IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v44y2017i2p153-162..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Overcoming the triple helix boundaries in an environmental research collaboration

Author

Listed:
  • Joacim Rosenlund
  • Erik Rosell
  • William Hogland

Abstract

Cross-sector interactions between university and other sectors are increasingly important in contemporary knowledge production. However, there are few guidelines for conducting such interactions at the micro-level. The aim of this paper is to provide a better understanding of such triple helix interactions. Throughout a six-year project there were increased demands on the researchers to develop applied results and to interact with other sectors. The researchers were challenged to cross boundaries and share their knowledge with participants outside academia. Results show that difficulties in micro-level triple helix collaboration can be related to three different boundaries. These difficulties emerged due to the different expectations of knowledge and variations in the sector-specific ways of working. Results also hint at solutions in the form of boundary spanners, boundary management and a common arena for dialogue.

Suggested Citation

  • Joacim Rosenlund & Erik Rosell & William Hogland, 2017. "Overcoming the triple helix boundaries in an environmental research collaboration," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(2), pages 153-162.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:44:y:2017:i:2:p:153-162.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scw045
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Lennart Svensson & Per-Erik Ellstroem & Goeran Brulin, 2007. "Introduction – on Interactive Research," International Journal of Action Research, Rainer Hampp Verlag, vol. 3(3), pages 233-249.
    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. Paul Jackson & Reza Kiani Mavi & Yuliani Suseno & Craig Standing, 2018. "University–industry collaboration within the triple helix of innovation: The importance of mutuality," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 553-564.
    2. Fotis Kitsios & Maria Kamariotou & Evangelos Grigoroudis, 2021. "Digital Entrepreneurship Services Evolution: Analysis of Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Models for Open Data Ecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, November.

    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. Brüggemann, Jelmer & Persson, Alma & Wijma, Barbro, 2019. "Understanding and preventing situations of abuse in health care – Navigation work in a Swedish palliative care setting," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 52-58.
    2. Sassanelli, Claudio & Pacheco, Diego A. de J., 2024. "The impact of the internet of things on the perceived quality and customer involvement of smart product-service systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    3. Sandberg, Erik & Oghazi, Pejvak & Chirumalla, Koteshwar & Patel, Pankaj C., 2022. "Interactive research framework in logistics and supply chain management: Bridging the academic research and practitioner gap," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    4. Stigendal, Mikael & Novy, Andreas, 2018. "A critical realist knowledge production: Enhancing a Potential-oriented Approach," SRE-Discussion Papers 2018/06, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    5. Erik Lindhult & Koteshwar Chirumalla & Pejvak Oghazi & Vinit Parida, 2018. "Value logics for service innovation: practice-driven implications for service-dominant logic," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 12(3), pages 457-481, September.
    6. James Wilson & Emily Wise & Madeline Smith, 2022. "Evidencing the benefits of cluster policies: towards a generalised framework of effects," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(2), pages 369-391, June.
    7. Hellström, Daniel & Olsson, John, 2024. "Let's go thrift shopping: Exploring circular business model innovation in fashion retail," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    8. Claudio Sassanelli & Tiziano Arriga & Stefano Zanin & Idiano D'Adamo & Sergio Terzi, 2022. "Industry 4.0 Driven Result-oriented PSS: An Assessment in the Energy Management," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 12(4), pages 186-203, July.
    9. Claudio Sassanelli & Sergio Terzi, 2022. "The D-BEST Reference Model: A Flexible and Sustainable Support for the Digital Transformation of Small and Medium Enterprises," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 23(3), pages 345-370, September.

    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:oup:scippl:v:44:y:2017:i:2:p:153-162.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.