix international conference 2016. Heidelberg, Germany.

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2016). Entrepreneurial university and Triple Helix. Presented at the Triple Helix international conference 2016. Heidelberg, Germany.

  • Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. C., Borgatti, S. P., & White, D. R. (1991). Centrality in valued graphs: A measure of betweenness based on network flow. Social Networks, 13(2), 141–154.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Godin, B., & Gingras, Y. (2000). The place of universities in the system of knowledge production. Research Policy, 29, 273–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, G. H., & Jin, S. H. (2014). Introduction to big data and the case study of its applications. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society, 16(3), 1337–1352. (in Korean).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kastrin, A., Klisara, J., Lužar, B., & Povh, J. (2017). Analysis of Slovenian research community through bibliographic networks. Scientometrics, 110(2), 791–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenekayoro, P., Buckley, K., & Thelwall, M. (2015). Clustering research group website homepages. Scientometrics, 102(3), 2023–2039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, K. S., Park, H. W., So, M. H., & 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 

  • Lander, B. (2013). Sectoral collaboration in biomedical research and development. Scientometrics, 94, 343–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E., & Stek, P. E. (2016). Shifting alliances in international organizations: A social networks analysis of co-sponsorship of UN GA resolutions, 1976–2012. Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia, 15(2), 191–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg, M., & Lindgren, M. (2010). The role of NGOs in supporting women’s entrepreneurship: A study of a Quadruple Helix project in the Baltic sea region. Quadruple Helix Reports, 2010(4), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundberg, H. (2013). Triple helix in practice: The key role of boundary spanners. European Journal of Innovation Management, 16(2), 211–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B.-Å. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter Publishers.

    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 

  • Murray, F. (2002). Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: Exploring tissue engineering. Research Policy, 31, 1389–1403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H. W. (2014). Transition from the triple helix to N-tuple helices? An interview with Elias G. Carayannis and David F. J. Campbell. Scientometrics, 99(1), 203–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2013). Decomposing social and semantic networks in emerging ‘‘big data’’ research. Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 756–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H. W., Yoon, J. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2016). The normalization of co-authorship networks in the bibliometric evaluation: The government stimulation programs of China and Korea. Scientometrics, 109(2), 1017–1036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1990). Competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Prell, C. (2012). Social network analysis: History, theory and methodology. UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skoric, M. (2014). The implications of big data for developing and transitional economies: Extending the Triple Helix? Scientometrics, 99(1), 175–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, J., & Jiang, C. (2014). Sino-South Korean scientific collaboration based on co-authored SCI papers. Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice, 2(1), 48–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, Y., & Negishi, M. (2010). Measuring the relationships among university, industry and other sectors in Japan’s national innovation system: A comparison of new approaches with mutual information indicators. Scientometrics, 82(3), 677–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2015). UNESCO science report: Towards 2030. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Geenhuizen, N. (2016). Living labs as boundary-spanners between Triple Helix actors. Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia, 15(1), 78–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L. D. A., & Woodson, T. S. (2012). The future of innovation studies in less economically developed countries. Minerva, 50, 221–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, E., & Ding, Y. (2009). Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network Analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 60(10), 2107–2118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Y., & Holgaard, J. E. (2012). The important role of civil society groups in eco-innovation: A triple helix perspective. Journal of Knowledge-based Innovation in China, 4(2), 132–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, H., & Jung, W. S. (2016). Assessing Knowledge Structures for Public Research Institutes. Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia, 15(1), 27–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, J. W. (2015). The evolution of South Korea’s innovation system: Moving towards the triple helix model? Scientometrics, 104, 265–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, J. W., & Park, H. W. (2016). Triple Helix dynamics of South Korea’s innovation system: A network analysis of inter-regional technological collaborations. Quality & Quantity. doi:10.1007/s11135-016-0346-x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, J. W., & Park, H. W. (2017). The unbalanced dynamics in Sino-South Korea scientific and technological collaboration: A triple helix perspective with insights from paper and patent network analysis. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 25(1), 184–198.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author acknowledges that this work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2015S1A5B5A01015224).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Soongsil University, 369 Sangdo-Ro, Dongjak-Gu, Seoul, 06978, South Korea

    Jungwon Yoon

  2. Bioinformatics Institute, Macrogen Inc., 908 World Meridian Venture Center, #254 Beotkkot-ro, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul, 08511, South Korea

    Joshua SungWoo Yang

  3. Department of Media and Communication, Interdisciplinary Program of Digital Convergence Business, YeungNam University, 214-1, Dae-dong, Gyeongsan-si, Gyeongsangbuk-do, 712-749, South Korea

    Han Woo Park

Authors
  1. Jungwon Yoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joshua SungWoo Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Han Woo Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Han Woo Park.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yoon, J., Yang, J.S. & Park, H.W. Quintuple helix structure of Sino-Korean research collaboration in science. Scientometrics 113, 61–81 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2476-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2476-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation