Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship

2013 Edition
| Editors: Elias G. Carayannis

Quintuple Innovation Helix and Global Warming: Challenges and Opportunities for Policy and Practice

  • Elias G. Carayannis
  • Thorsten D. Barth
  • David F. J. Campbell
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_467

Synonyms

Introduction

Due to the escalation of “global warming,” it is time for humanity to think and act responsibly and determine sustainable solutions. Global warming, in addition to climate change, has caused the world to undertake new responsibilities (see IPCC 2007a), which not only include further climate change but in the long term also hold humanity accountable in the prevention of new political and/or social conflicts, war on resources, new environmental catastrophes, as well as serious crises in the market economies (see UNDP 2007; UNEP 2008). The special challenge of global warming can be tackled by “sustainable development.” The definition of the Brundtland Commission states that sustainable development “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (United Nations 1987a, b). Sustainable development concerns us all and takes place on the local as well as global...

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

References

  1. Barbier EB. Rethinking the economic recovery: a global green new deal, United Nations Environment Program (UNEP); 2009. http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/portals/30/docs/GGND-Report-April2009.pdf
  2. Barth TD. Konzeption, messung und rating der demokratiequalität. Brasilien, südafrika, australien und die russische föderation 1997–2006. Saarbrücken: VDM-Verlag Dr. Müller; 2010.Google Scholar
  3. Barth TD. The idea of a green new deal in a quintuple helix model of knowledge, know-how and innovation. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development. 2011a;1(2):1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barth TD. Freiheit, Gleichheit, Demokratiequalität: Zur Qualitätsmessung in den Top 20 Demokratien des Democracy Rankings [Freedom, equality and the quality of democracy: measuring quality in the Top 20 democracies of the democracy ranking] [Dissertation (Doctoral Thesis)]. Vienna: University of Viennal; 2011b.Google Scholar
  5. Barth TD. Die 20 besten demokratien der welt. Freiheit – gleichheit – demokratiequalität auf einen blick. Norderstedt: Books on Demand Verlag; 2011c.Google Scholar
  6. Bhaskar R. Context of interdisciplinarity: interdisciplinarity and climate change. In: Bhasakar R, Frank C, Høyer KG, Næss P, Parker J, editors. Interdisciplinarity and climate change: transforming knowledge and practice for our global future. New York: Routledge; 2010. p. 1–24.Google Scholar
  7. Biegelbauer P. Learning from abroad: the Austrian competence centre programme Kplus. Science and Policy. 2007a;34(9):606–18.Google Scholar
  8. Biegelbauer P. Ein neuer blick auf politisches handeln: politik-lernansätze im vergleich. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft (ÖZP). 2007b;36(3):231–47.Google Scholar
  9. Campbell DFJ. The university/business research networks in science and technology: knowledge production trends in the United States, European Union and Japan. In: Carayannis EG, Campbell DFJ, editors. Knowledge creation, diffusion, and use in innovation networks and knowledge clusters. A comparative systems approach across the United States, Europe and Asia. Westport, CT: Praeger; 2006. p. 67–100.Google Scholar
  10. Campbell DFJ. Wie links Oder wie rechts Sind österreichs länder? eine komparative langzeitanalyse des parlamentarischen mehrebenensystems österreichs (1945–2007). SWS-Rundschau. 2007;47(4):381–404.Google Scholar
  11. Campbell DFJ. The basic concept for the democracy ranking of the quality of democracy. Vienna: Democracy Ranking; 2008. http://www.democracyranking.org/downloads/basic_concept_democracy_ranking_2008_A4.pdf. Accessed 20 Oct 2011.
  12. Campbell DFJ, Barth TD. Wie können demokratie und demokratiequalität gemessen werden? modelle, demokratie-indices und länderbeispiele im globalen vergleich. SWS-Rundschau. 2009;49(2):208–33.Google Scholar
  13. Campbell DFJ, Güttel WH. Knowledge production of firms: research networks and the ― scientification of business R&D. International Journal of Technology Management. 2005;31(1/2):152–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campbell DFJ, Schaller C, editors. Demokratiequalität in österreich – zustand und entwicklungsperspektiven. Opladen: Leske + Budrich; 2002.Google Scholar
  15. Campbell DFJ, Pölzlbauer P, Barth TD. Das “democracy ranking 2010 of the quality of democracy” – erstveröffentlichung (German). Vienna, Austria: Democracy Ranking; 2010. http://www.democracyranking.org/downloads/Democracy_Ranking_Concept_Earlyrelease_German_2010.pdf.
  16. Carayannis EG. Measuring intangibles: managing intangibles for tangible outcomes in research and innovation. International Journal of Nuclear Knowledge Management. 2004;1(1/2):49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Carayannis EG, editor. Planet earth 2011 – global warming challenges and opportunities for policy and practice. Rijeka: Open Access Publisher; 2011. http://www.intechopen.com/books/show/title/planet-earth-2011-global-warming-challenges-and-opportunities-for-policy-and-practice.
  18. Carayannis EG, Alexander JM. Global and local knowledge. Glocal transatlantic public-private partnerships for research and technological development. Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan; 2006.Google Scholar
  19. Carayannis EG, Campbell DFJ. “Mode 3”: meaning and implications from a knowledge systems perspective. In: Carayannis EG, Campbell DFJ, editors. Knowledge creation, diffusion, and use in innovation networks and knowledge clusters. A comparative systems approach across the United States, Europe and Asia. Westport, CT: Praeger; 2006. p. 1–25.Google Scholar
  20. Carayannis EG, Campbell DFJ. “Mode 3” and “quadruple helix”: toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management. 2009;46(3/4):201–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Carayannis EG, Campbell DFJ. 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. 2010;1(1):41–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Carayannis EG, Campbell DFJ. 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. 2011;2(3):327–72. http://www.springerlink.com/content/d1lr223321305579/.
  23. Carayannis E, Formica P. Intellectual venture capitalists: an emerging breed of knowledge entrepreneurs – viewpoint. Industry and Higher Education. 2006;20(3):151–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Carayannis EG, Kaloudis A. 21st century democratic capitalism: a time for action and a time to lead. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development. 2010;1(1):1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Carayannis EG, Zedtwitz Mv. Architecting GloCal (Global – Local), real-virtual incubator networks (G-RVINs) as catalysts and accelerators of entrepreneurship in transitioning and developing economies. Technovation. 2005;25:95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Diamond L, Morlino L. Introduction. In: Diamond L, Morlino L, editors. Assessing the quality of democracy. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press; 2005. p. ix–xliii.Google Scholar
  27. Dubina IN. Управление творчеством персонала в условиях инновационной экономики [Creativity management in the innovation economy]. Moscow: Academia; 2009.Google Scholar
  28. Dubina IN, Carayannis EG, Campbell DFJ. Creativity economy and a crisis of the economy? Coevolution of knowledge, innovation, and creativity, and of the knowledge economy and knowledge society. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. 2012;3(1):1–24. http://www.springerlink.com/content/t5j8l12136h526h5/.
  29. Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L. The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy. 2000;29:109–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Friedman TL. Hot, flat and crowded: why we need a green revolution – and how we can renew our global future. London: Penguin; 2008.Google Scholar
  31. Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotny H, Schwartzman S, Scott P, Trow M. The new production of knowledge. The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage; 1994.Google Scholar
  32. Giddens A. The politics of climate change. Cambridge/Malden: Polity Press; 2009.Google Scholar
  33. Green New Deal Group. A green new deal: joined-up policies to solve the triple crunch of the credit crisis, climate change and high oil prices – The first report of the Green New Deal Group, London: New Economic Foundation; 2008. http://www.neweconomics.org/sites/neweconomics.org/files/A_Green_New_Deal_1.pdf
  34. Höll O, et al. Entwicklungspolitik. In: Dachs H, editor. Politik in Österreich. Das Handbuch. Vienna: MANZ’sche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung; 2006. p. 884–904.Google Scholar
  35. Høyer KG. Seven theses on CO2 reductionism and its interdisciplinary counteraction. In: Bhasakar R, Frank C, Høyer KG, Næss P, Parker J, editors. Interdisciplinarity and climate change: transforming knowledge and practice for our global future. New York: Routledge; 2010a. p. 35–53.Google Scholar
  36. Høyer KG. Technological idealism: the case of the thorium fuel cycle. In: Bhasakar R, Frank C, Høyer KG, Næss P, Parker J, editors. Interdisciplinarity and climate change: transforming knowledge and practice for our global future. New York: Routledge; 2010b. p. 164–82.Google Scholar
  37. Hufbauer GC, Charnovitz S, Kim J. Global warming and the world trading system. Person Institute for International Economics: Washington DC; 2009.Google Scholar
  38. IPCC. Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL, editors. The fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USA: Cambridge University Press; 2007a.Google Scholar
  39. IPCC. Climate change 2007: the physical science basis – errata for the working group – fourth assessment report; 2007b. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-errata.pdf
  40. Kreisky E, Löffler M. Demokratietheorieentwicklung im Kontext gesellschaftlicher Paradigmen. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft. 2010;39(1):89–104.Google Scholar
  41. Kuhlmann S. Future governance of innovation policy in Europe – three scenarios. Research Policy. 2001;30:953–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Le Monde diplomatique, editor. Atlas der globalisierung – sehen und verstehen, was die welt bewegt. Paris/Berlin: Le Monde diplomatique/taz; 2009.Google Scholar
  43. Lundvall B-Å, editor. National systems of innovation. Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter Publishers; 1992.Google Scholar
  44. Meyer B. Wie muss die Wirtschaft umgebaut werden? Perspektiven nachhaltiger Entwicklung, Lizenzausgabe für die Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Frankfurt am Main/Bonn: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag; 2008.Google Scholar
  45. Müller M, Niebert K. Epochenwechsel – Plädoyer für einen grünen New Deal. Munich: Oekom Verlag; 2009.Google Scholar
  46. Nowotny H, Scott P, Gibbons M. Mode 2 revisited: the New production of knowledge. Minerva. 2003;41:179–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. O’Donnell G. Human development, human rights, and democracy. In: O’Donnell G, Cullell JV, Iazzetta OM, editors. The quality of democracy. Theory and applications. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press; 2004. p. 9–92.Google Scholar
  48. OECD. OECD-factbook 2009 – economic, environmental and social statistics – special focus: inequality. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. OECD. OECD-factbook 2010 – economic, environmental and social statistics – special focus: the crisis and beyond. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Otzelberger A. Gender-responsive strategies on climate change: recent progress and ways forward for donors. BRIDGE: development – gender. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies; 2011. http://www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/vfile/upload/4/document/1107/Gender%20responsive%20strategies%20on%20climate%20change_progress%20and%20ways%20forward%20for%20donors.pdf.Google Scholar
  51. Parker J. Towards a dialectics of knowledge and care in the global system. In: Bhasakar R, Frank C, Høyer KG, Næss P, Parker J, editors. Interdisciplinarity and climate change: transforming knowledge and practice for our global future. New York: Routledge; 2010. p. 205–26.Google Scholar
  52. Rommetveit K, Funtowicz S, Strand R. Knowledge, democracy and action in response to climate change. In: Bhasakar R, Frank C, Høyer KG, Næss P, Parker J, editors. Interdisciplinarity and climate change: transforming knowledge and practice for our global future. New York: Routledge; 2010. p. 149–63.Google Scholar
  53. Schumpeter JA. Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper Perennial; 1976.Google Scholar
  54. Sen A. Ökonomie für den menschen – wege zur gerechtigkeit und solidarität in der marktwirtschaft; Aus dem englischen von C. Goldmann. 4th ed. Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag; 2007.Google Scholar
  55. Stern N. The global deal – climate change and the creation of a new era of progress and prosperity. New York: Public Affairs; 2009.Google Scholar
  56. Tilly C. Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ulram PA. Politische Kultur der Bevölkerung. In: Dachs H et al., editors. Politik in Österreich. Das Handbuch. Vienna: MANZ’sche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung; 2006. p. 513–24.Google Scholar
  58. UNDP. Human development report 2007/2008. Fighting climate change: Human solidarity in a divided World. New York: United Nations Development Program; 2007. http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2007-2008
  59. UNDP. Human development report 2010 (20th anniversary edition) – The real wealth of nations: pathways to human development. New York: United Nations Development Program; 2010. http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2010_EN_Complete_reprint.pdf
  60. UNDP. Human development report 2011 – sustainability and equity: a better future for all. New York: United Nations Development Program; 2011. http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2011/
  61. UNEP. Green jobs: towards decent work in sustainable, low-carbon world, Washington/New York: United Nations Environment Program; 2008. http://www.unep.org/labour_environment/PDFs/Greenjobs/UNEP-Green-Jobs-Report.pdf 2011
  62. United Nations. Report of the World commission on environment and development (42/187). New York: United Nations; 1987a. http://www.un-documents.net/a42r187.htm
  63. United Nations. Report of the World commission on environment and development: “Our common future.” New York: United Nations; 1987b. http://worldinbalance.net/pdf/1987-brundtland.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elias G. Carayannis
    • 1
  • Thorsten D. Barth
    • 2
  • David F. J. Campbell
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Information Systems & Technology ManagementSchool of Business, The George Washington UniversityWashington, DCUSA
  2. 2.Political Scientist & Academic EntrepreneurVienna Democracy Ranking Organization - Academic Ranking TeamViennaAustria
  3. 3.Faculty for Interdisciplinary Studies (IFF), Institute of Science Communication and Higher Education ResearchAlpen–Adria–University KlagenfurtViennaAustria
  4. 4.University of Applied ArtsViennaAustria