Assessment of the relationship between the innovative development of the region and the standard of living of the population in the subjects of the Arctic zone of Russia

The relevance of the work is due to the need for predictive assessments of the impact of the effectiveness of innovation activities on improving the standard of living of the population in the regions. The «Quadruple Spiral» model of interaction of participants in the innovation process is presented. On the basis of correlation and regression analysis within the framework of the quadruple helix model, the possibility of predictive assessment of the standard of living of the population of the territory depending on the level of innovative development of the region is shown. In general, the presence of a certain relationship between key indicators in the innovation sphere and civil society allows us to use a regression formula to model predictive estimates of the impact of innovation performance on improving the standard of living of the population in the regions

Keywords: subjects of the Arctic zone, innovative development of regions; triple and quadruple helix; civil society; standard of living of the population; correlation and regression analysis.


  1. H. Etzkowitz, L. Leydesdorff. The Triple Helix–University–Industry–Government Relations: A Laboratory for Knowledge Based Economic Development//EASST Review. 1995. No. 14. P. 14–19.
  2. H. Etzkowitz, L. Leydesdorff. The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and ‘‘Mode 2’’ to a Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations//Research Policy. 2000. No. 29 (2). P. 109–123.–7333 (99)00055–4.
  3. H. Etzkowitz, C. Zhou. The Triple Helix: University–Industry–Government Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York: Routledge. 2018. 328 p.
  4. M. Saad, G. Zawdie. Theory and Practice of Triple Helix Model in Developing Countries: Issues and Challenges. New York: Routledge. 2011. 336 p.
  5. L. N. Borisoglebskaya, V. N. Mikhailov. Interaction of universities, business and the state in the context of the «Triple Helix» on a foreign example: problems and prospects// Priority scientific directions: from theory to practice. 2016. No. 21. P. 175–186 (in Russian).
  6. D. I. Artemova. State power, regional development strategy «Triple helix»//State power and local self-government. 2020. No. 9. P. 36–44.–1247– 2020–9-36–44 (in Russian).
  7. L. G. Batrakova. Innovative development of Russian regions according to the Triple Helix model//Socio-political studies. 2020. No. 3 (8). P. 67–80.– 428X‑2020–3-8–67–80 (in Russian).
  8. G. Antonov, K. Y. Pomogaeva. Innovative spiral//Moscow Economic Journal. 2019. No. 5. P. 5.–046X‑2019–15005 (in Russian).
  9. Y. Cai, H. Etzkowitz. Theorizing the Triple Helix model: Past, present, and future//Triple Helix Journal. 2020. No. 6 (1). P. 1–38.‑bja10003.
  10. L. Leydesdorff, H. Etzkowitz. Can “the public” be considered as a fourth helix in university–industry–government relations? Report of the fourth Triple Helix conference//Sci. Public Policy. 2003. No. 30 (1). P. 55–61.
  11. D. F. J. Campbell, E. G. Carayannis, S. S. Rehman. Quadruple helix structures of quality of democracy in innovation systems: the USA, OECD countries, and EU member countries in global comparison//Journal of the Knowledge Economy. 2015. No. 6 (3). P. 467–493.
  12. J. N. Kimatu. Evolution of strategic interactions from the triple to quad helix innovation models for sustainable development in the era of globalization//J. Innov. Entrep. 2016. No. 5 (16).–016–0044‑x.
  13. E. G. Carayannis, D. F. J. Campbell. ‘Mode 3’ and ‘Quadruple Helix’: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem//International Journal of Technology Management. 2009. Vol. 46. No. 3 (4). P. 201–234.
  14. R. R. Kasenov. Model of the national innovation system//Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University. 2013. No. 32 (323). P. 52–56 (in Russian).
  15. V. P. Shestak, I. G. Tyutyunnik. Financial and legal support of innovation activity//Finance: theory and practice. 2017. № 21 (6). С. 118–127.– 5671–2017–21–6-118–127 (in Russian).
  16. E. G. Carayannis, D. F. J. Campbell. Mode 3 Knowledge Production in Quadruple Helix Innovation Systems. In: Mode 3 Knowledge Production in Quadruple Helix Innovation Systems, 7. New York: Springer; 2012. С. 1–63.
  17. E. Carayannis, E. Grigoroudis. Quadruple Innovation Helix and Smart Specialization: Knowledge Production and National Competitiveness//Foresight and STI Governance. 2016. No. 10 (1). P. 31–42.–459x.2016.1.31.42.
  18. E. L. Kichatinova, I. V. Oleinikov. The concept of the «quadruple spiral» and innovative development of regions//Izvestiya Irkutsk State University. Lithology series. Religious studies. 2019. No. 29. P. 53–62.–3380.2019.29.53 (in Russian).
  19. K. S. Sablin. Russian regions and resource security: on the applicability of the concept of the quadruple helix»//Innovations. 2020. No. 8 (262). P. 75–82. https://doi. org/10.26310/2071–3010.2020.262.8.009 (in Russian).
  20. B. M. Grinchel, E. A. Nazarova. The influence of the innovativeness of regions on the competitive attractiveness and sustainability of the economy and quality of life//Innovations. 2017. No. 8 (226). P. 105–113 (in Russian).
  21. B. M. Grinchel, E. A. Nazarova. Competitive attractiveness and sustainability of the quality of life of regions in the territorial space of Russia//Economics and Management. 2021. No. 27 (6). P. 410–425.–1627–2021–6-410–425 (in Russian).
  22. A. Maltseva. Methodological approaches to assessing the sustainability of innovative development territories using the theory of dynamic standards//Economic analysis: theory and practice. 2015. No. 44. P. 15–29 (in Russian).
  23. V. V. Krivorotov, A. V. Kalina, I. S. Belik. Threshold values of indicative indicators for diagnostics of economic security of the Russian Federation at the present stage//Bulletin of the UrFU. Series: Economics and Management. 2019. No. 18 (6). P. 892–910. (in Russian).
  24. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. Statistical collection of the Federal State Statistics Service. (in Russian).
  25. Methods for calculating the correlation coefficient.шкала-чеддока (in Russian).
  26. Russian Regional Innovation Scoreboard. Issue 7 [Electronic Resource]/V. Abashkin, G. Abdrakhmanova, S. Bredikhin et al.; L. Gokhberg (ed.); National Research University Higher School of Economics. Moscow: HSE University, 2021 (in Russian).
  27. N. E. Egorov. Analysis and evaluation of key performance indicators of innovation activity of the federal districts of Russia//Innovations. 2017. No. 8 (226). P. 105–113 (in Russian).
  28. N. Egorov, T. Pospelova, A. Yarygina, E. Klochkova. The Assessment of Innovation Development in the Arctic Regions of Russia Based on the Triple Helix Model//Resources. 2019. No. 8 (2). P.72.
  29. N. Egorov, A. Babkin, I. Babkin, A. Yarygina. Innovative Development in Northern Russia Assessed by Triple Helix Model//International Journal of Technology. 2021. Vol. 12 (7), P. 1387–1396.