Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Introduction Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2019 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

2. Definition of Key Terms: Knowledge, Knowledge Production, Innovation, Democracy, and Governance

verfasst von : Elias G. Carayannis, David F. J. Campbell

Erschienen in: Smart Quintuple Helix Innovation Systems

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The Wikipedia definition of knowledge, also cross-referencing to the Oxford English dictionary, lists as a crucial element of knowledge “the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.” The Wikipedia definition furthermore associates knowledge to “expertise, and skills” that a person may have gained either by experience or through education. Currently, there exists a general belief (indicated by numerous publications) that knowledge becomes increasingly important for society, economy, and also democracy. Advancements and a sustainable development of society and the economy appear unlikely without leveraging and enhancing knowledge. This adds plausibility for using concepts such as the knowledge-based society, the knowledge-based economy, and the knowledge-based democracy (Carayannis & Campbell, 2009, p. 224). Perhaps there is even a shift not only to speak of the knowledge-based society and economy but of a knowledge society and a knowledge economy per se that is being endogenously driven by knowledge. The concept of a knowledge democracy consequently complements such propositions.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Introduction
Nächstes Kapitel Mode 1, Mode 2, and Mode 3: Triple Helix and Quadruple Helix
Fußnoten
2
In that understanding, emotional competence may crosscut social competences and personality.
 
3
The OECD is the “Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.”.
 
4
In the context of this analysis, we use “knowledge creation” and “knowledge production” as interchangeable terms. A possible distinction may emphasize that knowledge creation is more fundamental and basic (more overlapping with basic research) than the knowledge production.
 
5
We want to quote, how the OECD (1994, p. 29) defines basic research: “Basic research is experimental or theoretical work undertaken primarily to acquire new knowledge of the underlying foundation of phenomena and observable facts, without any particular application or use in view.” This definition the OECD repeats unchanged in 2002 (OECD, 2002, p. 30).
 
6
Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (2000, p. 116) use the term of “pure science” for describing the post-1945 university system in the USA, which largely behaved according to the principles that were formulated and postulated by Vannevar Bush (1945). Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (2000, p. 116) speak in this context also of an “ideology of pure research.”
 
7
In a different book section, Lundvall (1992, p. 15) says: “As pointed out, we do not assume the process of innovation to be exclusively localized inside national borders. On the contrary, we recognize that the process of innovation has increasingly become multinational and transnational reflecting, for example, R&D cooperation between big firms based in different nations.”
 
8
Nelson (1990) describes or paraphrases capitalism as an engine of growth. As Nelson (1990, p. 193) states at the beginning of his article: “Economists, from Marx, to Schumpeter, have touted capitalism as an engine of technical progress. But what kind of an engine is it? How does it work? What are the strengths and weaknesses?”
 
9
We can speculate, to which extent research about the European Union (EU) and concepts such as a multi-level governance of the EU (Bomberg & Stubb, 2003, p. 9; Hooghe & Marks, 2001) helped inducing and creating the concept of multi-level systems of innovation (Carayannis & Campbell, 2006, p. 11).
 
10
See: http://​en.​wikipedia.​org/​wiki/​Creativity (retrieved: October 29, 2009).
 
11
Hemlin et al. provide the following definition for CKEs (quoted from the slide page number 3 of a PowerPoint presentation: http://​www.​spp.​gatech.​edu/​conference2006/​PPTs/​Hemlin_​7E.​pdf, retrieved November 16, 2009), creative knowledge environments = “… those environments, contexts and surroundings, the characteristics of which are such that they exert a positive influence on human beings engaged in creative work aiming to produce new knowledge or innovations, whether they work individually or in teams, within a single organization or in collaboration with others.”
 
12
Consequently, the influential book The New Production of Knowledge (Gibbons et al., 1994) also could have been titled as The Creative Production of Knowledge.
 
Literatur
Bomberg, E., & Stubb, A. (2003). Introduction. In E. Bomberg & A. Stubb (Eds.), The European Union: How does it work? (pp. 3–18). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Boulding, K. E. (1985). The world as a total system. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Campbell, D. F. J. (2009). Externe Umwelten. Außensichten auf das iff. In M. Arnold (Ed.). Iff. Interdisziplinäre Wissenschaft im Wandel (pp. 101–134). Vienna, Austria: LIT.
Campbell, D. F. J. (2001). Politische Steuerung über öffentliche Förderung universitärer Forschung? Systemtheoretische Überlegungen zu Forschungs- und Technologiepolitik. [Political Steering through Public Support of University Research? Systems-Theoretical Considerations about Research and Technology Policy]. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft (Austrian Journal of Political Science), 30(4), 425–438.
Campbell, D. F. J. (2006). The university/business research networks in science and technology: Knowledge production trends in the United States, European Union and Japan. In E. G. Carayannis & D. F. J. Campbell (Eds.), Knowledge creation, diffusion, and use in innovation networks and knowledge clusters. A comparative systems approach across the United States, Europe and Asia (pp. 67–100). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Campbell, D. F. J., & Güttel, W. H. (2005). Knowledge production of firms: Research networks and the “scientification” of business R&D. International Journal of Technology Management, 31(1-2), 152–175.CrossRef
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2006). “Mode 3”: Meaning and implications from a knowledge systems perspective. In E. G. Carayannis & D. F. J. Campbell (Eds.), Knowledge creation, diffusion, and use in innovation networks and knowledge clusters. A comparative systems approach across the United States, Europe and Asia. (pp. 1–25). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2007). A “Mode 3” systems approach for knowledge creation, diffusion, and use: Towards a twenty-first-century fractal innovation ecosystem. In E. G. Carayannis & C. Ziemnowicz (Eds.), Rediscovering Schumpeter. Creative destruction evolving into “Mode 3” (pp. 71–111). Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dubina, I. N. (2009). Управление творчеством персонала в условиях инновационной экономики [Creativity Management in the Innovation Economy]. Moscow, Russia: Academia.
Dubina, I. N. (2005). Managing creativity: Theoretical approaches to employees’ creativity development and regulation. International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy, 1(4), 334–349.CrossRef
Dubina, I. N. (2007). Optimally managing creativity in organisations. In E. G. Carayannis (Ed.), Managing creative and innovative people: The art, science and craft of fostering creativity, triggering invention and catalyzing innovation (pp. 143–170). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109–123.CrossRef
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London, UK: Sage.
Hemlin, S., Allwood, C. M., & Martin, B. R. (2004). Creative knowledge environments. The influences on creativity in research and innovation. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2001). Multi-level governance and European integration. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Kaiser, R., & Prange, H. (2004). The reconfiguration of national innovation systems – the example of German biotechnology. Research Policy, 33, 395–408.CrossRef
Kline, S. J., & Rosenberg, N. (1986). An overview of innovation. In R. Landau & N. Rosenburg (Eds.), The positive sum strategy. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Kuhlmann, S. (2001). Future governance of innovation policy in Europe – three scenarios. Research Policy, 30, 953–976.CrossRef
Lundvall, B.-Å. (Ed.). (1992). National systems of innovation. Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London, UK: Pinter Publishers.
Malerba, F. (2002). Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Research Policy, 31(2), 247–264.CrossRef
Malerba, F. (2004). Sectoral systems of innovation: Concepts, issues and analyses of six major sectors in Europe. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Miyata, Y. (2003). An analysis of research and innovative activities of universities in the United States. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), The international handbook on innovation (pp. 715–738). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pergamon.CrossRef
Narin, F., Hamilton, K. S., & Olivastro, D. (1997). The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science. Research Policy, 26, 317–330.CrossRef
Nelson, R. R. (1990). Capitalism as an engine of progress. Research Policy, 19, 193–214.CrossRef
Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National innovation systems. A comparative analysis. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
OECD. (1994). The measurement of scientific and technological activities. Proposed standard practice for surveys of research and experimental development. Frascati manual 1993. Paris, France: Author.
OECD. (2002). The measurement of scientific and technological activities. Proposed standard practice for surveys on research and experimental development. Frascati manual 2002. Paris, France: Author.
Schafer, K. E. (2008). Have we succeeded? Political leadership lessons from the United States. In A. Zimmer & R. M. Jankowitsch (Eds.), Political leadership. Annäherungen aus Wissenschaft und Praxis (pp. 263–278). Berlin, Germany: Polisphere.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Shavinina, L. V. (Ed.). (2003). The international handbook on innovation. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pergamon Elsevier Science.
Tassey, G. (2001). R&D policy models and data needs. In M. P. Feldman & A. N. Link (Eds.), Innovation policy in the knowledge-based economy (pp. 37–71). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Definition of Key Terms: Knowledge, Knowledge Production, Innovation, Democracy, and Governance
verfasst von
Elias G. Carayannis
David F. J. Campbell
Copyright-Jahr
2019
Buch
Smart Quintuple Helix Innovation Systems

Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01516-9

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-01517-6

Copyright-Jahr: 2019

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01517-6_2

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise