A quadruple helix approach to the Regional Innovation System in Corner Brook and surrounding area: case study of a local innovation project applying waste heat from Corner Brook Pulp & Paper Limited for greenhouse operations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Regional Innovation System (RIS) model provides important insights into the innovation performance of regions by investigating the interaction of organizations with each other and their environment in these regions. There is a lack of literature on RIS in resource-dependent rural and peripheral regions. This thesis contributes to our understanding of RIS in resource-based regions by investigating the interaction between the quadruple helix of government, post-secondary institutions, the private sector, and community organizations to investigate the current state of RIS in Corner Brook and its surrounding area in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL). To achieve this, this study uses context analysis and a case study approach. The thesis reveals a number of challenges and opportunities to further develop RIS in the region. The findings suggest that there is a lack of interaction among key quadruple helix actors of RIS in Corner Brook and its surrounding area, especially between the private sector and other actors of the quadruple helix. On the other hand, strong knowledge infrastructure, the presence of enough support organizations, rich natural resources, quality transportation infrastructure, and close-knit ties within the small community offer good prospects for the future of RIS in the region. Findings from the case study indicate that, although establishing cross-sectoral partnerships with the quadruple helix actors can be challenging and time-consuming, the application of this approach to develop innovation-based projects could offer tremendous benefits to the region. Based on the findings, recommendations are provided for each category of actors involved in the quadruple helix approach to encourage innovations in Corner Brook and the surrounding area.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".