Initial actions of the Brazilian regional innovation ecosystem against the COVID-19 pandemic




COVID-19, Innovation, Innovation ecosystem, Quadruple Helix, Triple Helix.


Objective: We have analyzed Brazil’s initial COVID-19 combat actions by the regional innovation ecosystem actors.

Methodology/approach: This is a descriptive and qualitative study using documentary research. In total, 471 reports collected via web scraping were submitted to content analysis (using a codebook and intercoder test) and correspondence analysis.

Originality/relevance: From an innovation ecosystem perspective, this study fulfills an identified need to understand how different actors have proposed initial solutions to the COVID-19 pandemic, considering different geographic regions.

Main results: According to the seminal literature, in the more economically and socially favored regions, the government-industry dyadic model was corroborated, while in the less favored regions, the most innovative actors were universities and society. Our results have not shown the quintuple helix’s performance, which leads us to ponder the use of this model in crises. Furthermore, although the quadruple helix model was observed in our analyses, in the Brazilian geographic regions the helices were not designed in a transversal way.

Theoretical contributions: We propose that the geography of a pandemic combat occurs unevenly by the innovation ecosystem actors. Moreover, the helices ordering refers to the theoretical development process and not to the complementarity of the role between actors.

Practical implications: This article highlights the need for integrated management of the innovation ecosystem’s initial actions in a pandemic, preventing regions from being neglected, especially those with lower levels of wealth or quality of life.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Newton da Silva Miranda Junior, University of Brasília (UnB)

Ph.D. in Business Management at the University of Brasília

Luiz Fernando Câmara Viana, University of Brasília (UnB) and Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Brasília (IFB)

Candidate in Business Administration at the University of Brasília and professor at the Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Brasília (IFB)

Dayse Karenine de Oliveira Carneiro, University of Brasília (UnB)

Ph.D. in Business Administration at the University of Brasília

Renan Costa Filgueiras, University of Brasília (UnB)

M.Sc. in Computer Engineering at the University of Brasília

Gislayne da Silva Goulart, University of Brasília (UnB) and Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul

Ph.D. Candidate in Business Administration at the University of Brasília and Professor at the Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul


Adner, R. (2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard Business Review, 84(4), 98.

Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306-333.

Andion, C. (2020). Atuação da sociedade civil no enfrentamento dos efeitos da COVID-19 no Brasil. Revista de Administração Pública, 54(4), 936–951.

Arruda, E. F., & Ferreira, R. T. (2014). Dinâmica intrarregional do Brasil: Quem dirige o crescimento industrial das regiões brasileiras? Economia Aplicada, 18(2), 243–270.

Asheim, B. T., & Gertler, M. S. (2005). The geography of innovation: regional innovation systems. In The Oxford handbook of innovation.

Astley, W. G., & Fombrun, C. J. (1983). Collective strategy: social ecology of organizational environments. Academy of Management Review, 8(4), 576-587.

Azerrat, J. M., Ratto, M. C., & Fantozzi, A. (2021). ¿Gobernar es cuidar? Los estilos de gestión de la Pandemia en América del Sur: los casos de Argentina, Brasil y Uruguay. Trabajo y Sociedad, 21(36), 146–173.

Azoulay, P., & Jones, B. (2020). Beat COVID-19 through innovation. Science, 368(6491), 553.

Belenzon, S., & Mark Schankerman. (2009). University knowledge transfer: Private ownership, incentives, and local development objectives. Journal of Law and Economics, 52(1), 111–144.

Bogers, M., Sims, J., & West, J. (2019). What Is an Ecosystem? Incorporating 25 Years of Ecosystem Research. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2019(1), 11080.

Borges, P. de A., Araújo, L. P., Lima, L. A., Ghesti, G. F., & Carmo, T. S. (2020). The triple helix model and intellectual property: The case of the University of Brasilia. World Patent Information, 60(October 2019), 101945.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Butzin, A., & Terstriep, J. (2018). Actors and roles in Social Innovation. In Atlas of Social Innovation. New Practices for a Better Future.

Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2009). “Mode 3” and “Quadruple Helix”: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3–4), 201–234.

Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2010). Triple helix, quadruple helix and quintuple helix and how do knowledge, innovation and the environment relate to each other? International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 41–69.

Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2012). Mode 3 knowledge production in quadruple helix innovation systems: Twenty-first-century democracy, innovation, and entrepreneurship for development. Springer.

Carayannis, E. G., Dezi, L., Gregori, G., & Calo, E. (2021). Smart Environments and Techno-centric and Human-Centric Innovations for Industry and Society 5.0: A Quintuple Helix Innovation System View Towards Smart, Sustainable, and Inclusive Solutions. Journal of the Knowledge Economy.

Carayannis, Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F. J., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: an exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as Quadruple/Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. R and D Management, 48(1), 148–162.

Carayannis, E. G., & Rakhmatullin, R. (2014). The Quadruple/Quintuple Innovation Helixes and Smart Specialisation Strategies for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth in Europe and Beyond. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 212–239.

Caswell, D., & Dörr, K. (2019). Automating complex news stories by capturing news events as data. Journalism Practice, 13(8), 951–955.

Cavallini, S., Soldi, R., Friedl, J., & Volpe, M. (2016). Using the Quadruple Helix Approach to Accelerate the Transfer of Research and Innovation Results to Regional Growth.

Charmaz, K. (2014). Gathering Rich Data - Documents as Data. In Constructing Grounded Theory (2nd ed., p. 746). SAGE Publications Ltd.

Deakin, M., Mora, L., & Reid, A. (2018). The research and innovation of Smart Specialisation Strategies: The transition from the Triple to Quadruple Helix. Economic and Social Development: Book …, January.

DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., Marshall, P. L., & McCulloch, A. W. (2011). Developing and using a codebook for the analysis of interview data: An example from a professional development research project. Field Methods, 23(2), 136–155.

Doey, L., & Kurta, J. (2011). Correspondence Analysis applied to psychological research. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 7(1), 5–14.

Doloreux, D., & Gomez, I. P. (2017). A review of (almost) 20 years of regional innovation systems research. European Planning Studies, 25(3), 371–387.

Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). the Triple Helix---University-Industry-Government Relations: a Laboratory for Knowledge Based Economic Development. EASST Review, 14(1), 14–19.

Etzkowitz, H., & Zhou, C. (2017). Hélice Tríplice: inovação e empreendedorismo universidade-indústria-governo. Dicionário Crítico de Migrações Internacionais, 31(90), 273–278.

Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. In SAGE Publications (4th ed.). SAGE Publications Ltda.

Foguesatto, C. R., Santini, M. A. F., Martins, B. V., Faccin, K., De Mello, S. F., & Balestrin, A. (2021). What is going on recently in the innovation ecosystem field? A bibliometric and content-based analysis. International Journal of Innovation Management, 25(07), 2130001.

Freelon, D. G. (2010). ReCal : Intercoder Reliability Calculation as a Web Service. International Journal of Internet Science, 5(1), 20–33.

Freeman. (1989). Technology, Policy, and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. Printer Publishers.

Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2014). Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of product innovation management, 31(3), 417-433.

Gomes, L. A. V., Facin, A. L. F., Salerno, M. S., & Ikenami, R. K. (2018). Unpacking the innovation ecosystem construct: evolution, gaps and trends. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 30-48.

Granstrand, O., & Holgersson, M. (2020). Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation, 90–91(June 2018).

Greenacre, M. (2007). Correspondence Analysis in practice. In Correspondence Analysis in Practice, Third Edition (3rd ed.). Taylor & Francis Group.

Howaldt, J., Kaletka, C., & Schroder, A. (2016). Social Entrepreneurs: Important Actors within an Ecosystem of Social Innovation. European Public & Social Innovation Review, 1(2).

IBGE. (2020a). Divisão Regional do Brasil. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística.

IBGE. (2020b). Síntese de Indicadores Sociais: uma análise das condições de vida da população brasileira. Rio de Janeiro. Coordenação de População e Indicadores Sociais.

INEP. (2019). Censo da Educação Superior - Notas Estatísticas. In Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira.

Ivanova, I. (2014). Quadruple Helix Systems and Symmetry: A Step Towards Helix Innovation System Classification. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 357–369.

Kamradt-Scott, A. (2009). The WHO and SARS: The challenge of innovative responses to global health security. In A. F. Cooper & J. J. Kirton (Eds.), Innovation in Global Health Governance (pp. 81–98). Ashgate Publishing Group.

Kapoor, R., & Lee, J. M. (2013). Coordinating and competing in ecosystems: how organizational forms shape new technology investments. Strategic management journal, 34(3), 274-296..

Kolympiris, C., & Klein, P. G. (1996). The Effects of Academic Incubators on University Innovation. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 13(3), 287–288.

Krippendorff, K. (2010). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd ed.). In SAGE Publications (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Lima, E. E. C. de, Gayawan, E., Baptista, E. A., & Queiroz, B. L. (2021). Spatial pattern of COVID-19 deaths and infections in small areas of Brazil. PLoS ONE, 16(2), 1–12.

Lotta, G., Coelho, V. S. P., & Brage, E. (2021). How COVID-19 Has Affected Frontline Workers in Brazil: A Comparative Analysis of Nurses and Community Health Workers. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 23(1), 63–73.

Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National systems of innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning.

Mendonça, F. D., Rocha, S. S., Pinheiro, D. L. P., & Oliveira, S. V. de. (2020). North region of Brazil and the COVID-19 pandemic: socioeconomic and epidemiologic analysis. Journal Health NPEPS, 5(1), 20–37.

Miller, K., McAdam, R., & McAdam, M. (2018). A systematic literature review of university technology transfer from a quadruple helix perspective: toward a research agenda. R&D Management, 48(1), 7–24.

Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard business review, 71(3), 75-86.

Moore, J. F. (1996). The death of competition: leadership and strategy in the age of business ecosystems. Leadership.

Moore, J. F. (1998). The rise of a new corporate form. Washington quarterly, 21(1), 167-181.

Nambisan, S., & Baron, R. A. (2013). Entrepreneurship in innovation ecosystems: entrepreneurs’ self-regulatory processes and their implications for new venture success. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 37(5), 1071-1097.

Napolitano, M. R. (2020). The university as a catalyst of relationship for enhancing territorial capital. Capitale Culturale - Studies on the Value of Cultural Heritage, 11(1), 143–156.

Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). The Schumpeterian tradeoff revisited. The American Economic Review, 72(1), 114-132.

Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. SAGE Publications.

Neuman, L. (2013). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. In Pearson. Pearson Education Limited.

Oh, D. S., Phillips, F., Park, S., & Lee, E. (2016). Innovation ecosystems: A critical examination. Technovation, 54, 1-6.

OPS. (1980). Resoluciones de la 33a Asamblea Mundial de la Salud de Interes para el Comite Regional. Organización Panamericana de la Salud.

Overholm, H. (2015). Collectively created opportunities in emerging ecosystems: the case of solar service ventures. Technovation, 39, 14-25.

PAHO. (1960). Second International Conference on Live Poliovirus Vaccines. In Pan American Health Organization (Vol. 50, p. 552). Pan American Health Organization.

Panizzon, M., Costa, C. F. da, & Medeiros, I. B. de O. (2020). Práticas das universidades federais no combate à COVID-19: a relação entre investimento público e capacidade de implementação. Revista de Administração Pública, 54(4), 635–649.

Park, H., Lee, M., & Ahn, J. M. (2021). Bottom-up solutions in a time of crisis: the case of COVID-19 in South Korea. R&D Management, 51(2), 211–222.

Penna, G. O., Silva, J. A. A. da, Neto, J. C., Temporão, J. G., & Pinto, L. F. (2020). PNAD COVID-19: A powerful new tool for public health surveillance in Brazil. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 25(9), 3567–3571.

Pessoa, Z. S., Teixeira, R. L. P., & Clementino, M. do L. M. (2020). Interfaces between vulnerabilities, governance, innovation and capacity of response to COVID-19 in Brazilian Northeast. Ambiente e Sociedade, 23, 1–15.

Pinheiro, V. M., Ilarraz, M., & Mestriner, M. T. (2020). The impacts of the COVID-19 crisis on the Brazilian legal system–a report on the functioning of the branches of the government and on the legal scrutiny of their activities. Theory and Practice of Legislation, 0(0), 193–212.

Ritala, P., & Almpanopoulou, A. (2017). In defense of ‘eco’in innovation ecosystem. Technovation, 60, 39-42.

Rosa, M. F. F., da Silva, E. N., Pacheco, C., Diógenes, M. V. P., Millett, C., Gadelha, C. A. G., & Santos, L. M. P. (2021). Direct from the COVID-19 crisis: research and innovation sparks in Brazil. Health Research Policy and Systems, 19(1), 1–7.

Rothschild, M. L. (1990). Bionomics: the inevitability of capitalism. New York: Henry Holt.

Saldaña, J. (2013). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. In J. Seaman (Ed.), SAGE Publications Inc. (Second Edi). SAGE Publications.

Schön, D. A. (1984). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. 5126. London: Basic Books.

Silva, R. M. da, Caetano, R., Silva, A. B., Guedes, A. C. C. M., Ribeiro, G. D. R., Santos, D. L., & Paiva, C. C. N. de. (2020). Perfil e financiamento da pesquisa em saúde desencadeada pela pandemia da COVID-19 no Brasil. Vigilância Sanitária Em Debate, 8(2), 28–38.

Thomas, L. D., & Autio, E. (2020). Innovation ecosystems in management: An organizing typology. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management.

Thomas, E., Faccin, K., & Asheim, B. T. (2021). Universities as orchestrators of the development of regional innovation ecosystems in emerging economies. Growth and change, 52(2), 770-789.

Yawson, R. M. (2012). The Ecological System of Innovation: A New Architectural Framework for a Functional Evidence-Based Platform for Science and Innovation Policy. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–16.




How to Cite

Miranda Junior, N. da S., Viana, L. F. C., Carneiro, D. K. de O., Filgueiras, R. C., & Goulart, G. da S. (2022). Initial actions of the Brazilian regional innovation ecosystem against the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Innovation, 10(2), 291–318.