Environmental Threats and its Effects on the Innovation Landscape in Thailand: Toward a Quintuple Helix?

  • Stefania Paladini
  • Eleni Anoyrkati
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Democracy, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship for Growth book series (DIG)


Several “helices multiple models” have been proposed for analyzing and to a certain extent for predicting innovation pattern in the twenty-first century. While the basic triple helix stresses the university-industry-government relation, the quadruple model embeds a technological-savvy civil society in this equation. However, other important factors have emerged to be especially sensitive in affecting—positively and adversely—societal conditions for innovation, and environment is certainly a key one. Both doctrine (Carayannis et al. 2012) and institutions have been discussing, directly or indirectly, about a quintuple helix, including ecology in its wider meaning. In the specific geographic and institutional framework of Southeast Asia, environmental conditions, and the unique challenges they present, constitute essential components to analyze and predict innovation forces. It is important to remember that environmental security has emerged as one of the most relevant non-traditional security issues in the region, and that migration, climate changes, and environmental hazards have always affected countries of this area in a measure even more significant than in other parts of the planet. It is not accidental that one of the first and most renowned centers of non-traditional security is hosted in Singapore—that is, RSIS Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies—as a leading research center in the field for the last 15 years.


Environmental Impact Assessment Triple Helix Total Quality Management Southeast Asian Country External Quality Assessment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andersen, Maj Munch. “An innovation system approach to eco-innovation— Aligning policy rationales.” In Greening of policies—interlinkages and policy integration conference, 2004, 3–4.Google Scholar
  2. Andersen, Maj Munch. “Review: System transition processes for realising Sustainable Consumption and Production.” In Tukker, A., Martin Charter, Carlo Vezzoli, Eivind Stø and Maj Munch Andersen (Eds.) System Innovation for Sustainability 1: Perspectives on radical changes to sustainable consumption and production, Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing, 2008.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, E., J. Bessant, and P. Brimble. Enhancing policy and institutional support for industrial technology development in Thailand: The overall policy framework and the development of the industrial innovation system. Bangkok: National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA), 2003.Google Scholar
  4. Bakker, Karen. “The politics of hydropower: developing the Mekong.” Political Geography 18, no. 2 (1999): 209–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baron, L. N. “Environmental issues in the South East Asian region: An overview of the implementation prospects of renewable energy.” 2013. Retrieved December 3, 2014, from 20Region.pdf.Google Scholar
  6. Barth, Thorsten D. “The idea of a green new deal in a quintuple helix model of knowledge, know-how and innovation.” International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD) 2, no. 1 (2011): 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beise, Marian, and Klaus Rennings. “Lead markets and regulation: A framework for analyzing the international diffusion of environmental innovations.” Ecological Economics 52, no. 1 (2005): 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernauer, Thomas, Stephanie Engel, Daniel Kammerer, and Jazmin Sejas Nogareda. “Explaining green innovation: Ten years after Porter’s win-win proposition: How to study the effects of regulation on corporate environmental innovation?.” Politische Vierteljahresschrift 39 (2007): 323–341.Google Scholar
  9. Buranajarukorn, Panu, Peter R. Gibson, and Guenter Arndt. “The problems of implementation of total quality management in Thai manufacturing SMEs.” Asia Pacific Industrial Engineering and Management Systems and Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers Conference Proceedings, Thailand: APIEMS 2006: 238–248.Google Scholar
  10. Carayannis, Elias G., Thorsten D. Barth, and David F. J. Campbell. “The quintuple helix innovation model: Global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation.” Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 1, no. 1 (2012): 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carayannis, E. G., and D. F. J. Campbell. “Triple helix, quadruple helix and quintuple helix and how do knowledge, innovation and the environment relate to each other? A proposed framework for a trans-disciplinary analysis of sustainable development and social ecology.” International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development 1, no. 1 (2010): 41–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carayannis, Elias G., and David 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. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006.Google Scholar
  13. Carayannis, Elias G., and David F. J. Campbell. Mode 3 knowledge production in quadruple helix innovation systems. New York: Springer, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chaminade, Cristina, and Charles Edquist. “From theory to practice: the use of the systems of innovation approach in innovation policy.” In Hage, Jerald, and Marius Meeus, eds., Innovation, science, and institutional change: A research handbook. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, Inc., 2006.Google Scholar
  15. Chaminade, Cristina, Patarapong Intarakumnerd, and Koson Sapprasert. “Measuring systemic problems in national innovation systems. An application to Thailand.” Research Policy 41, no. 8 (2012): 1476–1488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cleff, Thomas, and Klaus Rennings. “Determinants of environmental product and process innovation.” European Environment 9, no. 5 (1999): 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Daming, He, and Hsiangte Kung. “Facilitating regional sustainable development through integrated multi-objective utilization management of water resources in the Lancang-Mekong river basin.” Yunnan Geographic Environment Research 1 (1996): 1–13.Google Scholar
  18. Dearing, Andrew. “Sustainable innovation: Drivers and barriers.” In OECD. Innovation and the Environment. Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2000.Google Scholar
  19. Dhanani, Shafiq, and Philippe Scholtes. Thailand’s Manufacturing Competitiveness: Promoting Technology, Productivity and Linkages. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Industrial Development Organization, 2002.Google Scholar
  20. Etzkowitz, Henry, and Loet Leydesdorff. “The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations.” Research Policy 29, no. 2 (2000): 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Etzkowitz, Henry, and Chunyan Zhou. “Triple helix twins: Innovation and sustainability.” Science and Public Policy 33, no. 1 (2006): 77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hall, Jeremy, and Harrie Vredenburg. “The challenges of innovating for sustainable development.” MIT Sloan Management Review 45, no. 1 (2012).Google Scholar
  23. Howes, Stephen, and Paul Wyrwoll. Asia’s Wicked Environmental Problems. Canberra, Australia: East Asian Bureau of Economic Research, 2012.Google Scholar
  24. Institute for Small and Medium Enterprises Development (ISMED). SMEs: Institute for Small and Medium Enterprises Development. Bangkok: ISMED, 1999.Google Scholar
  25. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007 (AR4). Geneva, Switzerland: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kemp, R., and T. Foxon. “Eco-innovation from an innovation dynamics perspective: Deliverable 1 of MEI project (D1).” Project Report, available at (2007).Google Scholar
  27. Kititasnasorchai, Vipon, and Panat Tasneeyanond. “Thai environmental law.” Singapore Journal of International & Comparative Law 4 (2000): 1–35.Google Scholar
  28. Krausmann, Fridolin, Marina Fischer-Kowalski, Heinz Schandl, and Nina Eisenmenger. “The global sociometabolic transition.” Journal of Industrial Ecology $112, no. 5–6 (2008): 637–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Laothamatas, Anek. Business associations and the new political economy of Thailand: From bureaucratic polity to liberal corporatism. Colorado: Westview Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  30. Leopairote, Manu. “Policy direction for SME development in Thailand.” In Proceedings of the International Conference on the Development of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Some APEC Countries. Bangkok, Thailand, pp. 212–224. (1997).Google Scholar
  31. Leydesdorff, Loet. “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, no. 1 (2012): 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lindgardt, Z., M. Reeves, G. Stalk, Jr., and M. Deimler. Business model innovation: When the game gets tough change the game. Boston, MA: The Boston Consulting Group, 2009.Google Scholar
  33. Machiba, Tomoo. “Eco-innovation for enabling resource efficiency and green growth: Development of an analytical framework and preliminary analysis of industry and policy practices.” International Economics and Economic Policy 7, no. 2–3 (2010): 357–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Markusson, N. Drivers of environmental innovation. Stockholm: VINNOVA, 2001.Google Scholar
  35. Ndeve, A., E. J. Petersen, A. H. Jensen, J. Monteiro, and Huq A. M. Subsistence and intensive farming in Bang Kayan, Northern Thailand—Its ecological and socio-economic impacts. Denmark: Copenhagen University, 2007.Google Scholar
  36. Nidumolu, Ram, Coimbatore K. Prahalad, and M. R. Rangaswami. “Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation.” Harvard Business Review 87, no. 9 (2009): 56–64.Google Scholar
  37. OECD. Innovation and growth: Rationale for an innovation strategy. Paris: OECD, 2007.Google Scholar
  38. OECD. Review of SME and entrepreneurship issues and policies in Thailand at national and local levels. Paris, France: Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs and Local Development, 2012.Google Scholar
  39. Paladini, S. “Mekong: il fiume delle controversie” (“The controversial river: Mekong”). In Rivista Giuridica Dell’ambiente 21, no. 6 (2006): 210–225.Google Scholar
  40. Rennings, Klaus. “Redefining innovation—Eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics.” Ecological Economics 32, no. 2 (2000): 319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sarkar, A. N. “Promoting eco-innovations to leverage sustainable development of eco-industry and green growth.” European Journal of Sustainable Development 2, no. 1 (2013): 171–224.Google Scholar
  42. United Nations. “Our common future, Chapter 2: towards sustainable development.” In UN Documents. Gathering a body of global agreements. New York: United Nations, 1987.Google Scholar
  43. Vollenbroek, Frans A. “Sustainable development and the challenge of innovation.” Journal of Cleaner Production 10, no. 3 (2002): 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wong, Chit-Ming, Nuntavarn Vichit-Vadakan, Haidong Kan, and Zhengmin Qian. “Public Health and Air Pollution in Asia (PAPA): A multicity study of short-term effects of air pollution on mortality.” Environmental Health Perspectives 116, no. 9 (2008): 1195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yang, Yan. “Looking for a framework for analyzing eco-innovation dynamics: A triple helix model of innovation perspective.” Proceedings of the IX Triple Helix Conference (2011): 1–22.Google Scholar
  46. Yin, Robert K. Case study research: Design and methods, Vol. 5. New York: Sage publications, 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Stavros Sindakis and Christian Walter 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefania Paladini
  • Eleni Anoyrkati

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations