Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Helix Trilogy: the Triple, Quadruple, and Quintuple Innovation Helices from a Theory, Policy, and Practice Set of Perspectives

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For an understanding of the concept of the Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Systems, it is essential to realize that the Quadruple and Quintuple Helices are based on democracy and ecology. This has two implications: (1) the further advancement and evolution of knowledge and innovation are requiring a co-evolution with democracy or knowledge democracy, and (2) ecology, ecological sensitivity, and environmental protection are a necessity for the survival of humanity, but they should also be regarded as drivers for further knowledge production and innovation development. This implies that for an innovation system to be a Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation System, the government and the political system, addressing the innovation system, must be democratic in substance, and not only in form. This indicates how a Quadruple and Quintuple Helix differs from Triple Helix approaches to innovation. Furthermore, within the framework of Quadruple and Quintuple Helix, the “Democracy of Climate” for innovation and the “Democracy of Knowledge” are combined together in creating a nexus. Implications for strategy, policy, and practice are manifold, also incorporating aspects of Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0.

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

Source: authors’ own conceptualization and adopted from Carayannis and Campbell (2009)

Fig. 2

Source: authors’ own conceptualization; see also Carayannis and Campbell (2009, p. 207; 2010, p. 62; 2014), Carayannis et al. (2012, p. 4), Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (2000, p. 112), and Danilda et al. (2009)

Fig. 3

Source: authors’ own conceptualization adapted from Carayannis and Campbell (2010, p. 62; 2013)

Fig. 4

Source: authors’ own conceptualization based on Carayannis and Campbell (2014, p. 15) and adapted from Carayannis and Campbell (2009, p. 207). See also Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (2000)

Fig. 5

Source: authors’ own conceptualization adapted from Carayannis and Campbell (2009)

Fig. 6

Source: authors’ own conceptualization based on Carayannis and Campbell (2009, p. 211; 212 p. 25) and Campbell and Carayannis (2013b, p. 29) and adapted from Campbell and Carayannis (2016b)

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS quarterly, 107–136.

  • Ashton, K. (2009). That ‘Internet of things’ thing. RFID Journal, 22(7), 97–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aslam F., Aimin W., Li M., Rehman K. (2020). Innovation in the era of IoT and Industry 5.0: Absolute innovation management (AIM) framework, Information 2020, 11, 124. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11020124

  • Bag, S., Telukdarie, A., Pretorius, J. H. C., & Gupta, S. (2018). Industry 4.0 and supply chain sustainability: Framework and future research directions. Benchmarking: An International Journal.

  • Bast, G. (2013). Preparing a “creative revolution” – Arts and universities of the arts in the creative knowledge economy, 1471–1476, in: Elias G. Carayannis (Editor-in-Chief) / Igor N. Dubina, Norbert Seel, David F. J. Campbell, Dimitri Uzunidis (Associate Editors): Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York, NY: Springer (http://www.link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/ https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_442 and http://www.springerreference.com/docs/html/chapterdbid/378818.html).

  • Bast, G., Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (eds.). (2015). Arts, research, innovation and society. New York, NY: Springer (https://www.link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-319-09909-5).

  • Bast, G., Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (eds.). (2019). The future of education and labor. New York, NY: Springer (https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030260675).

  • Brandenburger, A. M., & Nalebuff, B. J. (1997). Co-opetition. Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braganza, A., Brooks, L., Nepelski, D., et al. (2017). Resource management in big data initiatives: Processes and dynamic capabilities. Journal of Business Research, 70, 328–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bresciani, S., Ferraris, A., & Del Giudice, M. (2018). The management of organizational ambidexterity through alliances in a new context of analysis: Internet of things (IoT) smart city projects. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 331–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking, Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21. The MIT Press.

  • Buhr, D. (2017). Social innovation policy for Industry 4.0, Division for Social and Economic Policies, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung

  • Burritt, R., & Christ, K. (2016). Industry 4.0 and environmental accounting: A new revolution?. Asian Journal of Sustainability and Social Responsibility, 1(1), 23.

  • Bush, V. (1945). Science: the Endless Frontier. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office (http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/vbush1945.htm#transmittal).

  • Cai, Y., & Annina L. (2020). Synergy building between triple helix and quadruple helix. Tampere, Finland: Faculty of Management and Business, University of Tampere (unpublished manuscript for an article).

  • Campbell, D. F. J. & Carayannis, E. G. (2013a). Quality of democracy and innovation, 1527–1534, in: Elias G. Carayannis (Editor-in-Chief) / Igor N. Dubina, Norbert Seel, David F. J. Campbell, Dimitri Uzunidis (Associate Editors): Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York, NY: Springer (http://www.link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-1-4614-3858-8_509# and http://www.springerreference.com/docs/html/chapterdbid/378878.html).

  • Campbell, D. F. J., & Carayannis, E. G. (2013b). Epistemic governance in higher education. Quality enhancement of universities for development. SpringerBriefs in Business. New York, NY: Springer (http://www.springer.com/business+%26+management/organization/book/978-1-4614-4417-6).

  • Campbell, D. F. J., & Carayannis, E. G. (2013c). Epistemic governance and epistemic innovation policy, 697–702, in: Elias G. Carayannis (Editor-in-Chief) / Igor N. Dubina, Norbert Seel, David F. J. Campbell, Dimitri Uzunidis (Associate Editors): Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York, NY: Springer (http://www.link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_271 and http://www.springerreference.com/docs/html/chapterdbid/378723.html).

  • Campbell, D. F. J., Carayannis, E. G. & Rehman, S. S. (2015). Quadruple helix structures of quality of democracy in innovation systems: the USA, OECD countries, and EU member countries in global comparison. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 6 (3), 467–493 (http://www.link.springer.com/article/https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0246-7).

  • Campbell, D. F. J. & Carayannis, E. G. (2016a). Epistemic governance and epistemic innovation policy. Technology, Innovation and Education 2:2 (pp. 1–15) (https://doi.org/10.1186/s40660-016-0008-2) (http://www.technology-innovation-education.springeropen.com/articles/https://doi.org/10.1186/s40660-016-0008-2).

  • Campbell, D. F. J. & Carayannis, E. G. (2016b). The academic firm: a new design and redesign proposition for entrepreneurship in innovation-driven knowledge economy. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 5:12 (pp. 1–10) (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-016-0040-1) (http://www.innovation-entrepreneurship.springeropen.com/articles/https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-016-0040-1).

  • Campbell, D. F. J. (2019). Global quality of democracy as innovation enabler. Measuring Democracy for Success. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan (https://www.link.springer.com/book/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72529-1 and (https://www.palgrave.com/de/book/9783319725284).

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Maldifassi, J. (1992). Improving the management of nuclear technology: Technical, financial, and organizational measures for assessing the performance of nuclear utilities. International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 4(3), 125–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G. (1994a). The strategic management of technological learning: Transnational decision-making frameworks and their empirical effectiveness. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute: Dissertation.

  • Carayannis, E. G. (1994b). The strategic management of technological learning: Transnational decision-making frameworks and their empirical effectiveness. Dissertation Abstracts International, 55(11), 3564. (UMI No. 9511131)

  • Carayannis, E. G., Rogers, E. M., Kurihara, K., & Allbritton, M. M. (1998). High-technology spin-offs from government R&D laboratories and research universities. Technovation, 18(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G. (2001). The strategic management of technological learning. Learning to learn and learning to learn-how-to-learn as drivers of strategic choice and firm performance in global, technology-driven-markets. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Gonzalez, E. (2003a). Creativity and innovation = Competitiveness? when, how, and why, Vol. 1, Chap. 8. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), The International Handbook on Innovation (pp. 587–606). Pergamon.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Gonzalez, E., & Wetter, J. (2003). The nature and dynamics of discontinuous and disruptive innovations from a learning and knowledge management perspective, Vol. 1, Chap. 4. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), The International Handbook on Innovation (pp. 115–138). Pergamon.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2006). “Mode 3”: Meaning and implications from a knowledge systems perspective, 1–25, in: Elias G. Carayannis / David F. J. Campbell (eds.): Knowledge creation, diffusion, and use in innovation networks and knowledge clusters. A comparative systems approach across the United States, Europe and Asia. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.

  • Carayannis, E. G. (2008). Knowledge-Driven Creative Destruction, or Leveraging Knowledge for Competitive Advantage: Strategic KnowledgeArbitrage and Serendipity as Real Options Drivers Triggered by Co-Opetition, Co-Evolution and Co-Specialization, First Published December 1, 2008Research Articlehttps://doi.org/10.5367/000000008787225957Article information

  • 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 (http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=27&year=2009&vol=46&issue=3/4 and http://www.inderscience.com/search/index.php?action=record&rec_id=23374&prevQuery=&ps=10&m=or).

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2010). Triple helix, quadruple helix and quintuple helix and how do knowledge, innovation and the environment relate to each other? A proposed framework for a trans-disciplinary analysis of sustainable development and social ecology. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development 1 (1), 41–69 (https://www.igi-global.com/article/triple-helix-quadruple-helix-quintuple/41959).

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2011). Open innovation diplomacy and a 21st century fractal research, education and innovation (FREIE) ecosystem: Building on the quadruple and quintuple helix innovation concepts and the “mode 3” knowledge production system. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 2(3), 327–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2012). Mode 3 knowledge production in quadruple helix innovation systems. 21st-century democracy, innovation, and entrepreneurship for development. (SpringerBriefs in Business.). New York, NY: Springer (http://www.springer.com/business+%26+management/book/978-1-4614-2061-3 and http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9781461420613-c1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1263639-p174250662).

  • 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. (http://www.innovation-entrepreneurship.com/content/pdf/2192-5372-1-2.pdf).

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2014). Developed democracies versus emerging autocracies: Arts, democracy, and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 3:12. (http://www.innovation-entrepreneurship.com/content/3/1/12).

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Pirzadeh, A. (2014). The knowledge of culture and the culture of knowledge. Implications for theory, policy and practice. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan (http://www.amazon.de/The-Knowledge-Culture-Implications-Practice/dp/1403942439/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1403080044&sr=8-1&keywords=carayannis+knowledge+of+culture).

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2015). Art and artistic research in quadruple and quintuple helix innovation systems. In G. Bast & , Elias G. Carayannis , David F. J. Campbell, (Eds.), Arts, Research, Innovation and Society (pp. 29–51). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Hens, L., & Nicolopoulou-Stamati, P. (2017). Trans-disciplinarity and growth. Nature and characteristics of trans-disciplinary training programs on the human-environment interphase. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 8 (1), 1–22.

  • Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudisn, E., Campbell, D. F. J., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018a). The ecosystem as helix: An exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as quadruple/quintuple helix innovation models. R&D Management 48 (1), 148–162 (http://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12300/full).

  • Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudisn, E., Campbell, D. F. J., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018b). ‘Mode 3’ universities and academic firms: Thinking beyond the box trans-disciplinarity and nonlinear innovation dynamics within coopetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems. International Journal of Technology Management 77 (1/2/3), 145–185 (https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2018.091714).

  • Carayannis, E. G. (2019a). From Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.0 and the quintuple innovation helix framework – Theories, policies and practices. CI Food Webinar Series: Dr. Elias G. Carayannis Event, Teaching by Elias G. Carayannis (https://www.mcgill.ca/desautels/channels/event/ci-food-webinar-series-dr-elias-g-carayannis-296951).

  • Carayannis, E. G. (2019b). Innovation ecosystems and artificial intelligence. Teaching by Elias G. Carayannis (https://www.iem.fraunhofer.de/de/termine/archiv/2019/workshop-innovation-ecosystems-artificial-intelligence.html).

  • Carayannis, E. G. (2019c). Towards Industry and Society 5.0. ICSB exchange: Fall series. Teaching by Elias G. Carayannis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEPE_vDfyv0).

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2019). Smart quintuple helix innovation systems: How social ecology and environmental protection are driving innovation, Sustainable Development and Economic Growth. (SpringerBriefs in Business.). New York, NY: Springer (https://www.springer.com/de/book/9783030015169).

  • Carayannis, E. G. (2020). Democracy and the environment are endangered species: Reconfiguring today for a better tomorrow: Theories, policies, practices and politics for smart growth. Interview with Dr. Prof. Elias Carayannis by Charlotte Koldbye. (Research Reconfiguring and Innovation Constellations). Brussels: Project with funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 788047 (http://riconfigure.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Interview-with-Elias-Carayannis_2020_Final.pdf).

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2020). Triple helix vs. quadruple and quintuple helix dialogue. Tampere: Triple Helix Conference 2020 (https://events.tuni.fi/thc2020/updates-from-the-conference-sessions/conference-day-1-triple-helix-vs-quadruple-and-quintuple-helix-dialogue/).

  • Carayannis, E. G., Draper, J., & Bhaneja, B. (2020). Towards fusion energy in the Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 context: Call for a global commission for urgent action on fusion energy. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 11 (3), 1–14 (https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-020-00695-5).

  • Carayannis, E. G. & Campbell, D. F. J. (2021). Democracy of climate and climate for democracy: The evolution of quadruple and quintuple helix innovation systems. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 12, online first (https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00778-x).

  • Carayannis, E. G., Christodoulou, K., Christodoulou, P., Chatzichristofis, S. A., Zinonos, Z. (2021a). Known unknowns in an era of technological and viral disruptions: Implications for theory, policy, and practice. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 12 (1), 1–24 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7873668/).

  • Carayannis, E. G., Dezi, L., Gregori, G., & Calo, E. (2021b). Smart environments and techno-centric and human-centric innovations for Industry and Society 5.0: A quintuple helix innovation system view towards smart, sustainable, and inclusive solutions. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 12 (1), 25–55 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7903376/).

  • Carolan, M. (2017). Publicising food: Big data, precision agriculture, and co-experimental techniques of addition: Publicising food. Sociologia Ruralis, 57, 135–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, D. (2015). A world without causation: Big data and the coming of age of posthumanism. Millenn J Int Stud, 43, 833–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danilda, I., Lindberg, M., & Torstensson, B. M. (2009). Women resource centres: A quattro helix innovation system on the European agenda. Paper (http://www.hss09.se/own_documents/Papers/3-11%20-%20Danilda%20Lindberg%20&%20Torstensson%20-%20paper.pdf).

  • Deese, R. S. (2019). Climate change and the future of democracy. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., Jabbour, C. J. C., Foropon, C., & Godinho Filho, M. (2018). When titans meet–Can industry 4.0 revolutionise the environmentally-sustainable manufacturing wave? The role of critical success factors. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 132, 18–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eigelsreiter, B. (2017). Consumerization of IT, cyber-democracy and cyber-crime: The inherent challenges and opportunities of different ends of a continuum. In G. Elias & Carayannis , David F. J. Campbell , Marios P. Efthymiopoulos, (Eds.), Handbook of cyber-development, cyber-democracy, and cyber-defense (pp. 565–594). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elim, H. I., & Zhai, G. (2020). Control system of multitasking interactions between Society 5.0 and Industry 5.0: A conceptual introduction & its applications, Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1463, 012035. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1463/1/012035

  • Ellitan, L., & Anatan, L. (2019). Achieving business continuity in Industrial 4.0 and Society 5.0, International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development, 4, 2 ISSN: 2456–6470.

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The triple helix–-university-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge-based economic development. EASST Review, 14, 14–19.

    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, 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2009). The world in 2025. Rising Asia and socio-ecological transition. Brussels: European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/pdf/the-world-in-2025-report_en.pdf).

  • Fauquex, M., Goyal, S., Evequoz, F., & Bocchi, Y. (2015). Creating people-aware IoT applications by combining design thinking and user-centered design methods, Proceedings of the IEEE 2ndWorld Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Milan, Italy, pp. 57–62

  • Ferreira, C. M., & Serpa, S. (2018). Society 5.0 and social development, preprinted article. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201811.0108.v1

  • Fischer-Kowalski, M., & Haberl, H. (Eds.). (2007). Socioecological transitions and global change. Trajectories of social metabolism and land use. Edward Elgar.

  • Fukuyama, M. (2018). Society 5.0: Aiming for a new human-centered society, Japan Economic Foundation Journal SPOTLIGHT, July/August 2018.

  • Gano, G. (2015). Starting with universe: Buckminster Fuller’s design science now. Futures, 70, 56–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gehrke, L., Kühn, A.T., Rule, D., Moore, P., Bellmann, C., Siemes, S., Dawood, D., Singh, L., Kulik, J., Standley, M. A. (2015). Discussion of qualifications and skills in the factory of the future: A German and American perspective. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279201790.

  • Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.

  • Giusto, D., Iera, A., Morabito, G., & Atzori, L. (Eds.). (2010). The Internet of things: 20th Tyrrhenian workshop on digital communications. Springer Science & Business Media.

  • Haller, S., Karnouskos, S., & Schroth, C. (2008). The Internet of things in an enterprise context. In Future Internet Symposium (pp. 14–28). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

  • Hanusch, F. (2018). Democracy and climate change. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausberg, J. P., Liere-Netheler, K., Packmohr, S., Pakura, S., & Vogelsang, K. (2019). Research streams on digital transformation from a holistic business perspective: A systematic literature review and citation network analysis. Journal of Business Economics, 89, 931–963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemlin, S., Allwood, C. M., & Martin, B. R. (2004). Creative knowledge environments. The influences on creativity in research and innovation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

  • Hermann, M., Pentek, T., & Otto, B. (2015). Design principles for Industrie 4.0 scenarios: A literature review. Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund.

  • Hofmann, E., & Rüsch, M. (2017). Industry 4.0 and the current status as well as future prospects on logistics. Computers in Industry, 89, 23–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollands, R. G. (2008). Will the real smart city please stand up? Intelligent, progressive or entrepreneurial? City, 12(3), 303–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horváth, D., & Szabó, R. Z. (2019). Driving forces and barriers of Industry 4.0: Do multinational and small and medium-sized companies have equal opportunities? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 119–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagermann, H., Helbig, J., Hellinger, A., & Wahlster, W. (2013). Recommendations for implementing the strategic initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0: Securing the future of German manufacturing industry; final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group. Forschungsunion.

  • Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Sharma, R. (2018). Analysis of the driving and dependence power of barriers to adopt Industry 4.0 in Indian manufacturing industry. Computers in Industry, 101, 107–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lake, R. W. (2017). Big data, urban governance, and the ontological politics of hyperindividualism. Big Data & Society, 4, 205395171668253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, I., & Lee, K. (2015). The Internet of things (IoT): Applications, investments, and challenges for enterprises. Business Horizons, 58(4), 431–440.

    Article  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., & Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Can ‘the public’ be considered as a fourth helix in university–industry–government relations? Report on the Fourth Triple Helix Conference, 2002. Science and Public Policy, 30(1), 55–61.

    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 (http://www.link.springer.com/article/https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-011-0049-4).

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Smith, H. L. (2021). Triple, quadruple, and higher-order helices: Historical phenomena and (neo-)evolutionary models. SSRN online (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3817410)

  • Liao, Y., Deschamps, F., Loures, E. D. F. R., & Ramos, L. F. P. (2017). Past, present and future of Industry 4.0-A systematic literature review and research agenda proposal. International journal of production research, 55(12), 3609–3629.

  • Lorenz M., Rüßmann M., Strack R., Lueth K., Bolle M. (2015). “Man and machine in Industry 4.0. How will technology transform the industrial workforce through 2025?,” https://www.bcg.com/publications/2015/technology-businesstransformation-engineered-products-infrastructure-man-machineindustry-4.aspx

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B., & Weibel, P. (2002). ICONOCLASH: Beyond the image wars in science, religion and art. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, A. K., Flyverbom, M., Hilbert, M., & Ruppert, E. (2016). Big data: Issues for an international political sociology of data practices: Table 1. International Political Sociology, 10, 275–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitterlehner, B. (2014). Cyber-democracy and cybercrime: Two sides of the same coin, 207–230, in: Elias G. Carayannis / David F. J. Campbell / Marios P. Efthymiopoulos (eds.): Cyber- development, cyber-democracy and cyber-defense. Challenges, opportunities and implications for theory, policy and practice. New York, NY: Springer.

  • Morakanyane, R., Grace, A., O’Reilly, P. (2017). Conceptualizing digital transformation in business organizations: A systematic review of literature. In: Proceedings of the 30th bled eConference. pp 427–443.

  • Müller, J. M., Kiel, D., & Voigt, K. I. (2018). What drives the implementation of Industry 4.0? The role of opportunities and challenges in the context of sustainability. Sustainability, 10(1), 247.

  • Nahavandi, S. (2019). Industry 5.0—A human-centric solution, Sustainability, 11, 4371, doi: 10.3390 /su11164371.

  • Nambisan S, Wright M, & Feldman, M. (2019). The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes. Res Policy 48:103773.

  • Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science. Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.

  • Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2003). Mode 2 revisited: The new production of knowledge. Minerva, 41, 179–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2006). Re-thinking science: Mode 2 in societal context, 39–51, in: Elias G. Carayannis / David F. J. Campbell (eds.): Knowledge creation, diffusion, and use in innovation networks and knowledge clusters. A comparative systems approach across the United States, Europe and Asia. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.

  • Ng, I. C., & Wakenshaw, S. Y. (2017). The Internet-of-things: Review and research directions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(1), 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2005). Oslo manual: Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD): Paris, France; Statistical Office of the European Communities: Brussels, Belgium.

  • Onday, O. (2019). Japan’s Society 5.0: Going beyond Industry 4.0, Business and Economic Journal, 10: 389. https://doi.org/10.4172/2151-6219.1000389

  • Ozdemir, V., Hekim, N. (2018). Birth of Industry 5.0: Making sense of big data with artificial intelligence, ‘the Internet of things’ and next-generation technology policy, Journal of Integrative Biology, 22, 1, https://doi.org/10.1089/omi.2017.0194

  • 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 (http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-013-1124-3 and http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/907/art%253A10.1007%252Fs11192-013-1124-3.pdf?auth66=1397308723_4cb0003877af5305d5dc202280b9cd6d&ext=.pdf).

  • Pashek, D., Mocan, A., Draghici, A. (2019). Industry 5.0 – The expected impact of next industrial revolution, Management, Knowledge and Learning International Conference.

  • Pasisi, J., Gibb, J., Matthews, J. H. (2014). Approaching wicked problems through design thinking, Proceedings of the 28th Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management Conference: Reshaping Management for Impact, Sydney, Australia.

  • Pereira, A., Santos, F. C., Lima, T. M. (2020). Industry 4.0 and Society 5.0: Opportunities and threats, International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE) ISSN: 8(5), 2277–3878.

  • Piccarozzi, M., Aquilani, B., & Gatti, C. (2018). Industry 4.0 in management studies: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 10(10), 3821.

  • Polanyi, M. (1962). The republic of science: Its political and economic theory. Minerva 1, 54–74 (http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs_5100/polanyi_1967.pdf and http://fiesta.bren.ucsb.edu/~gsd/595e/docs/41.%20Polanyi_Republic_of_Science.pdf).

  • Riesener, M., Dolle, C., Kuhn, M. (2019). Innovation ecosystems for industrial sustainability, Procedia Computer Science, 26th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.01.035

  • Rothe, D. (2017). Seeing like a satellite: Remote sensing and the ontological politics of environmental security. Security Dialogue, 48, 334–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salgues, B. (2018). Society 5.0. Industry of the future, technologies, methods and tools, ISTE – John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken (NJ) – London.

  • Schallmo, D., Williams, C. A., & Boardman, L. (2017). Digital transformation of business models—Best practice, enablers, and roadmap. International Journal of Innovation Management, 21, 1740014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skobelev P.  O., Borovik S. Y. (2017). On the way from Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.0: From digital manufacturing to digital society, International Scientific Journal, Web ISSN: 2534–997x; Print ISSN: 2543–8582.

  • Stacey, R. D., Gri, D., & Shaw, P. (2000). Complexity and management: Fad or radical challenge to systems thinking? Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taratukhin V., Yadgarova Y., Becker J. (2018). The Internet of things prototyping platform under the design thinking methodology, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT.

  • Urbinati, A., Chiaroni, D., Chiesa, V., Frattini, V. (2018). The role of digital technologies in open innovation processes: An exploratory multiple case study analysis, R&D Management.

  • Vitali, I., Arquilla, V., & Tolino, U. (2017). A design perspective for IoT products. A Case Study of the Design of a Smart Product and a Smart Company following a Crowdfunding Campaign, the Design Journal, 20(sup1), S2592–S2604. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vittikh, V. A. (2014). Evolution of ideas on management processes in the society: From cybernetics to evergetics. Group Decision and Negotiation, 24, 825–832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-014-9414-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. (1995). The sources of innovation. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press (https://web.mit.edu/evhippel/www/books/DI/DemocInn.pdf).

  • Walch, M., Karagiannis, D. (2019). How to connect design thinking and cyber-physical systems: The s* IoT conceptual modelling approach, Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI, USA.

  • Yousefikhah, S. (2017). Sociology of innovation: Social construction of technology perspective. AD-Minister, 31–43. https://doi.org/10.17230/ad-minister.30.2

  • Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C, USA

    Elias G. Carayannis

  2. Department for Higher Education Research, Danube University Krems, Krems, Austria

    David F. J. Campbell

  3. School of Production Engineering and Management, Technical University of Crete, Chania, Greece

    Evangelos Grigoroudis

Authors
  1. Elias G. Carayannis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David F. J. Campbell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Evangelos Grigoroudis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elias G. Carayannis.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carayannis, E.G., Campbell, D.F.J. & Grigoroudis, E. Helix Trilogy: the Triple, Quadruple, and Quintuple Innovation Helices from a Theory, Policy, and Practice Set of Perspectives. J Knowl Econ 13, 2272–2301 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00813-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00813-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation