Abstract

The Triple Helix concept of innovation systems holds that consensus space among industry, government and university is required to bring together their competences to achieve enhanced economic and social development on a systemic scale. In line with this argument, this article analyses empirically how the concept of circular economy is conceived in the institutional spheres of “industry”, “government” and “university”. Innovation systems are constantly being reconstructed through knowledge production and communication, which is reflected in how concepts develop in the different spheres. By applying natural language processing tools to key contributions from each of the three spheres (the “Triple Helix”), it is shown that, although institutional backgrounds do contribute to differing conceptualizations of circular economy, there is a substantial but limited conceptual consensus space, which, according to the Triple Helix, should open new opportunities for innovations. The consensus space shared across the three spheres focuses on materials and products and sees circular economy as a way to create new resources, businesses and products from waste. The industry sphere highlights business opportunities on global scale, which are also evident in the government sphere. The government sphere connects circular economy to waste-related innovation policies targeted at industrial renewal, economic growth, investments and jobs. The university sphere, in turn, focuses on production and environmental issues, waste and knowledge, and is rather distinct from the two other spheres. The importance of the differing conceptions of circular economy is based on the logic of Triple Helix systems. Accordingly, sufficient consensus between the Triple Helix spheres can advance the application of the concept of circular economy beyond the individual spheres to achieve systemic changes.

Highlights

  • Scholars of circular economy maintain that systemic changes are required across institutional spheres and that such changes should take place at the same time for them to be effective [1,2,3]

  • Studies on innovation models focuses on different perspectives in innovation; e.g., the model of open innovation emphasises firm’s external and internal research process [4,5], while the Triple Helix model acknowledges the importance of the institutional spheres industry-government-university relations and knowledge production including shared concepts in innovation [6,7]

  • In this article we have analysed how the concept of circular economy is understood in the institutional spheres of industry, government and university, which together constitute the Triple Helix model of innovation systems

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Scholars of circular economy maintain that systemic changes are required across institutional spheres and that such changes should take place at the same time for them to be effective [1,2,3]. I.e., a “consensus space”, requires common topics that extend beyond the interests of each institutional sphere Such comparative innovation research in the CE field is, very limited (for an exception, see [20]), and in this article we fill this knowledge gap by analysing CE debates originating from the institutional spheres of industry, government and university, which together comprise the Triple Helix model of innovation systems [21]. By using natural language processing tools, we analyse empirically the content of CE outputs in all three helices, forming a unique overall picture of the circular economy conceptualisations, identifying a potential consensus space and observing differences between the industry, government and university spheres Understanding this can enhance pragmatic transition towards circular economy by enabling different institutional actors to accomplish innovations which are beyond the capacities of individual spheres. The importance of this finding is that there are promising opportunities for systemic change towards circular economy, which will be further addressed in the concluding discussion

Circular Economy Concept across Institutional Spheres
Research Design and Methodology
The Methodology of Topic Modelling
Shared and Sphere-Specific Topics of Circular Economy
Consensus Space for Circular Economy
Industrial Engineering and Management
Governmental Innovation Policies
Opportunities for Companies
Concluding Discussion
Findings
51. Ellen MacArthur Foundation towards the Circular Economy Vol 2
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call