Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 90, Issue 1, pp 101–120 | Cite as

Triple helix in the agricultural sector of Northeast Asian countries: a comparative study between Korea and China

  • Haneul Kim
  • Minghao Huang
  • Furong Jin
  • David Bodoff
  • Junghoon Moon
  • Young Chan Choe
Article

Abstract

In this paper, the agricultural innovation systems of two Northeast Asian countries—Korea and China—are investigated and compared from the perspective of triple helix innovation. Specifically, the current study examines the nature of agricultural innovation of the two countries and considers agricultural R&D investments and activities as well as the roles of university, industry, and government (UIG), which are the three units comprising the triple helix. As an empirical extension of the qualitative analysis, we collected bibliometric information of agricultural scientific publications from 1990 to 2010 and patent information from 1980 to 2010. By calculating transmission of uncertainty, which indicates collaboration among UIG, this paper tracks the relationship dynamics of the units comprising the triple helix. In addition, we analyze topics in scientific publications and patents in order to observe and compare the subareas that are the focus in the two countries. The findings reveal both commonalities and differences between the two countries, thus providing knowledge of and insights into the agricultural sector.

Keywords

Triple helix R&D Agricultural sector Korea China 

References

  1. Bae, S., & Yong, T. (2011). Recent trend and implications of government R&D expenditure in main developed countries and Korea. Seoul: Korea Institute of S&T Evaluation and Planning.Google Scholar
  2. Beghin, J. C., Bureau, J. C., & Park, S. J. (2003). Food security and agricultural protection in South Korea. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85(3), 618–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Colby, H., Diao, X., & Somwaru, A. (2000). Cross-commodity analysis of China’s grain sector: Sources of growth and supply response. Technical Bulletins. U.S. Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
  4. Danell, R., & Persson, O. (2003). Regional R&D activities and interactions in the Swedish Triple Helix. Scientometrics, 58(2), 203–218. doi: 10.1023/a:1026228425125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Diao, X., Somwaru, A., & Roe, T. (2001). A global analysis of agricultural reform in WTO member countries. Background paper for a USDA project on Agricultural Policy Reform in the WTO: The Road Ahead, ERS-E01-001. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
  6. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Social Science Information, 42(3), 293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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(2), 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fan, S., & Pardey, P. G. (1997). Research, productivity, and output growth in Chinese agriculture. Journal of Development Economics, 53(1), 115–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goktepe, D. (2003). The Triple Helix as a model to analyze Israeli Magnet Program and lessons for late-developing countries like Turkey. Scientometrics, 58(2), 219–239. doi: 10.1023/a:1026280409195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grupp, H. (1990). The concept of entropy in scientometrics and innovation research. Scientometrics, 18(3), 219–239. doi: 10.1007/bf02017763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jin, S., Ma, H., Huang, J., Hu, R., & Rozelle, S. (2010). Productivity, efficiency and technical change: measuring the performance of China’s transforming agriculture. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 33(3), 191–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kang, I. S., & Song, Y. (2004). Liberalization of the agricultural sector in northeast Asia: The effects of the Doha Development Agenda*. Asian Economic Papers, 3(2), 99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Korea Rural Economic Institute (2010). Agricultural Policy in China. Korea Rural Economic Institute. Press Release, 17 February 2011.Google Scholar
  14. Latour, B. (1988). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The triple helix: An evolutionary model of innovations. Research Policy, 29(2), 243–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leydesdorff, L. (2003). Can “The Public” be considered as a fourth helix in University–Industry–Government relations? Science and Public Policy, 30(1), 55–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leydesdorff, L., & Sun, Y. (2009). National and international dimensions of the Triple Helix in Japan: University–industry–government versus international coauthorship relations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(4), 778–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leydesdorff, L., & Zawdie, G. (2010). The triple helix perspective of innovation systems. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(7), 789–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lohmar, B., Gale, F., Tuan, F., & Hansen, J. (2009). China’s ongoing agricultural modernization: Challenges remain after 30 years of reform. USDAGoogle Scholar
  20. Ma, X. (2010). The present situation and future strategy of food security in China. Paper presented at the 5th forum for China–Korea Agricultural Cooperation, Beijing, December 2010.Google Scholar
  21. Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Korea (2009). The 1st Five-year Plan of Promoting Science & Technology in Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Press Release, 23 December 2009. Google Scholar
  22. 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. doi: 10.1007/s11192-005-0257-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pretty, J. N., Ball, A. S., Xiaoyun, L., & Ravindranath, N. (2002). The role of sustainable agriculture and renewable-resource management in reducing greenhouse-gas emissions and increasing sinks in China and India. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 360(1797), 1741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Razak, A. A., & Saad, M. (2007). The role of universities in the evolution of the Triple Helix culture of innovation network: The case of Malaysia. International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development, 6(3), 211–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rivera, M. I. (2006). The foreign factor within the Triple Helix model: Interactions of national and international innovation systems, technology transfer and implications for the region: The case of the electronics cluster in Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 1(4), 10–21.Google Scholar
  26. Saad, M., & Zawdie, G. (2005). From technology transfer to the emergence of a triple helix culture: The experience of Algeria in innovation and technological capability development. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 17(1), 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Saviotti, P. P. (1988). Information, variety and entropy in technoeconomic development. Research Policy, 17(2), 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(379), 623.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. Shen, X. (2010). Understanding the evolution of rice technology in China—from traditional agriculture to GM rice today. Journal of Development Studies, 46(6), 1026–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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(3), 677–685. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0179-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Theil, H. (1972). Statistical decomposition analysis. Amsterdam: North-Holland.MATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Toffler, A., Longul, W., & Forbes, H. (1981). The third wave. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
  33. Wasserman, S. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Haneul Kim
    • 1
  • Minghao Huang
    • 2
  • Furong Jin
    • 3
  • David Bodoff
    • 1
  • Junghoon Moon
    • 1
  • Young Chan Choe
    • 1
  1. 1.Program of Regional InformationCollege of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Seoul National UniversitySeoulKorea
  2. 2.Department of International TradeKonkuk UniversitySeoulKorea
  3. 3.Korea Institute for International Economic PolicySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations