David F. J. Campbell

David F. J. Campbell


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

24Years (2003-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
15 April 2021 in Journal of the Knowledge Economy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Elias G. CarayannisElias G. Carayannis
Elias G. Carayannis
David F. J. CampbellDavid F. J. Campbell
David F. J. Campbell
Quadruple and Quintuple Helix innovation systems are based on democracy and ecology. Two propositions are here key: (1) without a democracy or knowledge democracy, the further advancement of knowledge and innovation are seriously constrained, so in that sense, knowledge and innovation evolution depend on democracy and knowledge democracy; (2) ecology and environmental protection represent a necessity and challenge for humanity, but they also act as drivers for further knowledge and innovation (this should lead to a win–win situation for ecology and innovation). Therefore, for an innovation system to be a Quadruple/Quintuple Helix innovation system, the political regime hosting these helixes needs to be democratic in essence, not just in form. The next stage in evolution of innovation systems may be that this also will require a “democracy of climate” (promoting a social, cultural, economic, and political “climate for democracy”), where democracies as innovation enablers are creating innovation that regard the ecology as a crucial driver for further innovation and for responsible innovation.



15 February 2016 in Technology, Innovation and Education
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
David F. J. CampbellDavid F. J. Campbell
David F. J. Campbell
Elias G. CarayannisElias G. Carayannis
Elias G. Carayannis
Epistemic governance and epistemic innovation policy formulate a critique against too-narrowly defined approaches to governance, where governance follows one-sidedly bureaucratic or technocratic considerations. Instead, epistemic governance (also quality management and quality enhancement) and epistemic innovation policy should be regarded as a plea for a more comprehensive understanding, where the explicit-making, comprehension and reflection of knowledge, knowledge production, and knowledge application are keys for a successful governing and governance. For the further progress of advanced knowledge society, advanced knowledge economy, and advanced knowledge democracy, universities and the higher education sectors are crucial for driving development. How should the governance of higher education, the quality enhancement of universities, and the careers of academic faculty (the academic profession) be organized? Epistemic governance introduces here a novel approach and understanding. Epistemic governance emphasizes that the underlying epistemic structure, the underlying epistemic base, or the underlying epistemic paradigms (knowledge paradigms) of those organizations, institutions, or systems (sectors), which should be governed, are being addressed. This defines a benchmark and set of criteria for internal and external governance in higher education that is interested in applying a good, effective, and sustainable governance. Quality assurance, quality enhancement, and quality management of higher education, from the perspective of epistemic governance, should also orient themselves to quality and quality dimensions that cross-refer to the underlying epistemic structure of higher education. In a traditional understanding, the academic career patterns of the academic core faculty at universities follow a tenure-track logic. Cross-employment (multi-employment), on the contrary, refers to academic faculty (the academic profession) with simultaneous employment contracts to more than one organization only within or both inside and outside of higher education. Epistemic governance, in combination with crossemployment, should add to the organizational flexibility and creativity of universities and other higher education institutions, supporting the integration of a pluralism and diversity of knowledge production (basic research in the context of knowledge application and innovation), the formation of nonlinear innovation networks, and providing a rationale for a new type of academic career model.

15 May 2021 in Sustainability
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Elias G. CarayannisElias G. Carayannis
Elias G. Carayannis
David F. J. CampbellDavid F. J. Campbell
David F. J. Campbell
Evangelos GrigoroudisEvangelos Grigoroudis
Evangelos Grigoroudis
This paper aims to explore a possible relationship between democracy and the environment, more specifically between freedom and environmental sustainability (environmental performance). The conceptual lenses of the Quadruple and Quintuple Innovation Helix Frameworks were used as they emphasize the importance of democracy and ecology (environmental sustainability) for knowledge and innovation and vice versa. The empirical model focused on the following research question: What is the correlation between political freedom and environmental performance? In essence, all countries in the world with a population of one million or more were included (a total of 156 countries), and the reference year was 2016. The empirical outcome of the correlation analysis was a positive Pearson correlation of about 0.56 (or 0.73 if we examine regional country groups), and, perhaps even more significantly, this correlation was significant at the 0.001 level (two-tailed). The correlation results lend themselves to the following interpretation: The higher the political freedom in a country, the more likely it is to have a higher environmental performance. Similarly, the lower the political freedom in a country, the more likely it is to have a lower environmental performance. As a preliminary proposition, therefore, democracy, environmental sustainability, and innovation-driven knowledge economies may have a highly symbiotic and synergistic dynamic and non-linear relationship.

4 April 2022 in Triple Helix
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Elias G. CarayannisElias G. Carayannis
Elias G. Carayannis
David F. J. CampbellDavid F. J. Campbell
David F. J. Campbell
Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Systems aim to optimize the design and operation of modern, democratic societies and economies in a smart, sustainable, inclusive, resilient and efficacious manner via the cyber-physical ecosystems that align with Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 precepts. In this context, the Quintuple Innovation Helix Framework (which is part of the Quadruple/Quintuple Innovation Helix or Q2IH) represents the most comprehensive, meaningful and valuable construct and modality as it encompasses the five key core dimensions of modern, sustainable and democratic knowledge economies and societies. These are the Environment, the Civil Society as well as the Government, University and Industry dimensions. We strongly feel that it is appropriate and even critical, given current events in Europe that starkly highlight the conflict and struggle between democracies and autocracies, to enable, facilitate and even accelerate the further development of an Emerging Unified Theory of Helical Architectures (EUTOHA). The objective would be to bring clarity, coherence and consistency to the process of leveraging the helical architectures to advance and enhance the design of solutions for the digital transformation of modern knowledge economies and societies towards more democratic and sustainable (green) ones.