Thematic Issue in the making (2026): The Helix Framework and Beyond. Genealogies, Metaphors and Governance in STI Policy

Timeline: Abstracts are due by 2 March 2026, full papers by 1 May 2026, revised versions by 1 September 2026, with publication scheduled for December 2026.

Proposal submissions should be sent by e-mail to: novation@ufpr.br

Download CfP HERE

 

Thematic Issue Organizers

Tiago Brandão, Federal University of ABC, Brazil, NOVA University of Lisbon, Portugal

Silvestre Labiak Jr., Federal University of Technology of Paraná, Brazil

 

Presentation

Over the past two decades, there has been a proliferation of conceptual models aimed at capturing the complexity of contemporary innovation systems. Among these, the so-called 'Helix' frameworks —starting with the Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations— have become increasingly influential in academic and policy discourse. These models have evolved into Quadruple and Quintuple configurations and, more recently, into Sextuple Helix variants grounded in local contexts. They promise to account for a broader set of actors, logics, and normative dimensions. However, their growing popularity has not been matched by a proportional deepening of theoretical clarity or critical engagement with their assumptions, applicability and limitations. While the Helix models constitute the central object of analysis for this issue, they are also approached as part of a broader conceptual terrain shaped by the diffusion of biologistic and ecological metaphors in innovation policy.

Thus, this thematic issue aims to examine the intellectual origins, institutional adoption and operational diversity of Helix-based innovation models (e.g. Cai, 2022) and related biologistic metaphors (e.g., Smit, 2025; Ghazinoory et al., 2021, 2023), particularly in relation to the design and implementation of science, technology and innovation (STI) policy. The widespread use of terms such as ecosystem, organism, evolution, and spiral—often metaphorically borrowed from the life sciences (Freeman & Louçã, 2001; Zheng & Cai, 2022; Satalkina & Steiner, 2025)—suggests not only a shift in how innovation is imagined, but also a tacit reconfiguration of the governance and normativity of innovation itself. While Helix models offer a clear institutional grammar for mapping actors and relationships, other biologistic framings emphasize systemic interdependence, adaptation, and co-evolution, often without sufficient analytical scrutiny. By foregrounding the Helix as a central case, yet situating it within this broader conceptual terrain, the issue seeks to advance a more critical and reflective understanding of how metaphors travel, mutate, and solidify into innovation policy tools. (e.g., Lakoff & Johnson, 2003 [1980]; Rein & Schon, 1993)

Building on literature concerning innovation systems (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000; Carayannis & Campbell, 2009, 2010), knowledge management (Macedo et al., 2016) and critiques of linear and technocentric paradigms (Godin, 2006, 2002; Schot & Steinmüller, 2018), this issue aims to examine how the Helix metaphor has evolved to encompass civil society, environmental issues and territorial governance. The Quintuple Helix model, for example, has been useful for aligning STI with sustainability imperatives. However, its implementation is often ambiguous, and its impact is uneven.

In practice, this issue addresses recent developments in Latin America, particularly in Brazil, where subnational ecosystems such as Rede de Inovação de Pato Branco, SRI Litoral and Vale dos Trilhos in Ponta Grossa (Labiak et al.) have adopted Sextuple Helix approaches to develop innovation strategies outside metropolitan areas. While these cases emphasise inclusivity, decentralisation, and ecological responsibility, they also reveal enduring asymmetries in knowledge flows, financing structures, and institutional power. Notably, the integration of civic actors and environmental agendas is often more programmatic than structural in these arrangements.

This thematic issue invites contributions that examine how Helix models are adapted, contested or reimagined in diverse territorial contexts, from both theoretical and practice-oriented perspectives. The issue aims to provide a critical yet grounded reflection on the capacity of these frameworks to address the societal, democratic and ecological dimensions of innovation policy. The goal is to move beyond celebrating 'more helices' and towards a more nuanced understanding of the political economy, governance structures and knowledge dynamics that shape inclusive and sustainable innovation. Ultimately, we should also critically examine the conceptual logics and metaphorical framings—biologistic or otherwise—that structure contemporary innovation discourse and policy.

In an effort to address the lack of critical and historical perspectives in the literature, we have proposed this thematic issue to NOvation, titled «The Helixes' Approach to STI Policy: Origins, Perspectives and Shortcomings». We welcome papers addressing issues such as:

• The conceptual genealogy of Helix models, from the Triple Helix to Mode 3 and beyond, including their epistemological assumptions, normative commitments and implicit theories of change.
• Critical analyses of how these frameworks have been adopted, adapted or instrumentalised within specific policy regimes, regional innovation strategies, or governance experiments.
• Empirical studies of innovation ecosystems, particularly those outside major metropolitan centres, that have operationalised Quadruple, Quintuple or Sextuple Helix arrangements, such as in Pato Branco, Vale dos Trilhos (Ponta Grossa), and the SRI Litoral in Brazil.
• Comparative or transnational perspectives on the governance of STI that consider the cultural, institutional, and environmental context of innovation practices.
• Analyses of the political economy and knowledge asymmetries embedded within Helix-based innovation strategies, including their limits in addressing socio-environmental inequalities or democratic deficits.
• Studies examining the relationship between the maturity of innovation ecosystems and their governance arrangements, including inquiries into whether and how the degree of integration among Helix actors affects the role, intensity, or the structure of formal governance mechanisms over time.
• Reflections on the use of biologistic metaphors—such as ecosystems, evolution, organisms, or spirals—in STI policy discourse, and how these framings shape the conceptualization of innovation systems, actor relationships, and policy interventions, including their intersections and tensions with Helix-based models.

We are seeking theoretical contributions that challenge or extend existing models by integrating insights from Science and Technology Studies (STS), critical studies, feminist epistemologies, or decolonial thought. The aim of assembling this collection is to foster a more plural, situated, and reflexive understanding of how innovation is governed, for whom it is mobilised, and the institutional and territorial conditions under which it can serve public, democratic, and sustainable purposes.