XIX International Triple Helix Conference – 2021
Marcelo Amaral2021, Beyond a Bibliometric Analysis and Literature Review: The Comprehension and Uses of Triple Helix Approach in Brazil
PURPOSE: The Triple Helix (3H) approach has spread rapidly in Brazil since 1999 and remains a valuable metaphor for explaining the relationships between institutional actors to promote science, technology, and innovation. Players in the industry and government spheres have also incorporated the approach, largely because of its simplicity. Possibly, due to the lack of formal rigor. From an academic viewpoint, the production on the subject is relevant in the country, essentially case studies and reports of experiences in regional development projects (Amaral & Messias, 2020). Local research groups, such as Triple Helix Research Group Brazil (THERG-Brazil) and the Triple Helix Association (THA) local chapter, consolidated themselves as leaders to publicize 3H. However, from the observation of the 3H use and analyzing the academic communications published, several inaccuracies and superficialities were found that generated two inquiries. The first is if the Brazilian researchers have adequate comprehension of the 3H. The second question is which source of knowledge is used, whether it is the seminal works from the concept creators, local literature from researchers engaged in the international movement, or secondary literature, which gives rise to superficial and incorrect interpretations. Thus, the aim is to understand how the concept is applied by local academic researchers and, in a broader way, how it was spread in Brazil. The gap was identified in publications about the evolution of the 3H movement (Rosa et al., 2018). DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This research is characterized as exploratory. A database of scholarly communications was built with publications from Brazilian authors in Brazil from 1997 to 2020. The 382 documents collected from academic databases (like Scielo, Spell, and CAPES), conference proceedings, and grey literature were organized in an MS Excel spreadsheet. The database was split in two, one related to the authors from THERG-Brazil and the Brazilian THA Chapter, named Jose Mello's database (an homage to the former vice-president of THA and one of the main 3H disseminators in Brazil). The second one includes the remaining authors. In a second moment, the authors performed a content analysis to classify the studies using a typology proposed by the authors, with three approaches and nine categories, as shown in Table 1. A detailed analysis was about the sources (references) cited in these communications. Table 1. Typology to classify TH academic communications Approach Categories Theoretical approach Addresses TH theoretically. Macroeconomics aspects of innovation National or supranational/regional innovation system, such as S&T&I policies, funding agencies. Regional or local innovation systems (regional economic development projects or state policies). Innovation in a sector. Microeconomics aspects of innovation Innovation in the productive sector of goods and services, such as companies, spin-offs/spin-outs. Innovation at the university and research institutes/centers (entrepreneurial university, internal policies, projects, technology transfer offices). Government innovation, practices, and projects. Innovation in technology transfer mechanisms (TTO/NITs, incubators, and parks). Other organizations in the hybrid and consensus space. FINDINGS OR EXPECTED OUTCOMES: There are two main findings. The first one is a typical bibliometric analysis. From the total 382 communications, 52 were included in Jose Mello's database. The other 330 publications can be classified as 194 academic papers, 58 monographs/thesis/dissertations, 54 conference communications, six book chapters, etc. Around one-third of these communications were published in the last five years. An average of 30 communications was published by year, confirming the relevance of the subject. The most prolific academic authors are Dusan Schreiber (8 communications), Pelayo Olea (8), Andrea Paula Segatto (7), Carlos Alberto Silva (6), Asa Fujino (4), Geciane Porto (4), Gabriela Ferreira (4), Adriana Faria (4), Eric Charles Dorion (4) and Daniel Pedro Puffal (4). More than a hundred authors were identified, ensuring broad dissemination of 3H in the country. The authors are predominantly from public research universities from the southeast and south regions of Brazil. From the 382 communications references, 1125 citations were from Etzkowitz and Leydersdorff's works, 296 citations from the authors of José Mello's database, and 1321 citations from other Brazilian authors. No one from José Mello's database was in the ten most-cited authors. They are Andrea Segatto (99 citations), Renato Dagnino (63), Márcia Rapini (62), Ary Plonski (57), Geciane Porto (43), Eva Stal (41), José Cassiolatto (34), Asa Fujino (29), Sandra Brisolla (27), and Carlos Brito Cruz (27). Some of them also in the most prolific list. Several of these authors, in fact, dialogue with 3H, such as Segatto and Plonsky, which deals with technology transfer and science parks. However, most of the author's research topics related to the innovation system (IS) approach. The most referenced communication is Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff (2000), followed by the Portuguese translation of Etzkowitz’s book published in 2009. The book had a small edition and it is not available, which raises a question about ethics. The 9-categories typology allows classifying the 330 communications in: 24% addressing theoretical aspects (79); 46% approaching macroeconomic aspects (153 studying regional/local innovation systems); and 55% addressing microeconomic aspects (181 on discussions about the role of the university, TTO/NITs, etc.). Some communications are in more than one category. A second discussion is related to the quality of these communications. For example, there are references to communications about local productive arrangements (APL), hence the citations to works written by Cassiolato. It may indicate an incomplete understanding that 3H is an evolution of the IS approach, which it is not. By placing the university on the same level as the other entities (as the source of knowledge that will generate innovations in the knowledge economy), 3H breaks with the IS vision, essentially based on the firm's ability to innovate. The IS analyses the existence of the institutions and the execution of their roles, while 3H is an approach where the actors extrapolate their institutional roles and assume new missions. In this sense, the lack of works that explains how to apply 3H (if it should be applied) leaves the subject open to interpretation. Another possible interpretation is that Brazilian authors have comprehended only the Neoinstitutionalist functionality of 3H (related to the institutions) without comprehending the Neoschumpeterian aspects (dynamic and complexity of innovation process) (Cai & Etzkowtiz, 2020). There is an effort to add a new helix in some studies, which is not incorrect or prohibited. Still, when this new helix is the army or the intermediate entities, it reinforces the notion of an incomplete concept comprehension. The same matter happens with the merging of the APL concept with 3H. Most of the case studies reviewed advocate the existence of a 3H only due to the participation of organizations from the three spheres in regional development projects. There is no concern in analyzing the objectives and results of the projects and the role of organizations. When it is a project to modernize the industry aiming to upgrade its competitive capabilities, there is probably no relation with 3H. By the end, most of the authors used secondary literature. In the 382 communications, there are on average 2.94 references to the published research from Etzkowitz and Leydersdorff, 3.45 references to other Brazilian authors, and only 0.77 references to the Mello's database authors. The effort of researchers connected to José Mello to be part of the international movement has no local repercussion. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Scientometrics studies are relevant and developed, but similar studies were not found in the literature analyzing academic movements either their dissemination in a country. The work highlight valid results: a review of the methods used in research on the topic; review of objectives and approaches for research on the themes; discovery of themes or gaps not investigated; and increase of knowledge of researchers and institutions that work with 3H in Brazil. PRACTICAL/SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The work was not intended to have practical and social implications. It was essentially an academic exercise. However, the dissemination of the results may impact the comprehension and application of the 3H approach in Brazil and the future agenda of local researchers. DIRECTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH/LIMITATIONS: The work has limitations due to the construction of the database. Probably, the database is incomplete, and, in this sense, this project will continue. Some works initially published as congresses articles or monographs/dissertations are, in a second moment, published again or source for new publications, which leads to a possible double counting of subjects, research, and authors. KEYWORDS (3-5): Triple Helix; Academic Movements; Brazil