The Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations is an internationally recognized model for understanding entrepreneurship, the changing dynamics of universities, innovation and socio-economic development.
The aim of the journal is to publish research for an international audience covering analysis, theory, measurements and empirical enquiry in all aspects of university-industry-government interactions. The objective is to unite key research on the transformations of universities, capitalization of knowledge, translational research, spin-off activities, intellectual property, knowledge and technology transfer, as well as the international bases and dimensions of Triple Helix relations, their impacts, social, economic, political, cultural, health and environmental implications as they arise from and shape Triple Helix interactions.
Open to all innovation authors, the special mission of the journal is to be an international outlet also for innovation scholars from developing countries.
Need support prior to submitting your manuscript? Make the process of preparing and submitting a manuscript easier with
Brill's suite of author services, an online platform that connects academics seeking support for their work with specialized experts who can help.
Editor-in-Chief Henry Etzkowitz,
International Triple Helix Institute (ITHI), USA and
Helix Centre, Linkoping University, Sweden
Managing Editor Anne Rocha Perazzo,
Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris, France
Advisory Editors Carlota Perez,
Technological University of Tallinn, Estonia Hebe Vessuri,
Venezuelan Institute of Scientific Research, Venezuela
Associate Editors Yuzhuo Cai,
University of Tampere, Finland Devrim Göktepe-Hultén,
University of Lund, Sweden Annamaria Inzelt,
IKU Innovation Research Center Hungary Riccardo Viale,
Fondazione Rosselli, Italy Girmah Zawdie,
Strathclyde University Alice Chunyan Zhou,
International Triple Helix Institute, China
Editorial Board Justin Axelberg,
University of Sao Paulo Irina Dezhina,
Institute of International Relations and World Economy, Russia James Dzisah,
University of Ghana Christiane Gebhardt,
Malik Management Institute, Switzerland / associated Heidelberg University, Germany Loet Leydesdorff,
University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands Liudvika Leisyte,
TU Dortmund University Josep Piqué,
International Association of Science Parks and Areas of Innovation (IASP) Ary Plonski,
University of Saõ Paulo, Brazil Tatiana Pospelova,
Moscow State University, Russia Jarunee Wonglimpiyarat,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
TRIPLE HELIX Journal Review Process
Triple Helix Journal is a double blind peer-reviewed journal. The editor initially screens all manuscripts submitted. A manuscript may be returned without peer review – desk-rejected – if it is judged to be inappropriate for publication in THJ. Manuscripts judged to be consistent with the publication criteria of THJ will be submitted for double-blind review to at least two referees through the submission and peer-review system Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/thj. Corresponding authors can expect to receive first-round review feedback via the system within approximately 30 days, moderated by the editor or a guest editor in the case of guest-edited Special Issues. Whenever the reviewers ask for revisions, the manuscript can be processed through up to a total of three rounds of reviews and revisions. After the 3rd round of reviews, the decision is taken by the Editor in Chief.
In their reviews peer-reviewers should ideally consider the below questions:
• What research question(s) do the authors address? Do they make a good argument for why a question is important?
• What methods do the authors use to answer the question? Are the methods the most current available or is there a newer more powerful method available? Does their overall strategy seem like a good one, or are there major problems with their methods? Are there other experiments that would greatly improve the quality of the manuscript? If so, are they necessary to make the work publishable? Would any different data help confirm the presented results and strengthen the paper?
• Were the results analyzed and interpreted correctly? Does the evidence support the authors’ conclusions?
• Will the results advance the research field in some way? If so, how much? Does the importance of the advance match the standards of the journal?
• Will other researchers be interested in reading the study? If so, what types of researchers? Do they match the journal’s audience? Is there an alternative readership that the paper would be more suitable for?
• Does the manuscript fit together well? Does it clearly describe what was done, why it was done, and what the results mean?
• Is the manuscript written well and easy to read? If the manuscript has many mistakes, the reviewers may suggest that the authors have it checked by a native English speaker. If the language quality is so poor that it is difficult to understand, it can be asked that the manuscript be corrected before it is reviewed.
Editor in Chief & Anne Rocha Perazzo,