Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research and innovation in South African universities: from the triple helix’s perspective

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explores the research and innovation in South African universities within the triple-helix framework. Patents and publications data have been used as output indicators to map the R&D activities of South African universities. The study observed that universities are the most prolific publishers and constitute about 91% of total South African publications. However, universities altogether produce only about 14% of total South African patents. Only a few universities are responsible for both patenting and publication portfolio of South Africa. The collaboration patterns from joint patents show that only about 19% patents are collaborative patents. South African public research institutes are more active in joint patents with universities followed by the foreign universities but local firms are less active in collaborative patents. The similar trends are observed in co-authored articles also. The study recommends that collaboration between universities and local firms need to be strengthened to develop technological capabilities in South Africa. South African universities need to collaborate more with the industries, particularly the local industries or institutes to achieve the ‘entrepreneurial university’ in terms of patents and technology transfer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • A Programme for the Transformation of Higher Education, White Paper 3. (1997). Department of Education, South Africa.

  • Abbasi, A., Hossaina, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2012). Betweenness centrality as a driver of preferential attachment in the evolution of research collaboration networks. Journal of Informetrics, 6, 403–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1989). Patents as a measure of innovative activity. Kyklos, 42(2), 171–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archibugi, D., & Coco, A. (2004). A new indicator of technological capabilities for developed and developing countries (ArCo). World Development, 32(4), 629–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archibugi, D., & Coco, A. (2005). Measuring technological capabilities at the country level: A survey and a menu for choice. Research Policy, 34(2), 175–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belderbos, R. (2001). Overseas innovation by Japanese firms: An analysis of patent and subsidiary data. Research Policy, 20(2), 313–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P. (2005). Centrality and network flow. Social Networks, 27(1), 55–71.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P. (2009). Social network analysis, two-mode concepts. In R. A. Meyers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of complexity and systems science (pp. 8279–8291). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (1997). Network analysis of 2-mode data. Social Networks, 19(3), 243–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (2006). A Graph-theoretic perspective on centrality. Social Networks, 28(4), 466–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boshoff, N., & Mouton, J. (2003). Science policy indicators. In HSRC (Ed.), Human resources development review 2003: Education, employment and skills in South Africa. Pretoria: HSRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callaert, J., Looy, B. V., Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., & Thijs, B. (2006). Traces of prior art: An analysis of non-patent references found in patent documents. Scientometrics, 69(1), 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cloete, N., & Maassen, P. (2015). Roles of Universities and the African context. In N. Cloete, P. Maassen, & T. Bailey (Eds.), Knowledge production and contradictory functions in African higher education. African minds higher education dynamics series (Vol. 1). Cape Town: African Minds.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danell, R., & Persson, O. (2003). Regional R&D activities and interactions in the Swedish triple helix. Scientometrics, 58(2), 205–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erfanmanesh, M., Rohani, V. A., & Abrizah, A. (2012). Co-authorship network of scientometrics research collaboration. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 17(3), 73–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales, 42(3), 293–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., de Mello, J. M. C., & Almeida, M. (2005). Towards “meta-innovation” in Brazil: The evolution of the incubator and the emergence of a triple helix. Research Policy, 34(4), 411–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Dzisah, J. (2007). The triple helix of innovation: Towards a university-led development strategy for Africa. ATDF Journal, 4(2), 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1998). The endless transition: A “triple helix” of university–industry–government relations. Minerva, 36(3), 203–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Final Report of the Ministerial Review Committee on the Science, Technology and Innovation Landscape in South Africa. (2012). Department of Science and Technology, Republic of South Africa.

  • Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • 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: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giuliani, E., & Rabellotti, R. (2012). Universities in emerging economies: Bridging local industry with international science-evidence from Chile and South Africa. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36(3), 679–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28, 1661–1707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside, CA: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawe, P., Webster, C., & Shiell, A. (2004). A glossary of terms for navigating the field of social network analysis. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 58(12), 971–975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglesi, R., & Pouris, A. (2008). Where are our universities going? A review, twenty years later. South African Journal of Science, 104(September/October), 345–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, W. H. A. (2008). Roles, resources and benefits of intermediate organizations supporting triple helix collaborative R&D: The case of Precarn. Technovation, 28(8), 495–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juma, C. (Ed.). (2005). Going for growth: Science, technology and innovation in Africa. London: The Smith Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, D. (2004). South Africa’s National Research and development strategy: A review. Science Technology and Society, 9(2), 273–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, D. (2008). Science and technology policy in South Africa: Past performance and proposals for the future. Science Technology and Society, 13(1), 95–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruss, G. (2006). Working partnerships: The challenge of creating mutual benefit for academics and industry. Perspectives in Education, 24(3), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruss, G. (2008). Balancing old and new organisational forms: Changing dynamics of government, industry and university interaction in South Africa. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 20(6), 667–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruss, G., Adeoti, J., & Nabudere, D. (2012a). Universities and knowledge-based development in sub-Saharan Africa: Comparing University-Firm interaction in Nigeria, Uganda and South Africa. Journal of Development Studies, 48(4), 516–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruss, G., & Visser, M. (2017). Putting university–industry interaction into perspective: A differentiated view from inside South African universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(4), 884–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruss, G., Visser, M., Haupt, G., & Aphane, M. (2012b). Academic interaction with external social partners: Investigating the contribution of universities to economic and social development. Cape Town: HSRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, K. S., Park, H. W., So, M., & Leydesdorff, L. (2012). Has globalization strengthened South Korea’s national research system? National and international dynamics of the triple helix of scientific co-authorship relationships in South Korea. Scientometrics, 90(1), 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2010). The knowledge-based economy and the triple helix model. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 44, 367–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Meyer, M. (2003). The triple helix of university–industry–Government relations. Scientometrics, 58(2), 191–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Meyer, M. (2006). Triple helix indicators of knowledge-based innovation systems: Introduction to the special issue. Research Policy, 35(10), 1441–1449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Meyer, M. (2007). The scientometrics of a triple helix of university–industry–government relations: Introduction to the topical issue. Scientometrics, 70(2), 207–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Zawdie, G. (2010). The triple helix perspective of innovation systems. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 22(7), 789–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li-chun, Y., Kretschmer, H., Hanneman, R. A., & Ze-yuan, L. (2006). Connection and stratification in research collaboration: An analysis of the COLLNET network. Information Processing and Management, 42, 1599–1613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B.-A. (1999). The globalising learning economy. Implications for innovation policy. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maharajh, R., Motala, E., & Scerri, M. (2011). South Africa: Reforming higher education and transforming the national system of innovation. In B. Göransson & C. Brundenius (Eds.), Universities in transition: The changing role and challenges for Academic Institutions (pp. 193–218). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Manzini, S. T. (2012). The national system of innovation concept: An ontological review and critique. South African Journal of Science, 108(9/10), 1–7.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Mêgnigbêto, E. (2013). Triple helix of university–industry–government relationships in West Africa. Journal of Scientometric Research, 2(3), 214–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mêgnigbêto, E. (2014). Information flow within the West African innovation systems. Triple Helix, 1(5), 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyborg, M. (2013). The role of German universities in a system of joint knowledge generation and innovation: A social network analysis of publications and patents with a focus on the spatial dimension. Karlsruhe: KIT Scientific Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M., Sinilainen, T., & Utecht, J. T. (2003). Towards hybrid triple helix indicators: A study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors. Scientometrics, 58(2), 321–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D., & Sampat, B. (2005). Universities in national innovation systems. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, & R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moya-Anegón, F. D., López-Illescas, C., & Moed, H. F. (2014). How to interpret the position of private sector institutions in bibliometric rankings of research institutions. Scientometrics, 98(1), 283–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muchie, M. (2003). Re-thinking Africa’s Development through the National Innovation system. In M. Muchie, P. Gammeltoft, & B. A. Lundvall (Eds.), Putting Africa first: The making of African innovation system. Aalborg: Aalborg University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagaoka, S., Motohashi, K., & Goto, A. (2011). Patent statistics as an innovation indicator. In B. H. Hall & N. Rosenberg (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of innovation (pp. 1083–1127). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. (2005). The roles of research in universities and public labs in economic catch-up. In G. D. Santangelo (Ed.), Technological change and economic catch-up: The Role of science and multinationals (pp. 19–32). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. E. J. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review, 45(2), 167–256.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2003). ‘Mode 2’ revisited: The new production of knowledge. Minerva, 41, 179–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: South Africa. (2007). Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

  • OECD and SCImago Research Group (CSIC). (2016). Compendium of bibliometric science indicators. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28(6), 441–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1995). Patterns of technological change. In P. Stoneman (Ed.), Handbook of the economics of innovation and technological change. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pouris, A., & Pouris, A. (2011). Patents and economic development in South Africa: Managing intellectual property rights. South African Journal of Science, 107(11/12), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, P. (2011). The evolving role of universities in economic development: The case of university–industry linkages. In B. Göransson & C. Brundenius (Eds.), Universities in transition: The changing role and challenges for Academic Institutions (pp. 25–52). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Robins, G. (2013). A tutorial on methods for the modeling and analysis of social network data. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 57, 261–274.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. (2006). Measuring innovation. In J. Fagerberg & D. C. Mowery (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 148–177). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ssebuwufu, J., Ludwick, T. & Béland M. (2012). Strengthening university–industry linkages in Africa: A study on institutional capacities and gaps. Accra: Association of African Universities: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada.

  • Taylor, S. (2004). Knowledge circulation: The “triple helix” concept applied in South Africa. Industry and Higher Education, 18, 329–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waghid, Y. (2002). Knowledge production and higher education transformation in South Africa: Towards reflexivity in university teaching, research and community service. Higher Education, 43(4), 457–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Earlier version of the paper was presented as a poster in 14th Globelics Conference held in Bandung, Indonesia during 12–14th October 2016. Authors acknowledge the useful and constructive comments received from the participants of the conference.

Funding

Funding was provided by The South African Research Chairs Initiative (SARChI) - Innovation Studies, Tshwane University of Technology.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tshwane University of Technology, 210 Steve Biko Street, Pretoria, 0001, South Africa

    Swapan Kumar Patra & Mammo Muchie

Authors
  1. Swapan Kumar Patra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mammo Muchie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Swapan Kumar Patra.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patra, S.K., Muchie, M. Research and innovation in South African universities: from the triple helix’s perspective. Scientometrics 116, 51–76 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2764-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2764-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation