• Policy makers should strengthen appropriate funding mechanisms that assist Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in receiving appropriate rewards when entering QH collaborations (e.g.: social innovation funds; QH collaboration funds targeted for CSO participation). Actors of the fourth helix (‘civil society’) often lack the funding to enter into QH collaborations that provide innovation rewards in later stages of the process. This hinders the participation of CSOs from early on. It also hinders market oriented players from including and later assessing social/non-market oriented outputs and effects.
• Metrics and indicators should be provided for practicioners to measure success of QH collaborations in terms of its democratic and social impact. QH collaborations lack an appropriate metrix, or currently available indicators (e.g., SDGs, KPIs) are not operationalized to the extent that they may be used by practicioners to measure success in non-market orineted output(s). This hinders the participation of CSOs with a societal mission.
• Compendia of ‘best practices’ of QH collaborations, as well as their methods, are required to help set up efficient governance structures, operational processes and modes of addressing internal conflicts. Effective methodologies support the active participation of CSOs within QH collaborations to promote a multidimensional view of innovation. ‘How to’ resources and ‘best practice’ examples, including, amongst other things, methods and formats for collaboration, help to address barriers and obstacles.