La Triple Hélice en economías en transición a través del caso de Skolkovo: un ejemplo de ecosistema de innovación ruso
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1344/jesb2022.2.j110Palabras clave:
ecosistemas, redes de valor, sistemas de innovación, ecosistemas de innovación, Rusia, nuevas iniciativas innovadoras, planes de financiación, del sector público, SkolkovoResumen
Las administraciones públicas toman iniciativas para fomentar los ecosistemas del conocimiento en zonas sensibles científicas y tecnológicas. Se asume que los sistemas de innovación crearán redes de valor a través de las cuales los participantes puede desarrollar y comercializar sus propuestas de valor. Las redes de valor se refieren a los ecosistemas de innovación en los que el producto o servicio final es ofertado por una constelación de empresas que se complementan entre sí. La literatura de los ecosistemas de innovación sugiere que los ecosistemas de innovación conducen a ventajas competitivas para cada uno de los socios integrantes en el ecosistema, creando así valor para todos sus actores. Basándose en un estudio de caso longitudinal del Centro de Innovación Skolkovo, con más de 3.000 iniciativas innovadoras en el distrito de Moscú en Rusia, este estudio explora cómo se crea valor en los ecosistemas de innovación en las economías de transición, y las funciones de las partes implicadas que contribuyen a los mismos. A través de un estudio de caso longitudinal, y utilizando el marco Triple Hélix, este estudio concluye que en economías de transición el Estado tiende a asumir el papel principal en el establecimiento de los pilares de los ecosistemas de innovación, junto con un sólido apoyo de los socios de la industria relacionada con el Estado, estando las Universidades infrarepresentadas en las fases iniciales del desarrollo del ecosistema. Estas contribuciones del estudio perfeccionan la aplicabilidad del modelo de Triple Hélix en las economías de transición, ajustando la ponderación de las diferentes partes del modelo para establecer un ecosistema de innovación.
Descargas
Citas
Autio, Erkko, Martin Kenney, Philippe Mustar, Don Siegel and Mike Wright. 2014. “Entrepreneurial Innovation: The Importance of Context.” Research Policy 43(7: 1097-1108. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.015.
Bittencourt, Bruno Anicet, Diego Alex Gazaro dos Santos, and Julhete Mignoni. 2021. “Resource Orchestration in Innovation Ecosystems: A Comparative Study between Innovation Ecosystems at Different Stages of Development.” International Journal of Innovation 9(1): 108-130. . doi: 10.5585/iji.v9i1.18076.
Calza, Francesco, Marco Ferretti, Eva Panetti, and Adele Parmentola. 2021. “Moving Drug Discoveries beyond the Valley of Death: The Role of Innovation Ecosystems.” European Journal of Innovation Management 24(4): 1184-1209. doi: 10.1108/EJIM-11-2019-0342.
Cooke, Philip, Mikel Gomez Uranga, and Goio Etxebarria. 1997. “Regional Innovation Systems: Institutional and Organisational Dimensions.” Research Policy 26(4–5): 475-491. doi: 10.1016/s0048-7333(97)00025-5.
David, Paul A., and Dominique Foray. 2002. “An Introduction to the Economy of the Knowledge Society.” International Social Science Journal 54(171): 9-23. doi: 10.1111/1468-2451.00355.
Devlin, Rose Anne, R. Quentin Grafton, and Dane Rowlands. 1998. “Rights and Wrongs: A Property Rights Perspective of Russia’s Market Reforms.” Antitrust Bulletin 43(1): 275-296. doi: 10.1177/0003603X9804300111.
Estrin, Saul, and Mike Wright. 1999. “Corporate Governance in the Former Soviet Union: An Overview.” Journal of Comparative Economics 27(3): 398-421. doi: 10.1006/jcec.1999.1603.
Etzkowitz, H., and L. Leydesdorff. 1995. “The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Relations: A Laboratory for Knowledge Based Economic Development.” EASST Review 14 (1).
Etzkowitz, Henry. 1983. “Entrepreneurial Scientists and Entrepreneurial Universities in American Academic Science.” Minerva 21(2–3): 198-233. doi: 10.1007/BF01097964.
Etzkowitz, Henry. 1998. “The Norms of Entrepreneurial Science: Cognitive Effects of the New University-Industry Linkages.” Research Policy 27(8): 823-833. doi. 10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00093-6.
Etzkowitz, Henry. 2003a. “Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations.” Social Science Information 42(3): 293-337. doi: 10.1177/05390184030423002.
Etzkowitz, Henry. 2003b. “Research Groups as ‘Quasi-Firms’: The Invention of the Entrepreneurial University.” Research Policy 32(1): 109-121. 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00009-4.
Etzkowitz, Henry. 2004. “The Evolution of the Entrepreneurial University.” International Journal of Technology and Globalisation 1(1): 64-77. doi: 10.1504/IJTG.2004.004551.
Etzkowitz, Henry. 2008. The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action. The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action. New York: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203929605.
Etzkowitz, Henry, and Loet Leydesdorff. 1995. “The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Relations: A Laboratory for Knowledge Based Economic Development.” EASST Review 14(1): 14-19.
Etzkowitz, Henry, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2000. “The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations.” Research Policy 29(2): 109-123. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
Etzkowitz, Henry, Andrew Webster, Christiane Gebhardt, and Branca Regina Cantisano Terra. 2000. “The Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm.” Research Policy 29(2): 313-330. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00069-4.
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. 1998. Annual report 1998. London: EBRD.
Jones, Stephen L., Aija Leiponen, and Gurneeta Vasudeva. 2021. “The Evolution of Cooperation in the Face of Conflict: Evidence from the Innovation Ecosystem for Mobile Telecom Standards Development.” Strategic Management Journal 42 (4): 710-740. doi: 10.1002/smj.3244.
Kornai, János. 1986. “The Soft Budget Constraint.” Kyklos 39(1): 3-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6435.1986.tb01252.x.
Kornai, János. 2000. “What the Change of System from Socialism to Capitalism Does and Does Not Mean.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(1): 27-42. doi: 10.1257/jep.14.1.27.
Kornai, János, Eric Maskin, and Gérald Roland. 2003a. “Understanding the Soft Budget Constraint.” Journal of Economic Literature 41(4): 1095-1136. doi: 10.1257/002205103771799999.
Lengyel, Balázs, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2011. “Regional Innovation Systems in Hungary: The Failing Synergy at the National Level.” Regional Studies 45(5): 677-693. doi: 10.1080/00343401003614274.
Leydesdorff, Loet. 2018. “Synergy in Knowledge-Based Innovation Systems at National and Regional Levels: The Triple-Helix Model and the Fourth Industrial Revolution.” Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 4(2): 16. doi: 10.3390/joitmc4020016.
Leydesdorff, Loet, and Henry Etzkowitz. 1996. “Emergence of a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations.” Science and Public Policy 23(5): 279-286. doi: 10.1093/spp/23.5.279.
Leydesdorff, Loet, and Henry Etzkowitz. 1998. “The Triple Helix as a Model for Innovation Studies.” In Science and Public Policy. 25(3): 195-203. doi: 10.1093/spp/25.3.195.
Leydesdorff, Loet, and Martin Meyer. 2006. “Triple Helix Indicators of Knowledge-Based Innovation Systems. Introduction to the Special Issue.” Research Policy 35(10): 1441-1449. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.016.
Leydesdorff, Loet, and Yuan Sun. 2009. “National and International Dimensions of the Triple Helix in Japan: University-Industry-Government versus International Coauthorship Relations.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60(4): 778-788. doi: 10.1002/asi.20997.
Nikina, Anna, Josep Piqué, editors. 2016. Areas of innovation in a global world: Concept and practice. Málaga: IASP.
Pique, Josep Miquel, Aline Figlioli, Francesc Miralles, and Jasmina Berbegal-Mirabent. 2021. “The Role of Modern Urban Science Parks in Developing Entrepreneurship and Innovation Ecosystems.” In Handbook of Research on Business and Technology Incubation and Acceleration, edited by Sarfraz A. Mian, Magnus Klofsten and Wadid Lamine, 140-159. doi: 10.4337/9781788974783.00016.
Pique, Josep Miquel, Francesc Miralles, and Jasmina Berbegal-Mirabent. 2019. “Areas of Innovation in Cities: The Evolution of 22@Barcelona.” International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development 10(1): 3-25. doi: 10.1504/IJKBD.2019.098227.
Ranga, Marina, and Henry Etzkowitz. 2013. “Triple Helix Systems: An Analytical Framework for Innovation Policy and Practice in the Knowledge Society.” Industry and Higher Education 27 (4): 237-262. doi: 10.5367/ihe.2013.0165.
Rosenberg, Nathan, and Richard R. Nelson. 1994. “American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry.” Research Policy 23 (3): 323-348. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(94)90042-6.
Shinn, Terry, and Erwan Lamy. 2006. “Paths of Commercial Knowledge: Forms and Consequences of University-Enterprise Synergy in Scientist-Sponsored Firms.” Research Policy 35(10): 1465-1476. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.024.
Viale, Riccardo, and Sergio Campodall’ Orto. 2002. “An Evolutionary Triple Helix to Strengthen Academy-Industry Relations: Suggestions from European Regions.” Science and Public Policy 29 (3): 154-168. doi: 10.3152/147154302781781029.
Wilson, D., & Purushothaman, R. (2003). Dreaming with BRICs: The path to 2050. Goldman Sachs Global Economics Paper, 99, 1-24.
Yin, Robert K. 1981. “The Case Study Crisis: Some Answers.” Administrative Science Quarterly 26(1): 58-65. doi: 10.2307/2392599.
Yin, Robert K. 2014. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage (5th ed.).
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2022 Journal of Evolutionary Studies in Business
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
