Quadruple and quintuple innovation helix framework

[3] In the case of industry involved in R&D, the framework emphasizes that companies' public relations strategies have to negotiate ‘reality construction’ by the media.

[10] Mode 1 was theorized by Michael Gibbons and is an elderly linear model of fundamental university research where success is defined as "a quality or excellence that is approved by hierarchically established peers” and does not necessarily contribute to industry or the knowledge economy.

[10] Mode 2 was also theorized by Michael Gibbons and is context-driven, problem-focused and interdisciplinary research characterized by the following five principles: (1) knowledge produced in the context of application; (2) transdisciplinarity; (3) heterogeneity and organizational diversity; (4) social accountability and reflexivity; (5) and quality control.

[12] The triple helix was first suggested by Henry Etzkowitz and Loet Leydesdorff in 1995[13] and emphasizes trilateral networks and hybrid organizations of university-industry-government relations to provide the infrastructure necessary for innovation and economic development;[2][12] it provides a structural explanation for the historical evolution of mode 2 in relation to mode 1.

This fourth helix includes, for example, sociological concepts like art, the creative industries, culture, lifestyles, media, and values.

[17][18][19][20] The quintuple helix has been applied to the quality of democracy,[21][22] including in innovation systems;[23] international cooperation;[24] forest-based bioeconomies;[25] the Russian Arctic zone energy shelf;[26] regional ecosystems;[27] smart specialization and living labs;[28] climate change,[2] and sustainable development,[5] as well as to innovation diplomacy,[29] a quintuple-helix based extension of science diplomacy.