IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v76-77y2018ip3-14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using web mining to explore Triple Helix influences on growth in small and mid-size firms

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Yin
  • Arora, Sanjay
  • Youtie, Jan
  • Shapira, Philip

Abstract

While broad “Triple Helix” frameworks of industry, government and university collaborations have the potential to enhance innovation and economic development at macro-levels, at the micro-level of the firm it should not be assumed that such relationships are uniform in character or outcomes. Each firm will negotiate and develop its own set of relationships with other innovation system actors based on its capabilities and strategies. To better understand these dynamics, particularly from the perspective of small and medium-sized enterprises, this study probes the micro-level characteristics and impacts of external enterprise relationships. Novel website-based Triple Helix measures are introduced that extend the analytical scope beyond customary indicators (such as patent analysis or entropy measures) to include communication and coordination among all three helices at the micro-level of individual firms. This approach is used to explore the micro-level characteristics and impacts of industry, government and university relations for small and medium-sized enterprises by analyzing a subset of 271 U.S. green goods small and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises. We compare the website-based measures with case study results to authenticate the method. A panel data regression model is then employed to analyze the simultaneous impacts of various combinations of industry, government and university links on firm sales growth (2008–2011), with controls for region, scale, and application domains. The ability of website-based indicators to distinguish the impacts of different mixes of Triple Helix relations is demonstrated. While relationships with all three helices have a positive total marginal effect on firm sales growth, local relationships and relationships that emphasize links with government and industry make particularly notable contributions to growth in the sample green goods enterprises. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Yin & Arora, Sanjay & Youtie, Jan & Shapira, Philip, 2018. "Using web mining to explore Triple Helix influences on growth in small and mid-size firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 3-14.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:76-77:y:2018:i::p:3-14
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2016.01.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497216000031
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.01.002?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. Loet Leydesdorff, 2003. "The mutual information of university-industry-government relations: An indicator of the Triple Helix dynamics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 445-467, October.
    2. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February.
    3. Eric J. Iversen & Magnus Gulbrandsen & Antje Klitkou, 2007. "A baseline for the impact of academic patenting legislation in Norway," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 393-414, February.
    4. Martin Meyer & Tatiana Siniläinen & Jan Timm Utecht, 2003. "Towards hybrid Triple Helix indicators: A study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 321-350, October.
    5. Abdullah Gök & Alec Waterworth & Philip Shapira, 2015. "Use of web mining in studying innovation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 653-671, January.
    6. Acosta, Manuel & Coronado, Daniel, 2003. "Science-technology flows in Spanish regions: An analysis of scientific citations in patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1783-1803, December.
    7. Leydesdorff, Loet & Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Triple Helix indicators of knowledge-based innovation systems: Introduction to the special issue," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1441-1449, December.
    8. Hausman, Jerry A & Taylor, William E, 1981. "Panel Data and Unobservable Individual Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1377-1398, November.
    9. Leydesdorff, Loet & Fritsch, Michael, 2006. "Measuring the knowledge base of regional innovation systems in Germany in terms of a Triple Helix dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1538-1553, December.
    10. Chrysanthos Dellarocas, 2006. "Strategic Manipulation of Internet Opinion Forums: Implications for Consumers and Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(10), pages 1577-1593, October.
    11. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Ana Fernández, 2009. "Exploring the quality of environmental technology in Europe: evidence from patent citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(1), pages 131-152, July.
    12. Han Woo Park & Heung Deug Hong & Loet Leydesdorff, 2005. "A comparison of the knowledge-based innovation systems in the economies of South Korea and the Netherlands using Triple Helix indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 65(1), pages 3-27, October.
    13. David Godes & Dina Mayzlin & Yubo Chen & Sanjiv Das & Chrysanthos Dellarocas & Bruce Pfeiffer & Barak Libai & Subrata Sen & Mengze Shi & Peeter Verlegh, 2005. "The Firm's Management of Social Interactions," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 415-428, December.
    14. Yin Li & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2015. "Why do technology firms publish scientific papers? The strategic use of science by small and midsize enterprises in nanotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1016-1033, December.
    15. Dellarocas, Chrysanthos, 2003. "The Digitization of Word-of-mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Working papers 4296-03, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    16. Chrysanthos Dellarocas, 2003. "The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(10), pages 1407-1424, October.
    17. Julie Callaert & Bart Van Looy & Arnold Verbeek & Koenraad Debackere & Bart Thijs, 2006. "Traces of Prior Art: An analysis of non-patent references found in patent documents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 3-20, October.
    18. Loet Leydesdorff & Henry Etzkowitz, 1996. "Emergence of a Triple Helix of university—industry—government relations," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(5), pages 279-286, October.
    19. Nicola Baldini, 2006. "University patenting and licensing activity: a review of the literature," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 197-207, December.
    20. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    21. Sanjay K. Arora & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira & Lidan Gao & TingTing Ma, 2013. "Entry strategies in an emerging technology: a pilot web-based study of graphene firms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 1189-1207, June.
    22. Allen, Robert C., 1983. "Collective invention," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 1-24, March.
    23. Martin Meyer & Kevin Grant & Piera Morlacchi & Dagmara Weckowska, 2014. "Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 151-174, April.
    24. Hicks, Diana, 1995. "Published Papers, Tacit Competencies and Corporate Management of the Public/Private Character of Knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 4(2), pages 401-424.
    25. Kevin Morgan, 2004. "The exaggerated death of geography: learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 3-21, January.
    26. Paul Muller & Julien Pénin, 2007. "Why do firms disclose knowledge and how does it matter?," Springer Books, in: Uwe Cantner & Franco Malerba (ed.), Innovation, Industrial Dynamics and Structural Transformation, pages 149-172, Springer.
    27. James Simmie, 2005. "Critical surveys edited by Stephen Roper innovation and space: A critical review of the literature," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(6), pages 789-804.
    28. Bart Looy & Tom Magerman & Koenraad Debackere, 2007. "Developing technology in the vicinity of science: An examination of the relationship between science intensity (of patents) and technological productivity within the field of biotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 441-458, February.
    29. Marta Riba Vilanova & Loet Leydesdorff, 2001. "Why Catalonia cannot be considered as a regional innovation system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 50(2), pages 215-240, February.
    30. Asheim, Bjorn T. & Coenen, Lars, 2005. "Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic clusters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1173-1190, October.
    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. Byeongdeuk Jang & Jae-Yong Choung & Inje Kang, 2022. "Knowledge production patterns of China and the US: quantum technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5691-5719, October.
    2. Jong-Hyun Kim & Yong-Gil Lee, 2021. "Factors of Collaboration Affecting the Performance of Alternative Energy Patents in South Korea from 2010 to 2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-25, September.
    3. Borah, Dhruba & Malik, Khaleel & Massini, Silvia, 2021. "Teaching-focused university–industry collaborations: Determinants and impact on graduates’ employability competencies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(3).
    4. Sanjay K. Arora & Yin Li & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2020. "Measuring dynamic capabilities in new ventures: exploring strategic change in US green goods manufacturing using website data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1451-1480, October.
    5. 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.
    6. Sylvia Novillo-Villegas & Ricardo Ayala-Andrade & Juan Pablo Lopez-Cox & Javier Salazar-Oyaneder & Patricia Acosta-Vargas, 2022. "A Roadmap for Innovation Capacity in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-20, May.
    7. Marta Ferrer-Serrano & M. Pilar Latorre-Martínez & Lucio Fuentelsaz, 2021. "The European research landscape under the Horizon 2020 Lenses: the interaction between science centers, public institutions, and industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 828-853, June.
    8. Christoph Stich & Emmanouil Tranos & Max Nathan, 2023. "Modeling clusters from the ground up: A web data approach," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 50(1), pages 244-267, January.
    9. Rammer, Christian & Es-Sadki, Nordine, 2023. "Using big data for generating firm-level innovation indicators - a literature review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    10. ZHU Chen & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2024. "The Fundraising of AI Startups: Evidence from web data," Discussion papers 24021, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    11. Leonid Gokhberg & Dirk Meissner & Ilya Kuzminov, 2023. "What semantic analysis can tell us about long term trends in the global STI policy agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2249-2277, December.
    12. Mazzoni Leonardo & Pinelli Fabio & Riccaboni Massimo, 2023. "Measuring Corporate Digital Divide with web scraping: Evidence from Italy," Papers 2301.04925, arXiv.org.
    13. 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).

    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. Martin Meyer & Kevin Grant & Piera Morlacchi & Dagmara Weckowska, 2014. "Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 151-174, April.
    2. Milica Jovanović & Gordana Savić & Yuzhuo Cai & Maja Levi-Jakšić, 2022. "Towards a Triple Helix based efficiency index of innovation systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2577-2609, May.
    3. Weimin Kang & Shuliang Zhao & Wei Song & Tao Zhuang, 2019. "Triple helix in the science and technology innovation centers of China from the perspective of mutual information: a comparative study between Beijing and Shanghai," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 921-940, March.
    4. Porto-Gomez, Igone & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2019. "Innovation systems in México: A matter of missing synergies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    5. Rotolo, Daniele & Camerani, Roberto & Grassano, Nicola & Martin, Ben R., 2022. "Why do firms publish? A systematic literature review and a conceptual framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    6. Reza Naghizadeh & Shaban Elahi & Manoochehr Manteghi & Sepehr Ghazinoory & Marina Ranga, 2015. "Through the magnifying glass: an analysis of regional innovation models based on co-word and meta-synthesis methods," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 2481-2505, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Subhan Tahrima & Don Jaegal, 2013. "Applicability of Knowledge-Based Innovation System in Bangladesh," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 185-208, December.
    9. Noriko Yoda & Kenichi Kuwashima, 2020. "Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations in Japan: Transitions of Collaborations and Interactions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(3), pages 1120-1144, September.
    10. Paola Rucker Schaeffer & Bruno Fischer & Sergio Queiroz, 2018. "Beyond Education: The Role of Research Universities in Innovation Ecosystems," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 50-61.
    11. Roberto Camerani & Daniele Rotolo & Nicola Grassano, 2018. "Do Firms Publish? A Multi-Sectoral Analysis," SPRU Working Paper Series 2018-21, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    12. Rakas, Marija & Hain, Daniel S., 2019. "The state of innovation system research: What happens beneath the surface?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    13. Md. Dulal Hossain & Junghoon Moon & Hyoung Goo Kang & Sung Chul Lee & Young Chan Choe, 2012. "Mapping the dynamics of knowledge base of innovations of R&D in Bangladesh: triple helix perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(1), pages 57-83, January.
    14. Strand, Øivind & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2013. "Where is synergy indicated in the Norwegian innovation system? Triple-Helix relations among technology, organization, and geography," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 471-484.
    15. Swapan Kumar Patra & Mammo Muchie, 2018. "Research and innovation in South African universities: from the triple helix’s perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 51-76, July.
    16. Pieter Stek & Marina Geenhuizen, 2015. "Measuring the dynamics of an innovation system using patent data: a case study of South Korea, 2001–2010," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1325-1343, July.
    17. Dahesh, Mehran Badin & Tabarsa, Gholamali & Zandieh, Mostafa & Hamidizadeh, Mohammadreza, 2020. "Reviewing the intellectual structure and evolution of the innovation systems approach: A social network analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    18. Hernández-Trasobares, Alejandro & Murillo-Luna, Josefina L., 2020. "The effect of triple helix cooperation on business innovation: The case of Spain," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    19. Ssu-Han Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang & Dar-Zen Chen, 2013. "Driving factors of external funding and funding effects on academic innovation performance in university–industry–government linkages," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1077-1098, March.
    20. Claudia Fuentes & Gabriela Dutrénit, 2016. "Geographic proximity and university–industry interaction: the case of Mexico," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 329-348, April.

    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:techno:v:76-77:y:2018:i::p:3-14. 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/01664972 .

    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.