IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v182y2022ics0040162522004000.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An exploratory analysis of Brazilian universities in the technological innovation process

Author

Listed:
  • Andrade, Eron Passos
  • Pereira, Jadiel dos Santos
  • Rocha, Angela Machado
  • Nascimento, Marcio Luis Ferreira

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to use hierarchical clustering (HC) and principal component analysis (PCA) for determining the key institutions and variables in a multidimensional data set to visualize Triple Helix (TH) relationships between industry, academia and government. This is a huge task, essential to better understand technological innovation, an interactive process that creates knowledge in an integrated way, reducing the number of variables. For this task we analyzed the data from eight Brazilian universities between 2008 and 2015 considering median of twelve parameters so diverse as the number of research groups; researchers; teaching staff; innovation projects in collaboration; papers; patents; technology transfer agreement; money generated from technology transfer and financing. From HC it was possible to identify four main university clusters considering all variables. PCA also shown four groups on main component mapping, in agreement with HC. The financing, the existence of innovation environments and specific innovation legislation, and the regional context explain clustering. PCA suggests that much of the data variability can be summarized in three principal components, presenting industry, academia and government interrelationships, in agreement with HC. So PCA and HC could be considered as a new view of investigation to quantify the TH, statistically mapping this model.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrade, Eron Passos & Pereira, Jadiel dos Santos & Rocha, Angela Machado & Nascimento, Marcio Luis Ferreira, 2022. "An exploratory analysis of Brazilian universities in the technological innovation process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:182:y:2022:i:c:s0040162522004000
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121876
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162522004000
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121876?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meifang Li & Lerong He & Yongxiang Zhao, 2020. "The triple helix system and regional entrepreneurship in China," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(7-8), pages 508-530, August.
    2. Li, Baibing & Martin, Elaine B. & Morris, A. Julian, 2002. "On principal component analysis in L1," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 471-474, September.
    3. Elias G. Carayannis & David F.J. Campbell, 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 Dev," International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), IGI Global, vol. 1(1), pages 41-69, January.
    4. Zhao, S.L. & 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, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 202-220.
    5. Manlio Del Giudice & Elias G. Carayannis & Maria Rosaria Della Peruta, 2012. "Cross-Cultural Knowledge Management," Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, Springer, number 978-1-4614-2089-7, February.
    6. Wang, Wenjing & Lu, Shan, 2021. "University-industry innovation community dynamics and knowledge transfer: Evidence from China," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    7. Ibrahim Alnafrah & Bassel Zeno, 2020. "A new comparative model for national innovation systems based on machine learning classification techniques," Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 45-66, January.
    8. Boardman, P. Craig, 2009. "Government centrality to university-industry interactions: University research centers and the industry involvement of academic researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1505-1516, December.
    9. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    10. Bryan Campbell, 2010. "Environment And Sustainable Development," CIRANO Papers 2010n-04speciala, CIRANO.
    11. Michela Loi & Maria Chiara Di Guardo, 2015. "The third mission of universities: An investigation of the espoused values," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(6), pages 855-870.
    12. María-Jesús Luengo-Valderrey & Julián Pando-García & Iñaki Periáñez-Cañadillas & Amparo Cervera-Taulet, 2020. "Analysis of the Impact of the Triple Helix on Sustainable Innovation Targets in Spanish Technology Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, April.
    13. Navas, Lina P. & Montes, Felipe & Abolghasem, Sepideh & Salas, Ricardo J. & Toloo, Mehdi & Zarama, Roberto, 2020. "Colombian higher education institutions evaluation," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    14. Manlio Giudice & Elias G. Carayannis & Maria Rosaria Della Peruta, 2012. "Culture and Cooperative Strategies: Knowledge Management Perspectives," Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, in: Cross-Cultural Knowledge Management, chapter 0, pages 49-62, Springer.
    15. Jungwon Yoon & Joshua SungWoo Yang & Han Woo Park, 2017. "Quintuple helix structure of Sino-Korean research collaboration in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 61-81, October.
    16. Basso, Fernanda Gisele & Pereira, Cristiano Gonçalves & Porto, Geciane Silveira, 2021. "Cooperation and technological areas in the state universities of São Paulo: An analysis from the perspective of the triple helix model," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Heikkilä, Jussi T.S. & Peltoniemi, Mirva, 2023. "The changing work of IPR attorneys: 30 years of institutional transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Yi & Zhu, Guilong & Mu, Rongping, 2020. "Do research institutes benefit from their network positions in research collaboration networks with industries or/and universities?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 94.
    2. Martin Jaekel & Arto Wallin & Minna Isomursu, 2015. "Guiding Networked Innovation Projects Towards Commercial Success—a Case Study of an EU Innovation Programme with Implications for Targeted Open Innovation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(3), pages 625-639, September.
    3. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold & Pyka, Andreas & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua, 2021. "On the performance and strategy of innovation systems: A multicriteria group decision analysis approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Sándor Huszár & Szabolcs Prónay & Norbert Buzás, 2016. "Examining the differences between the motivations of traditional and entrepreneurial scientists," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-22, December.
    5. Lars Jonsson & Enrico Baraldi & Lars-Eric Larsson & Petter Forsberg & Kristofer Severinsson, 2015. "Targeting Academic Engagement in Open Innovation: Tools, Effects and Challenges for University Management," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(3), pages 522-550, September.
    6. Enas Alhassan & R. Sandra Schillo & Margaret A. Lemay & Fred Pries, 2019. "Research Outputs as Vehicles of Knowledge Exchange in a Quintuple Helix Context: The Case of Biofuels Research Outputs," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(3), pages 958-973, September.
    7. Susanne Beck & Maral Mahdad & Karin Beukel & Marion Poetz, 2019. "The Value of Scientific Knowledge Dissemination for Scientists—A Value Capture Perspective," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-23, July.
    8. Zhang, Yi & Chen, Kaihua & Fu, Xiaolan, 2019. "Scientific effects of Triple Helix interactions among research institutes, industries and universities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 86, pages 33-47.
    9. Marco Cucculelli & Ivano Dileo & Marco Pini, 2022. "Filling the void of family leadership: institutional support to business model changes in the Italian Industry 4.0 experience," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-241, February.
    10. Tao, Zhuang & Shuliang, Zhao, 2022. "Collaborative innovation relationship in Yangtze River Delta of China: Subjects collaboration and spatial correlation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    11. Anna Sworowska-Baranowska, 2021. "Science-Nonscience Research Partnership in Poland," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 3), pages 96-113.
    12. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    13. Xiaoran Zheng & Yuzhuo Cai, 2022. "Transforming Innovation Systems into Innovation Ecosystems: The Role of Public Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-26, June.
    14. Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko, 2016. "City-as-a-Platform: The Rise of Participatory Innovation Platforms in Finnish Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-31, September.
    15. Elias G. Carayannis & David F. J. Campbell, 2021. "Democracy of Climate and Climate for Democracy: the Evolution of Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Systems," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 2050-2082, December.
    16. Francesco Campanella & Maria Rosaria Della Peruta & Stefano Bresciani & Luca Dezi, 2017. "Quadruple Helix and firms’ performance: an empirical verification in Europe," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 267-284, April.
    17. Elias G. Carayannis & Luca Dezi & Gianluca Gregori & Ernesto Calo, 2022. "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, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(2), pages 926-955, June.
    18. Morena Paulišić & Ana Čuić Tanković & Manuela Hrvatin, 2016. "Managing the service concept in creating an innovative tourism product," Tourism and Hospitality Industry 18, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management.
    19. Loet Leydesdorff & Han Woo Park & Balazs Lengyel, 2014. "A routine for measuring synergy in university–industry–government relations: mutual information as a Triple-Helix and Quadruple-Helix indicator," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 27-35, April.
    20. Zafeirios Thomakis & Irene Daskalopoulou, 2022. "Entrepreneurial Views and Rural Entrepreneurial Potential: Evidence from Greece," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(2), pages 1611-1634, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:182:y:2022:i:c:s0040162522004000. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.