, Volume 90, Issue 1, pp 57–83 | Cite as

Mapping the dynamics of knowledge base of innovations of R&D in Bangladesh: triple helix perspective

  • Md. Dulal Hossain
  • Junghoon Moon
  • Hyoung Goo Kang
  • Sung Chul Lee
  • Young Chan Choe


Triple helix (TH) collaborations involving university, industry and government provide a networked infrastructure for shaping the dynamic fluxes of knowledge base of innovations locally and these fluxes remain emergent within the domains. This study maps these emergence dynamics of the knowledge base of innovations of Research & Development (R&D) by exploring the longitudinal trend of systemness within the networked research relations in Bangladesh on the TH model. The bibliometric data of publications collected from the Science Citation Index (SCI), the social sciences and the arts and humanities for analysis of science indicators and the patent data collected from the US Patent Office to analyze the patent success ratio as a measure of innovation within TH domains. The findings show that the network dynamics have varied considerably according to the R&D policies of the government. The collaboration patterns of co-authorship relations in the SCI publications prominently increased, with some variation, from 1996 to 2006. Nevertheless, inter-institutional collaboration negatively influenced by the national science and technology (S&T) research policies in the last 5 years due to their evaluation criteria. Finally, the findings reveal that the R&D system of Bangladesh is still undergoing a process of institutionalizing S&T and has failed to boost its research capacity for building the knowledge base of innovations by neglecting the network effects of TH dynamics.


Triple helix Research & development Bangladesh government University Industry Innovations 



This work was supported by the research fund of Hanyang University (HY-2011-N).


  1. Abramson, N. (1963). Information theory and coding. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  2. Bertelsmann Stiftung (BTI 2010). Bangladesh country report. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2009.Google Scholar
  3. Carlsson, B. (2006). Internationalization of innovation systems: A survey of the literature. Research Policy, 35(1), 56–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chatziparadeisis, A. (2003). The R&D indicators in the knowledge-based economy: The research paradox, at
  5. Dzisah, J., & Etzkowitz, H. (2009). Triple helix circulation: The heart of innovation and development. In: A theme paper presented at the 2009 triple-helix annual conference. Glasgow, UK, 16–18 June, 2009.Google Scholar
  6. Etzkowitz, H., & Brisolla, S. N. (1999). Failure and success: The fate of industrial policy in Latin America and South East Asia. Research Policy, 28, 337–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdoref, L. (Eds.). (1997). Universities in the global knowledge economy: A triple helix of university–industry–government relations. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  8. 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(22), 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fritsch, M. (2004). R&D-cooperation and the efficiency of regional innovation activities. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 28, 829–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Granstrand, O. (1999). The economics and management of intellectual property: Towards intellectual capitalism. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  12. Hall, B. H., Grilliches, Z., & Hausman, J. (1986). Patents and R&D: Is there a lag? International Economic Review, 27, 265–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haque, M. M., & Islam, M. N. N. (1997). Promoting industrial competitiveness through technological capability building in Bangladesh. Dhaka: Mimeo.Google Scholar
  14. Hwang, Y.-S., Kim, S.-S., Byun, B.-M., Lee, K.-H., & Lee, H. (2004). Strategies of promoting industry-academia-research institute R&D partnerships to cope with new technologies-focusing on industry–research institute, interfirm R&D partnerships. In: Policy research report R03-25. STEPI (Science & Technology Policy Institute), Seoul, written in Korean.Google Scholar
  15. Iqbal, Muhammed Zafar ‘Only 1000 PhD’. (2011). (Prothom Alo (Banglaseshi daily Newspaper), Dhaka, Monday, 6 June, 2011.Google Scholar
  16. Islam, K. N. (2001). Strengthening technological capability for industrial competitiveness in Bangladesh. Science, Technology and Society, 6(1), 133–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Krishna, V. V. (2006). Mapping research systems in developing countries: Country report: The science and technology system in Bangladesh. Published with the support of UNESCO Forum for higher education, research and knowledge by CREST. France: South Africa and IRD.Google Scholar
  18. Leydesdorff, L. (2001). Indicators of innovation in a knowledge-based economy. Cybermetrics, 5(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
  19. Leydesdorff, L. (2003). The mutual information of university-industry-government relations: An indicator of the triple helix dynamics. Scientometrics, 58(2), 445–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leydesdorff, L., & Fritsch, M. (2006). Measuring the knowledge base of regional innovation systems in Germany in terms of a triple helix dynamics. Research Policy, 35(10), 1538–1553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leydesdorff, L., & Scharnhorst, A. (2003). Measuring the knowledge base: A program of innovation studies. Report to the “Förderinitiative science policy studies” of the German Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. Berlin: Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften; at
  22. Leydesdorff, L., & Sun, Y. (2009). National and international dimensions of the triple helix in Japan: University-industry-government versus international Co-authorship relations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(4), 778–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Leydesdorff, L., & Zhou, P. (2005). Are the contributions of China and Korea upsetting the world system of science? Scientometrics, 63(3), 617–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leydesdorff, L., Dolfsma, W., & van der Panne, G. (2006). Measuring the knowledge base of an economy in terms of triple-helix relations among technology, organization, and territory. Research Policy, 35(2), 181–199.Google Scholar
  25. Lundvall, B.-Å. (Ed.). (1998). Innovation as an interactive process: From user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation. In: G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, & L. Soete (Eds.), Technical change and economic theory (pp. 349–369) London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  26. Mahbuba, D., & Rousseau, R. (2010). Scientific research in the indian subcontinent: Selected trends and indicators 1973–2007 comparing Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka with India, the local giant. Scientometrics, 84, 403–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mahmud, I. (2006). Science and technology development in Bangladesh: Failure in policy implementation,
  28. Mcaleer, M., & Slottje, D. (2005). A new measure of innovation: The patent success ratio. Scientometrics, 63(3), 421–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Momtaz, U. A. (2004). Promoting business and technology incubation for improved competitiveness of small and medium-sized industries through application of modern and efficient technologies in Bangladesh. proceedings and papers presented at the national workshops on promoting business and technology incubation for improved competitiveness of small and medium-sized industries through application of modern and efficient technologies, New York, United Nations.Google Scholar
  30. Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Longitudinal trends in networks of university–industry–government relations in South Korea: The role of programmatic incentives. Research Policy, 39, 640–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Park, H. W., Hong, H. D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). A comparison of the knowledge-based innovation systems in the economies of South Korea and the Netherlands using triple helix indicators. Scientometrics, 65(1), 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds.). (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  33. Shannon, C. E. (1948). Amathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423 and 623–356.Google Scholar
  34. Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.MATHGoogle Scholar
  35. Shapiro, M. (2007). The triple helix paradigm in Korea: A test for new capital. International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development, 6(3), 171–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sun, Y., & Negishi, M. (2010). Measuring the relationships among university, industry and other sectors in Japan’s national innovation system: A comparison of new approaches with mutual information indicators. Scientometrics, 82, 677–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Theil, H. (1972). Statistical decomposition analysis. Amsterdam: North-Holland.MATHGoogle Scholar
  38. Trotter, I. I. R. T., Briody, E. K., Sengir, G. H., & Meerwarth, T. L. (2008). The life cycle of collaborative partnerships: Evolution of structure and roles in industry-university research networks. Connections, 28(1), 40–58.Google Scholar
  39. Wagner, C. S. (2008). The new invisible college. Washington: Brookings Press.Google Scholar
  40. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Md. Dulal Hossain
    • 1
  • Junghoon Moon
    • 1
  • Hyoung Goo Kang
    • 2
  • Sung Chul Lee
    • 1
  • Young Chan Choe
    • 3
  1. 1.Program in Regional Information, College of Agriculture and Life SciencesSeoul National UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of FinanceHanyang University School of BusinessSeoulRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Research Institute for Agriculture & Life SciencesSeoul National UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations