Article Sidebar

Download
PDF Author information
Statistic
Read Counter : 1073 Download : 885

Main Article Content

Abstract

The Triple Helix (TH) model (University-Industry-Government relationship) enables numerous nations to enhance and accelerate their development forms. Ventures and universities are customary wellsprings of information. In most creating nations like Malaysia, which is experiencing significant change towards innovation-based economies, the Triple Helix model coupled with the National Innovation System can speed up this progress. This paper investigates the application of the Triple Helix (TH) model inside the National Innovation System in Malaysia. It looks at the degree or level of cooperation amongst organizations and universities in advancing economic development. This research applies mix method in which an integrative investigation of the literature, secondary information and a survey of six Malaysian public universities. The outcomes demonstrate that, the application of Triple Helix model in Malaysian public universities is acceptable. The National University of Malaysia (UKM) performed poorly while University Putra Malaysia (UPM) appears better than others. The outcomes show the need of taking care of distinguished issues in parallel with the execution of the open development idea to extend University-Industry-Government collaboration.

 

Keywords

Triple Helix Entrepreneurial University National Innovation Systems Malaysian public university Research product commercialization

Article Details

References

  1. Afzal, M.N.I & Lawrey, R. (2012). Evaluating the Comparative Performance of Technical and Scale Efficiencies in Knowledge-Based Economies (KBEs) in ASEAN: A Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) Application. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 51(1), 81-95.
  2. Afzal, M.N.I. & Lawrey, R. (2014). Measuring the importance and efficiency of research and development expenditures in the transformation of knowledge-based economies: A case study of the ASEAN region. International Journal of Asia Pacific Studies (IJAPS), 10(1), 33-47.
  3. Barterls, F. L. Voss, H., Lederer, S. & Bachtrog, C. (2012). Determinants of National Innovation Systems: Policy implications for developing countries. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 14(1), 2-18.
  4. Castellacci, F. & Natera, J. M. (2013). The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 42(3), 579-594.
  5. Chandran, V. G. R., Sundram, V. P. K. & Santhidran, S. (2013). Innovation systems in Malaysia: a perspective of university—industry R&D collaboration. AI & Society, 29(3), 435-444.
  6. Chuah, F., Ting, H., Run, E. C. & Cheah, J. H. (2016). Reconsidering What Entrepreneurial Intention Implies: The Evidence from Malaysian University Students. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 7(9), 85-98.
  7. Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R. R., Silverberg, G. & Soete, L. (Eds) (1988). Technology and Economic Theory. (London: Pinter).
  8. Edquist, C. (Ed.) (1997). Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organization. (London: Printer/Cassell Academic).
  9. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32(1), 109-121.
  10. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Social Science Information, 42(3), 293-338.
  11. Freeman, C. (1987). Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. (London: Pinter).
  12. Friedman, T.L. (2007). The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty First Century, Farrar, Straus and Giroux: MacMillan Inc.
  13. Harman, G. & Harman, K. (2004). Governments and Universities as the Main Drivers of Enhanced Australian University Research Commercialization Capability. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 26(2), 153-169.
  14. Iqbal, A.M., Khan, A.S., Bashir, F. & Senin, A. A. (2015). Evaluating National Innovation System of Malaysia Based on University-industry Research Collaboration: A System Thinking Approach. Asian Social Science, 11(13), 45-60.
  15. Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix, and an N-tuple of helices: Explanatory models for analyzing the knowledge-based economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3(1), 25-35.
  16. Leydesdorff, L. (2012). Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations (pp. 1844-1851). Springer New York.
  17. Lundvall, B. A. (2007). National Innovation System –– Analytical Concept and Development Tool. Industry and Innovation, 14(1), 95-119.
  18. Lundvall, B. A. (Ed.) (1992). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. (London: Pinter).
  19. Maarof, M. G., Sorooshian, S., Rahamaddulla, S. R., R. & Hamid, S. A. (2017). Technology Transfer Obstacles. International Journal of Pharmacy & Technology, 9(1), 28100-28105.
  20. Mok, K. H. (2013). The quest for an entrepreneurial university in East Asia: impact on academics and administrators in higher education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 14(1), 11-22.
  21. Monroe, T. (2006). The National Innovation Systems of Singapore and Malaysia. Institute Troy, New York.
  22. Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National innovation systems: a comparative analysis. Oxford University Press.
  23. Ramli, M. F. & Senin, A. A. (2015). Success factors to reduce orientation and resources-related barriers in university-industry R&D Collaboration particularly during development research stages. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172(1), 375-382.
  24. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students. Edinburgh: Pearson Education.
  25. Swamidass, P. & Vulusa, V. (2009). Why university inventions rarely produce income? Bottlenecks in university technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(4), 343-363.
  26. World Competitiveness Yearbook (2017). IMD, Switzerland.
  27. Yusof, M., Siddiq, M, S. & Nor, L. M. (2012). Internal Factors of Academic Entrepreneurship: the case of Four Malaysian Public Research Universities. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 8(1), 84-115.