Product: Management & Develop­ment
Product: Management & Develop­ment
Original Article

The effort of “Triple Helix” actors in disruptive technologies

Sanderson César Macêdo Barbalho, Leandro Burba, Adriana Regina Martin

Downloads: 0
Views: 28


Disruptive technologies are areas of technology capable of creating abrupt changes in the market, creating new economic arena and alter the way of life in our society. In this scope, it is of great importance to perform an investigation related to the technologies and its top players that will possibly play a protagonist role in the main evolutions and changes in our society in the next few years. Understand the dynamics of technology innovation in disruptive areas can bring light on current effort made by private and public sectors, and specially the timeframe for launching new products in market. In this context, this contribution seek to present and discuss the current conjuncture of R&D in a group of technologies considered currently as disruptive for the next two decades. The focus of the work is to analyse the distribution of technology production in these areas in a context of university-industry-government relation, using the concepts of “triple helix”. For this purpose, we present statistical data of patents related to the investigated technology areas, and an analysis try to understand the motivation behind R&D in disruptive technologies, and what is the relationship among the triple helix actors in this innovative process.


disruptive technologies, triple helix, technology plan, research and development.


AN, H. J.; AHN, S.-J. Emerging technologies-beyond the chasm: assessing technological forecasting and its implication for innovation management in Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v. 102, p. 132-142, 2016.

BREITZMAN, A. F.; MOGEE, M. E. The many applications of patent analysis. Journal of Information Science, 2002.

CHRISTENSEN, C. M. The Innovator’s Dilema: when new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 1997.

CUI, Y.; JIAO, J.; JIAO, H. Technological innovation in Brazil, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS): an organizational ecology perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v. 107, p. 28-36, 2016.

ETZKOWITZ, H.; LEYDESDORFF, L. The endless transition: a “Triple Helix” of University-Industry-Govenment relations. Minerva, v. 36, p. 203-208, 1998.

GRUPP, H.; SCHMOCH, U. Patent statistics in the age of globalization: new legal procedures, new analytical methods; new economic interpretation. Research Policy, v. 28, p. 377-396, 1999.

GUAN, J.; LIU, N. Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: a patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy. Research Policy, v. 45, p. 97-112, 2016.

HUANG, Y. et al. A systematic method to create search strategies for emerging technologies based on the Web of Science: illustrated for ‘Big Data’. Scientometrics, v. 105, p. 2005-2022, 2015.

IVANOVA, I. A.; LEYDESDORFF, L. Rotational summetry and the transformation of innovation systems in a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v. 86, p. 143-156, 2014.

LEYDESDORFF, L. The triple helix: an evolutionary model of innovations. Research Policy, v. 29, p. 243-255, 2000.

LEYDESDORFF, L. The mutual information of universityindustry-government relations: an indicator of the triple helix dynamics. Scientometrics, v. 58, n. 2, p. 445-467, 2003.

MA, J.; PORTER, A. M. Analysing patent topical information to identify technology pathways and potential opportunities. Scientometrics, v. 102, p. 811-827, 2015.

MAZZUCATO, M. The entrepreneurial state: debunking public vs. private sector myths. London: Anthem Press, 2013.

MCKINSEY GLOBAL INSTITUTE. Disruptive technologies: advances that will transform life, business, and the global economy. USA: McKinsey Global Institute, 2013.

MILANEZ, D. H. et al. Patents in nanotechnology: an analysis using macro-indicators and forecasting curves. Scientometrics, v. 101, p. 1097-1112, 2014.

MOGEE, M. E. Using patent data for technology analysis and planning. Research Technology Management, v. 34, n. 4, p. 43-49, 1991.

MOGEE, M. E.; KOLAR, R. G. Using international patent data to identify and asses opportunities for technology acquisition from government research agencies. World Patent Information 14(4): 237-244, 1992.

MOGEE, M. E. Patent analysis for strategic advantage: using international patent records. Competitive Intelligence Review 5(1): 27-35, 1994.

MOGEE, M. E. Comparison of US, EPO, and PCT Patent Citations for Citation Analysis. In: ATLANTA CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION POLICY, 2007. Atlanta. Proceedings… USA: IEEE, 2007.

PORTER, M. E. The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review, p. 71-91, mar.- apr. 1990.

ROBIN, S.; SCHUBERT, T. Cooperation with Public Research Institutions and Socess in Innovation: evidence from France and Germany. Research Policy, v. 42, p. 149-166, 2013.

SCHUMPETER, J. Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Nova Iorque: Harper & Brothers, 1942.

ZHANG, Y. et al. A hybrid similarity measure methos for patent portfolio analysis. Journal of Informetrics, v. 10, p. 1108-1130, 2016.

5c9e117c0e88256a5d9ed45d pmd Articles
Links & Downloads


Share this page
Page Sections