2411-14062411-140610.17059/ekon.reg.2025-4-16Evaluating the Quality of Human Resources in a Regional Scientific and Educational Ecosystem Оценка качества человеческих ресурсов региональной научно-образовательной экосистемыhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1975-0875Kulkova Inna A. КульковаИнна Анатольевнаi.a.koulkova@mail.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5298-5743MasalovaYuliya А. МасаловаЮлия Александровна ymasalova@yandex.ruInstitute of Economics of the Ural Branch of RASИнститут экономики УрО РАНNovosibirsk State University of Economics and ManagementНовосибирский государственный университет экономики и управления «НИНХ»Novosibirsk State Technical UniversityНовосибирский государственный технический университет21411551171Copyright © 2025 2025 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/https://www.economyofregions.org/ojs/index.php/er/article/view/1096https://www.economyofregions.org/ojs/index.php/er/article/download/1096/491

Modern developments in science and education are marked by rapid changes in the global environment and the emergence of regional science-education ecosystems. However, the quality of the human resources (HR) involved in these ecosystems remains insufficiently examined. The purpose of the paper is to identify the key characteristics of HR quality in a regional science-education ecosystem, introduce a methodological approach for assessing HR quality through its influence on the regional economy, and demonstrate the application of this approach. The study’s hypothesis suggests that evaluating HR quality in a regional science-education ecosystem should include characteristics such as competence, motivation, engagement, innovativeness, and competitiveness. The proposed methodological approach is applied to assess HR quality in the science-education ecosystem of Novosibirsk Oblast, Russia. This region is one of the country’s major research hubs and has hosted the Academgorodok 2.0 program since 2018.            The analysis shows that the region’s human resources have above-average competitiveness, with an overall quality score of 4.4. They are highly qualified and open to innovation, supporting the region’s leading position in Russia’s innovation development ranking. Weaknesses include low workforce engagement and limited interaction between science, education, and industry. Enhancing collaboration among these spheres could strengthen the region’s innovative development. The study is limited by regional statistics, which do not fully capture all HR quality characteristics. Nevertheless, the results can guide regional science-education policy and support ecosystem-focused cooperation.

Современное развитие науки и образования характеризуется быстрыми изменениями в глобальном пространстве, формированием региональных научно-образовательных экосистем, однако оценка качества задействованных в них человеческих ресурсов пока остается недостаточно изученной. Целью статьи является выявление характеристик качества человеческих ресурсов научно-образовательной экосистемы на региональном уровне, разработка методического подхода к оценке через влияние на экономику региона и его апробация. Гипотеза исследования заключается в том, что для оценки качества человеческих ресурсов научно-образовательной экосистемы на региональном уровне необходимо и достаточно учитывать такие характеристики, как компетентность, мотивация, вовлечённость, инновационность и конкурентоспособность. В статье предложен методический подход к оценке качества человеческих ресурсов научно-образовательной экосистемы на уровне региона, апробированный на примере Новосибирской области, являющейся одним из научных и образовательных центров страны, в котором в 2018 г. была запущена программа «Академгородок 2.0». Проведенный авторами с помощью предлагаемого в статье методического подхода анализ показал, что конкурентоспособность человеческих ресурсов Новосибирской области находится на уровне выше среднего, с интегральной оценкой качества 4,4. Человеческие ресурсы региона выделяются высоким уровнем квалификации и открытостью к инновациям, что способствует лидерству региона в рейтинге инновационного развития среди субъектов РФ. Вместе с тем, выявлены слабые стороны: недостаточная вовлечённость специалистов и ограниченное взаимодействие между наукой, образованием и производством. Эти аспекты требуют создания условий для более тесного сотрудничества, что позволит повысить эффективность инновационного развития региона. Ограничения исследования обусловлены тем, что региональная статистика не в полной мере позволяет составить представление об отдельных характеристиках качества человеческих ресурсов. Вместе с тем, полученные результаты могут быть использованы при разработке на региональном уровне научно-образовательной политики, в том числе в части формирования экосистемного научно-образовательного взаимодействия.

scientific and educational ecosystemhuman resources quality assessmentregional human resourcesquality characteristics of human resourcesimpact of the quality of human resources on the economyнаучно-образовательная экосистемаоценка качества человеческих ресурсовчеловеческие ресурсы регионахарактеристики качества человеческих ресурсоввлияние качества человеческих ресурсов на экономику

The study was carried out in accordance with the research plan of the Institute of Economics of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences for 2024–2026.

Исследование выполнено в соответствии с планом НИР Института экономики Уральского отделения РАН на 2024–2026 гг.

Кремнева, Л. В., Заведенский, К. Е., Рабинович, П. Д., Апенько, С. Н. (2020). Стратегирование образования: экосистемный переход. Интеграция образования, 24 (4), 656–677. https://doi.org/10.15507/1991–9468.101.024.202004.656-677Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43 (1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316678451Кузьминов, Я. И., Юдкевич, М. М. (2021). Университеты в России: как это работает. Москва: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 616.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. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.821Лаврикова, Ю. Г. (ред.). (2020). Приоритеты научно-технологического развития регионов: механизмы реализации. Екатеринбург: ИЭ УрО РАН, 603.Alexy, O., George, G., & Salter, A. J. (2013). Cui bono? The selective revealing of knowledge and its implications for innovative activity. Academy of Management Review, 38 (2), 270–291. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0193Масалова, Ю. А. (2015). Система управления качеством человеческих ресурсов. Вестник Омского университета. Серия: Экономика, (1), 81–85. Baldwin, C. Y. (2012). Organization design for business ecosystems. Journal of Organization Design, 1 (1), 20–23. https://doi.org/10.7146/jod.6334Масалова, Ю. А. (2022). Научно-образовательная экосистема как среда для развития человеческих ресурсов. Креативная экономика, 16 (12), 4973–4986. https://doi.org/10.18334/ce.16.12.116926Barokas, J., & Barth, I. (2018). Multi-stakeholder ecosystems in rapidly changing educational environments. 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1934–1938). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363472Пацала, С. В., Горошко, Н. В. (2022). Новосибирская область в хозяйстве России: наука и инновации. Вестник ПНИПУ. Социально-экономические науки, (1), 220–237. https://doi.org/10.15593/2224–9354/2022.17Bogers, M., Sims, J., & West, J. (2019). What is an ecosystem? Incorporating 25 years of ecosystem research. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2019 (1), 11080. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2019.11080abstractТомасова, Д. А., Хавенсон, Т. Е., Королева, Д. О. (2021). Образовательные экосистемы: традиционные и нетрадиционные акторы в развитии территорий. Под ред. Д. П. Соснина. Города будущего: пространственное развитие, соучаствующее управление и творческие индустрии (с. 349–373). Москва: Издательский дом «Дело» РАНХиГС.Brusoni, S., & Prencipe, A. (2013). The organization of innovation in ecosystems: Problem framing, problem solving, and patterns of coupling. Advances in Strategic Management, 30, 167–194. Фаузер, В. В., Смирнов, А. В. (2024). Многомерная демография: новый подход к оценке человеческих ресурсов российского Севера. Экономика региона, 20 (2), 395–411. https://doi.org/10.17059/ekon.reg.2024-2-4Cai, Y., Ma, J., & Chen, Q. (2020). Higher education in innovation ecosystems. Sustainability, 12 (11), 4376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114376Хамидулин, В. С. (2018). Модель тройной спирали и региональное экономическое развитие: роль университета. Ars Administrandi (Искусство управления), 10 (4), 598–609. https://doi.org/10.17072/2218–9173-2018-4-598-609Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2009). “Mode 3” and “Quadruple Helix”: toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46 (3/4), 201. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2009.023374Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43 (1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316678451Carayannis, E. G., Barth, T. D., & Campbell, D. F. (2012). The Quintuple Helix innovation model: Global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/2192–5372-1-2Adner, 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.821Carayannis, E. G., 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12300Alexy, O., George, G., & Salter, A. J. (2013). Cui bono? The selective revealing of knowledge and its implications for innovative activity. Academy of Management Review, 38 (2), 270–291. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0193Ceccagnoli, N., Forman, N., Huang, N., & Wu, N. (2012). Cocreation of value in a platform ecosystem! The case of enterprise software. MIS Quarterly, 36 (1), 263. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410417Baldwin, C. Y. (2012). Organization design for business ecosystems. Journal of Organization Design, 1 (1), 20–23. https://doi.org/10.7146/jod.6334Cennamo, C., & Santalo, J. (2013). Platform competition: Strategic trade-offs in platform markets. Strategic Management Journal, 34 (11), 1331–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2066Barokas, J., & Barth, I. (2018). Multi-stakeholder ecosystems in rapidly changing educational environments. 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1934–1938). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363472Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy, 43 (7), 1164–1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.014Bogers, M., Sims, J., & West, J. (2019). What is an ecosystem? Incorporating 25 years of ecosystem research. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2019 (1), 11080. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2019.11080abstractCrilly, M., Vemury, C. M., Humphrey, R., Rodriguez, S., Crosbie, T., Johnson, K., Wilson, A., & Heidrich, O. (2020). Common Language of Sustainability for Built Environment Professionals—The Quintuple Helix Model for Higher Education. Energies, 13 (22), 5860. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13225860Brusoni, S., & Prencipe, A. (2013). The organization of innovation in ecosystems: Problem framing, problem solving, and patterns of coupling. Advances in Strategic Management, 30, 167–194. Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action. New York: Routledge, 164.Cai, Y., Ma, J., & Chen, Q. (2020). Higher education in innovation ecosystems. Sustainability, 12 (11), 4376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114376Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix—University-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST review, 14 (1), 14–19.Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2009). “Mode 3” and “Quadruple Helix”: toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46 (3/4), 201. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2009.023374Fauzer, V. V., & Smirnov, A. V. (2024). Multidimensional Demography: A New Approach to Assessing the Human Resources of the Russian North. Ekonomika regiona [Economy of regions], 20 (2), 395–411. https://doi.org/10.17059/ekon.reg.2024-2-4 (In Russ.)Carayannis, E. G., Barth, T. D., & Campbell, D. F. (2012). The Quintuple Helix innovation model: Global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/2192–5372-1-2Ganco, M., Kapoor, R., & Lee, G. K. (2020). From rugged landscapes to rugged ecosystems: Structure of interdependencies and firms’ innovative search. Academy of Management Review, 45 (3), 646–674. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2017.0549Carayannis, E. G., 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12300Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2008). How companies become platform leaders. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49 (2), 28–35.Ceccagnoli, N., Forman, N., Huang, N., & Wu, N. (2012). Cocreation of value in a platform ecosystem! The case of enterprise software. MIS Quarterly, 36 (1), 263. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410417Geuna, A., & Muscio, A. (2009). The Governance of University Knowledge Transfer: A Critical Review of the literature. Minerva, 47 (1), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-009-9118-2Cennamo, C., & Santalo, J. (2013). Platform competition: Strategic trade-offs in platform markets. Strategic Management Journal, 34 (11), 1331–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2066Gulati, R., Puranam, P., & Tushman, M. (2012). Meta-organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 33 (6), 571–586. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1975Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy, 43 (7), 1164–1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.014Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39 (8), 2255–2276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904Crilly, M., Vemury, C. M., Humphrey, R., Rodriguez, S., Crosbie, T., Johnson, K., Wilson, A., & Heidrich, O. (2020). Common Language of Sustainability for Built Environment Professionals — The Quintuple Helix Model for Higher Education. Energies, 13 (22), 5860. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13225860Kapoor, K., Bigdeli, A. Z., Dwivedi, Y. K., Schroeder, A., Beltagui, A., & Baines T. (2021). A socio-technical view of platform ecosystems: Systematic review and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 128, 94–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.01.060Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action. New York: Routledge, 164.Kapoor, R. (2018). Ecosystems: broadening the locus of value creation. Journal of Organization Design, 7 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41469-018-0035-4Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix—University-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST review, 14 (1), 14–19.Kerres, M., & Heinen, R. (2015). Open informational ecosystems: The missing link for sharing resources for education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16 (1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i1.2008Ganco, M., Kapoor, R., & Lee, G. K. (2020). From rugged landscapes to rugged ecosystems: Structure of interdependencies and firms’ innovative search. Academy of Management Review, 45 (3), 646–674. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2017.0549Khamidulin, V. S. (2018). The Triple Helix Model and Regional Economic Development: The Role of Universities. Ars Administrandi, 10 (4), 598–609. https://doi.org/10.17072/2218–9173-2018-4-598-609 (In Russ.)Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2008). How companies become platform leaders. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49 (2), 28–35.Koroleva, D., Khavenson, T., & Tomasova D. (2023). Genesis and Predictive ability of ecosystem approach in education. Foresight-Russia, 17 (4), 93–109. https://doi.org/10.17323/2500–2597.2023.4.93.109Geuna, A., & Muscio, A. (2009). The Governance of University Knowledge Transfer: A Critical Review of the literature. Minerva, 47 (1), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-009-9118-2Koul, S., & Nayar, B. (2021). The holistic learning educational ecosystem: A classroom 4.0 perspective. Higher Education Quarterly, 75 (1), 98–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12271Gulati, R., Puranam, P., & Tushman, M. (2012). Meta-organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 33 (6), 571–586. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1975Kremneva, L. V., Zavedensky, K. E., Rabinovich, P. D., & Apenko, S. N. (2020). Strategizing Education: Ecosystem Transition. Integratsiya obrazovaniya [Integration of Education], 24 (4), 656–677. https://doi.org/10.15507/1991–9468.101.024.202004.656-677 (In Russ.)Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39 (8), 2255–2276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904Kuzminov, Ya. I., & Yudkevich, M. M. (2021). Universitety v Rossii: kak eto rabotaet [Russian universities: How the system works]. Moscow: HSE Publishing House, 616. (In Russ.)Kapoor, K., Bigdeli, A. Z., Dwivedi, Y. K., Schroeder, A., Beltagui, A., & Baines, T. (2021). A socio-technical view of platform ecosystems: Systematic review and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 128, 94–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.01.060Lavrikova, Yu. G. (Ed.) (2020). Prioritety nauchno-tekhnologicheskogo razvitiya regionov: mekhanizmy realizatsii [Priorities of scientific and technological development of the regions: Implementation mechanisms]. Ekaterinburg: Institute of Economics of the Ural Branch of RAS, 603. (In Russ.)Kapoor, R. (2018). Ecosystems: broadening the locus of value creation. Journal of Organization Design, 7 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41469-018-0035-4Leten, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Roijakkers, N., Clerix, A., & Van Helleputte, J. (2013). IP models to orchestrate Innovation ecosystems: IMEC, a public research institute in Nano-Electronics. California Management Review, 55 (4), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2013.55.4.51Kerres, M., & Heinen, R. (2015). Open informational ecosystems: The missing link for sharing resources for education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16 (1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i1.2008Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The Triple Helix, quadruple Helix, . . ., and an N-Tuple of Helices: Explanatory Models for analyzing the Knowledge-Based Economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3 (1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-011-0049-4Koroleva, D., Khavenson, T., & Tomasova, D. (2023). Genesis and Predictive ability of ecosystem approach in education. Foresight-Russia, 17 (4), 93–109. https://doi.org/10.17323/2500–2597.2023.4.93.109Masalova, Y. A. (2022). Scientific and educational ecosystem as an environment for human resource development. Kreativnaya ekonomika [Creative Economy], 16 (12), 4973–4986. https://doi.org/10.18334/ce.16.12.116926 (In Russ.)Koul, S., & Nayar, B. (2021). The holistic learning educational ecosystem: A classroom 4.0 perspective. Higher Education Quarterly, 75 (1), 98–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12271Masalova, Yu. A. (2015). Quality Management System of Human Resources. Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika [Herald of Omsk University. Series: Economics], (1), 81–85. (In Russ.)Leten, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Roijakkers, N., Clerix, A., & Van Helleputte, J. (2013). IP models to orchestrate Innovation ecosystems: IMEC, a public research institute in Nano-Electronics. California Management Review, 55 (4), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2013.55.4.51McAdam, M., & Debackere, K. (2018). Beyond ‘triple helix’ toward ‘quadruple helix’ models in regional innovation systems: implications for theory and practice. R and D Management, 48 (1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12309Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The Triple Helix, quadruple Helix, . . ., and an N-Tuple of Helices: Explanatory Models for analyzing the Knowledge-Based Economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3 (1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-011-0049-4Muthusamy, S. K., & White, M. A. (2005). Learning and knowledge transfer in strategic alliances: A social exchange view. Organization studies, 26 (3), 415–441.McAdam, M., & Debackere, K. (2018). Beyond ‘triple helix’ toward ‘quadruple helix’ models in regional innovation systems: implications for theory and practice. R and D Management, 48 (1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12309Oh, D., Phillips, F., Park, S., & Lee, E. (2016). Innovation ecosystems: A critical examination. Technovation, 54, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.02.004Muthusamy, S. K., & White, M. A. (2005). Learning and knowledge transfer in strategic alliances: A social exchange view. Organization studies, 26 (3), 415–441.Parker, G., Van Alstyne, M., & Jiang, X. (2017). Platform ecosystems. MIS quarterly, 41 (1), 255–266.Oh, D., Phillips, F., Park, S., & Lee, E. (2016). Innovation ecosystems: A critical examination. Technovation, 54, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.02.004Patsala, S. V., & Goroshko, N. V. (2022). Novosibirsk region in Russian economy: Science and innovation. Vestnik PNIPU. Sotsial’no-ekonomicheskie nauki [PNRPU Sociology and Economics Bulletin], (1), 220–237. https://doi.org/10.15593/2224–9354/2022.17 (In Russ.)Parker, G., Van Alstyne, M., & Jiang, X. (2017). Platform ecosystems. MIS quarterly, 41 (1), 255–266.Reichert, S. (2019). The Role of Universities in Regional Innovation Ecosystems. Brussels: EUA. Reichert, S. (2019). The Role of Universities in Regional Innovation Ecosystems. Brussels: EUA. Ritala, P., Agouridas, V., Assimakopoulos, D., & Gies, O. (2013). Value creation and capture mechanisms in innovation ecosystems: a comparative case study. International Journal of Technology Management, 63 (3/4), 244. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2013.056900Ritala, P., Agouridas, V., Assimakopoulos, D., & Gies, O. (2013). Value creation and capture mechanisms in innovation ecosystems: a comparative case study. International Journal of Technology Management, 63 (3/4), 244. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2013.056900Saragih, H. S., & Tan, J. D. (2018). Co-innovation: a review and conceptual framework. International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 17 (3), 361. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijbir.2018.095542Saragih, H. S., & Tan, J. D. (2018). Co-innovation: a review and conceptual framework. International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 17 (3), 361. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijbir.2018.095542Smorodinskaya, N., Russell, M., Katukov, D., & Still, K. (2017). Innovation Ecosystems vs. Innovation Systems in Terms of Collaboration and Co-creation of Value. Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, (2017), 5245–5254. https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2017.636Smorodinskaya, N., Russell, M., Katukov, D., & Still, K. (2017). Innovation Ecosystems vs. Innovation Systems in Terms of Collaboration and Co-creation of Value. Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, (2017), 5245–5254. https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2017.636Sørensen, M. P., Geschwind, L., Kekäle, J., & Pinheiro, R. (2019). (Eds.) The Responsible University: Exploring the Nordic Context and Beyond. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.Sørensen, M. P., Geschwind, L., Kekäle, J., & Pinheiro, R. (2019). (Eds.) The Responsible University: Exploring the Nordic Context and Beyond. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Teece, D. J. (2018). Business ecosystems. In M. Augier & D. J. Teece (Eds.), The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Management (pp. 151–154). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-00772-8_724Teece, D. J. (2018). Business ecosystems. In M. Augier & D. J. Teece (Eds.), The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Management (pp. 151–154). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-00772-8_724Teichler, U. (2006). Changing structures of the higher education systems: The increasing complexity of underlying forces. Higher Education Policy, 19 (4), 447–461. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.hep.8300133Teichler, U. (2006). Changing structures of the higher education systems: The increasing complexity of underlying forces. Higher Education Policy, 19 (4), 447–461. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.hep.8300133Tomasova, D. A., Khavenson, T. E., & Koroleva, D. O. (2021). Educational Ecosystems: Traditional and Non-traditional Actors in the Development of Territories. In D. P. Sosnin (Ed.), Goroda budushchego: prostranstvennoe razvitie, souchastvuyushchee upravlenie i tvorcheskie industrii [Cities of the Future: Spatial Development, Participatory Management and Creative Industries] (pp. 349–373). Moscow: Publishing house “Delo” of RANEPA. (In Russ.)Tsoukas, H. (2009). A dialogical approach to the creation of new knowledge in organizations. Organization Science, 20 (6), 941–957. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0435Tsoukas, H. (2009). A dialogical approach to the creation of new knowledge in organizations. Organization Science, 20 (6), 941–957. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0435Valkokari, K. (2015). Business, Innovation, and Knowledge Ecosystems: How They Differ and How to Survive and Thrive within Them. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5 (8), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/919Valkokari, K. (2015). Business, Innovation, and Knowledge Ecosystems: How They Differ and How to Survive and Thrive within Them. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5 (8), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/919Wareham, J., Fox, P. B., & Giner, J. L. C. (2014). Technology ecosystem governance. Organization Science, 25 (4), 1195–1215. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0895Wareham, J., Fox, P. B., & Giner, J. L. C. (2014). Technology ecosystem governance. Organization Science, 25 (4), 1195–1215. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0895Wu, S., & Lin, C. Y. (2019). Innovation and entrepreneurship in an educational ecosystem: Cases from Taiwan. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9445-5Wu, S., & Lin, C. Y. (2019). Innovation and entrepreneurship in an educational ecosystem: Cases from Taiwan. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9445-5