Industry–University Collaboration and Regional Innovation Performance: Evidence from R&D Zones Using a Quadruple Helix Growth Framework
AUTHORS
Matthew Collins,School of Economics and Finance, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
Hannah Thompson,Department of Management University of Canterbury Christchurch, New Zealand
Daniel Murray,School of Business and Economics, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
ABSTRACT
Amid increasing organizational complexity and uncertainty, this study explores the link between industry–university collaboration and regional economic performance in designated R&D zones. Drawing on the Quadruple Helix growth framework, which conceptualizes innovation as an interaction among firms, universities, government, and civil society, the analysis evaluates whether technology commercialization activities contribute to firm-level revenue growth. Using regional panel data from four Korean R&D zones over the period 2013–2022, the study estimates a fixed-effects regression model incorporating labour inputs, public expenditure, innovation outputs, and collaboration indicators. The results indicate that technology transfer activities and research-based spin-off formation are positively associated with firm revenue. In contrast, aggregate public expenditure and several R&D input measures do not show statistically significant effects. These findings suggest that the economic contribution of public research is most evident when knowledge is actively translated into market-facing activities. The study contributes to regional innovation research by empirically clarifying the conditions under which Quadruple Helix interactions are associated with local economic outcomes.
KEYWORDS
Research and Development (R&D) zones, Industry–university collaboration, Regional innovation performance, Regional economic performance, Quadruple Helix framework, Technology commercialization
REFERENCES
[1] R. Brown, “Mission impossible? Entrepreneurial universities and peripheral regional innovation systems.” Industry and Innovation, vol.23, no. 2, pp.189–205, (2016) DOI:10.1080/13662716.2016.1145575(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[2] S. Reichert, “The role of universities in regional innovation ecosystems,” European University Association, (2019)
[3] J. Min, Y. Kim, and N. S. Vonortas, “Public technology transfer, commercialization and business growth,” European Economic Review, vol.124, 103407, (2020) DOI:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2020.103407(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[4] L. Höglund, and G. Linton, “Smart specialization in regional innovation systems: A quadruple helix perspective,” R&D Management, vol.48, no.1, pp.60-72, (2017) DOI:10.1111/radm.12306(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[5] N. Hasche, L. Höglund, and G. Linton, “Quadruple helix as a network of relationships: creating value within a Swedish regional innovation system,” Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship,, vol.32, no.6, pp.523–544, (2020) DOI:10.1080/08276331.2019.1643134(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[6] M. Roman and K. Fellnhofer, “Facilitating the participation of civil society in regional planning: Implementing the quadruple helix model in Finnish regions,” Land Use Policy, vol.112, 105864, (2021) DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105864 (CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[7] C. Mascarenhas, C. S. Marques, J. J. Ferreira, and A. R. Galvão, “The Influence of research and innovation strategies for smart specialization (RIS3) on university-industry collaboration,” Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, vol.7, no.1, pp.82, (2021) DOI:10.3390/joitmc7010082 (CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[8] A. Romero-Sánchez, G. Perdomo-Charry, and E. L. Burbano-Vallejo, “Exploring the entrepreneurial landscape of university-industry collaboration on public university spin-off creation: A systematic literature review,” Heliyon, vol.10, no.19, e27258, (2024), DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27258(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[9] H. Martínez-Ardila, A. Castro-Rodriguez, and J. Camacho-Pico, “Examining the impact of university-industry collaborations on spin-off creation: Evidence from joint patents,” Heliyon, vol.9, no.9, e19533, (2023) DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19533 (CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[10] Y. Cai and A. Lattu, “Triple helix or quadruple helix: Which model of innovation to choose for empirical studies?” Minerva, vol.60, pp.257–280, (2022) DOI:10.1007/s11024-021-09453-6 (CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[11] P. González-Martinez, D. García-Pérez-De-Lema, M. Castillo-Vergara, and P. B. Hansen, “Determinants and performance of the quadruple helix model and the mediating role of civil society,” Technology in Society, vol.75, 102358, (2023) DOI:10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102358(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[12] A. Y. Aksoy, D. Pulizzotto, and C. Beaudry, “University-Industry partnerships in the smart specialization era,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol.176, 121438, (2022) DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121438 (CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[13] Y. Li, Z. Li, and T. Liu, “Does university-industry collaboration improve firm productivity? Evidence from China,” PLOS ONE, vol.19, no.7, e0305695, (2024) DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0305695 (CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[14] S. Radosevic and T. Zoretic, “EU smart specialization policy between experimentation and accountability: dynamic policy cycle perspective,: European Planning Studies, vol.32, no.8, pp.1693–1712, (2024) DOI:10.1080/09654313.2024.2359669(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[15] D. Bamford, I. Reid, P. Forrester, “An empirical investigation into UK university–industry collaboration: The development of an impact framework,” J Technol Transf, vol.49, pp.1411–1443, (2024) DOI:10.1007/s10961-023-10043-9(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[16] J. Starkbaum, R. Braun, V. Blok, F. Schroth, J. J. Haubermann, C. Colonnello, and A. Gerhardus, “Responsible innovation across societal sectors: a practice perspective on Quadruple Helix collaboration,” Journal of Responsible Innovation, vol.11, no.1, (2024) DOI:10.1080/23299460.2024.2414531(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)