Role of Networks of Rural Innovation in Advancing the Sustainable Development Goals: A Quadruple Helix Case Study

Abstract

Tackling rural development challenges is essential for achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The quadruple helix approach, encompassing academia, the government, industry, and the community, is crucial for promoting neo-endogenous rural development and sustainability through effective interventions. This paper utilizes a case study methodology and qualitative approaches, such as observation, discussions, and semi-structured interviews, to provide an overview of a quadruple helix rural revitalization program focused on sustainable rural development. The findings showed the following: (1) the quadruple helix collaborations initiated among the stakeholders are essential for promoting collaborative research, enhancing relevance, and stimulating neo-endogenous growth; (2) the program’s focus on agricultural science and technology, entrepreneurship, and tourism offers a holistic approach to sustainable rural development, representing a departure from a sectoral focus on agriculture and the move towards a comprehensive understanding of rural innovation, where agricultural production is incorporated as one activity among many; (3) the multidisciplinary approach of the program has facilitated the advancement of a total of 11 out of the 17 SDGs. The study suggests implications for practice, emphasizing the importance of context-specific and multidisciplinary approaches to address sustainability challenges that are not bounded by discipline.

1. Introduction

A world with large disparities in terms of development between rural and urban areas could never achieve the SDGs [1]. Rural underdevelopment might lead to severe consequences regarding global sustainable development, such as poverty, poor land management, the failure of education, the underdevelopment of infrastructure and even crime [1]. Furthermore, many rural areas are experiencing population decline and a downfall in private business, employment, and public services. The reasons for this are associated with the geographical and relational remoteness of rural areas due to limited socio-economic connections.

The existing weak innovation systems in rural regions, often associated with the lack of knowledge institutions, further mean that there are low levels of collective learning and an insufficient capacity to absorb interregional knowledge spillover. These ongoing challenges call for urgent rural innovation measures that require multidisciplinary approaches and partnerships across the ecosystems of science (academia), policy (government), industry and the wider community.

Consequently, the quadruple helix framework has increasingly received recognition in rural development studies. The quadruple helix framework embodies a collaborative model involving academia, the government, industry, and the community, and emphasizes the interconnected roles of these four partners in driving holistic development and problem solving. The significance of the role of the quadruple helix approach in rural areas draws on our understanding of the nature of rural development as neo-endogenous, in which local collaborations seek to develop embedded innovation initiatives but rely on a mix of both internal and external actors. Academic institutions or universities, acting as the external actors, contribute knowledge in these peripheral regions that might have previously lacked knowledge institutions, resulting in weak innovation systems. On the other hand, the internal actors are mostly local stakeholders, including the government, communities, and individuals, whose involvement in development interventions offers an opportunity to enable synergies and mutual benefits between local and global aspirations, with place-based needs and priorities [2].

Quadruple helix approaches, characterized by the active collaboration of academia, the government, industry, and community stakeholders, can be particularly useful for sustainability, which demands partnerships between stakeholders, including local ones to enhance localized solutions. In fact, the involvement of local communities and stakeholders in achieving sustainability has been widely advocated for in policy initiatives such as Local Agenda 21, which was a key component of the United Nations global action plan for sustainable development [2].

Given the criticality of such collaborative initiatives, a nuanced and systematic investigation of the role of quadruple helix approaches in supporting knowledge-based rural development has not yet been undertaken, and according to a recent study [3], is required. It is also important to unravel how quadruple helix approaches are developed in rural regions, what initiatives can promote rural innovation, and how such initiatives can promote the advancement of the SDGs.

The experiences developed in the rural revitalization program under study can hopefully provide meaningful responses to these questions. The program was established as a collaborative initiative among a university, the government, industry, and the wider community in 2012. It has now been in operation for the past 10 years and is still ongoing, serving rural regions in more than 15 provinces in China. The program has established more than 263 rural revitalization projects. These projects are based on a foundation of solid interactions among the university, government, and the public, as well as the establishment of over 50 rural research and service bases that serve as platforms for collaborative research between researchers and non-academic actors. In this ecosystem, the university serves as the knowledge repository, the government as a primary funder and policy architect, and the industry as a catalyst for innovation; the community members actively engage in co-creating, utilizing, and disseminating knowledge to foster comprehensive development. Notably, the program represents a departure from the sectoral focus on agriculture in rural development, and a move towards a holistic and integrated understanding of innovation, in which agricultural production is integrated as one activity among many, including entrepreneurship, education and talent building, and tourism [4].

The objective of this paper is to present an overview of the rural revitalization program during the last 10 years, as well as the main findings of the various initiatives aimed at enhancing knowledge-based sustainable rural development. The goal is twofold: first, to present the actions performed by the quadruple helix initiative; and second, to explain how these actions contribute to the advancement of the SDGs. The structure of the paper is as follows. Section 2 presents the theoretical framework for the networks of innovation in rural development. Section 3 is the methodology. Section 4 presents the results of the rural revitalization program, showing the four main actions it performs and how this provides an opportunity for the advancement of the SDGs. This section also discusses the findings regarding the research questions and puts them into perspective with the broader literature. Section 5 concludes the paper and proposes avenues for future research on quadruple helix initiatives in the sustainable development of rural areas.

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Neo-Endogenous Rural Development

Rural regions face difficult challenges that can hinder sustained growth and development and are as a result of peripherality, remoteness, and marginalization. Nevertheless, rural regions also potentially possess considerable advantages over urban areas owing to their inherent natural resources and other regional specificities that must be seen as resources and not as limitations for development. In many rural areas, the absence of universities and other knowledge institutions has influenced the development of rural and remote regions, as the innovation systems are either weak or non-existent. As such, external interventions are seen as responses to these challenges.

Consequently, rural development theory has oscillated from bottom-up endogenous models to wholly exogenous approaches, and now to increasingly neo-endogenous approaches [5]. The neo-endogenous approach is a mixed endogenous–exogenous dynamic revolving around maximizing local resources and generating competitiveness based on local assets [5]. The dynamic force behind this is networks of local actors connected to external influences, where the state plays a facilitating role [6]. The neo-endogenous approach is a holistic approach to rural development that maximizes available resources by enhancing connectivity and the inclusion of external actors like academia. This is paramount to rural innovation, which can only be achieved when research interventions are organized in ways that promote interactions.

The neo-endogenous model has been the focus of many studies seeking ways to interpret rural development, and there are many and varied applications of this approach in the literature. Many of these are related to the experiences of bottom-up rural development policies, which are almost completely monopolized by the “community-led development” strategy of the LEADER programme in Europe [7]. The emphasis in the majority of studies is on the significance of area-based, innovative local action that is co-ordinated through networks and cooperation, which can mobilize both local communities and external institutions to contribute to sustainable rural development [5]. It seems crucial that local communities cooperate with different types of actors like industries, organisations, and knowledge institutions.

As such, the neo-endogenous approach can be said to be a holistic approach to rural development that includes local empowerment, talent training, overcoming exclusion, maximising local resources, enhancing connectivity, and promoting innovation [6]. In this way, the neo-endogenous approach has many parallels with the quadruple helix theory, which is often a high-powered innovation network targeting shared local development.

2.2. Quadruple Helix Approach

The quadruple helix approach is an extension of the triple helix model. The triple helix was developed by Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff to explain the tri-lateral networks and hybrid interactions among academia, industry, and the government [8]. While it is effective in explaining the dynamics of innovation, such as the key actors, enabling conditions and mechanisms of interaction, it has been critiqued as inadequate for analyzing multiple sectoral collaborations in contemporary society [9]. More specifically, the triple helix model is rendered inadequate for conceptualizing knowledge transfer interactions in rural areas, in which the innovation system is becoming increasingly open to different stakeholders.

Consequently, the quadruple helix model has emerged as an ideal approach for conceptualizing rural innovation systems, in which collaborations extend beyond the traditional university, government, and industry stakeholders to include the community. It provides a comprehensive, collaborative, and context-aware framework that recognizes the distinct stakeholders and multidimensional aspects involved in rural development. According to Wallin [10], the stakeholders, local employees and inhabitants should be disclosed as the fourth helix of the development because of their meaningful contribution and active role in the development.

The quadruple helix model has increasingly been applied to rural development studies in various ways. In case studies, the model has been applied to examine the role of the government, academia, industry, and the community in fostering innovation and rural development. These studies have explored collaboration and knowledge exchange among stakeholders, the impact of policies and regulations, and the role of local communities in shaping innovation processes [11,12].

A study by Kolehmainen et al. [11] started by extrapolating that the fourth helix of community refers to the actors of the local and regional civil society. The study reveals that the community is an important helix that can sometimes even play the dominant entrepreneurial role, especially in the case of the following rural situations: a remote and less-favored region has no university or other knowledge-intensive institution; the business community is scattered and insufficiently developed in terms of innovation; and there is a weak public sector that is unable to enhance innovation [11]. Nordberg et al. [12] applied the quadruple helix model to analyze the network of innovation systems in rural development programs. Their study revealed that while the community possesses knowledge of local needs and resources, it may at the same time lack the knowhow to maximize these resources; in this situation, the expertise from extra-local academic, professional, and regulatory knowledge must be adapted to such contexts. As such, the community is assimilated with the other helices in an engagement setting in order to enhance the creation of new knowledge, technology and innovation, addressing both economic and societal needs [12].

Another study by Roman et al. [13] explored the application of the quadruple helix model in the context of sustainable rural development, and emphasized the significance of integrating different perspectives and knowledge domains to foster innovation and enhance the capacity of rural areas. The authors discussed the potential of collaborative partnerships to address complex issues such as resource management, economic diversification, and social inclusion.

Overall, the literature on the application of the quadruple helix in rural development studies highlights the potential benefits of collaborative approaches, as well as the importance of an integrated rural development approach that seeks to address the multiple dimensions of rural development in an integrated and coordinated manner. However, further research is needed to explore the specific mechanisms involved in implementing quadruple helix approaches in an integrated rural development setting.

In this study, we apply the quadruple helix model to conceptualize the case of the AU rural revitalization program, which is a collaborative initiative involving academia, the government, industry, and the wider community. The model helps to shed more light on the collaborations and knowledge exchange among the stakeholders, their roles in shaping the innovation process, and the importance of local knowledge, cultural values, and social dynamics in driving innovation and sustainable development in rural areas. Specifically, the model analyzes the roles of the four stakeholders in ensuring integrated rural development through the following four main actions: agricultural science and technological innovation; tourism; education and talent training; and entrepreneurship.

3. Methodology

3.1. Description of the Case Study

To ensure the anonymity of the university, we concealed the original name of the university and used an appropriate pseudonym: Agricultural University (AU). The AU rural revitalization program is a collaborative initiative among the university, the government, industry, and the community that was established in 2012 and serves rural regions in more than 15 provinces across China. The program has established 9 rural demonstration bases, 24 industrial bases, and 17 service stations in rural regions across the 15 provinces (

Table 1. Outline of the AU rural revitalization program.

Implementation		Goals
Region	15 Provinces	Address rural challenges. To foster collaboration. Provide an integrated and holistic approach to rural development.
Infrastructure	50 rural service bases
Duration of operation	11 years (2011–2023)
Projects	263 projects

), which serve as platforms of interaction among academia (AU), the government, industry, and the local communities. It is rooted in a multistakeholder and multidisciplinary approach that seeks to promote a holistic and systemic vision of rural development that incorporates agriculture, entrepreneurship, education, and tourism.

3.2. Data Collection and Analysis

3.2.1. Observations and Interviews

Firstly, purposive sampling was employed to select the 12 rural bases of the AU program that have been included in this study (

Table 2. Description of the sample and data collection.

Rural Research Bases Visited	Observation and Interviews
Industrial bases (total number: 4)	Sample: 46 participants AU researchers (faculty members and graduate students); industry partners; local community members. Observations: Guided observation tours of the rural research bases that provided insights about various processes and actions, and helped guide relationships with informants. Interviews and Discussions: The questions focused on the initiatives and activities carried out by the rural bases to promote rural revitalization.
Lawn industry research institute
Meat products processing industry research institute
Vegetable industry research institute
Grape industry institute
Demonstration bases (total number: 7)
Six Rural research institutes
Chrysanthemum Park and research institute
Workstations (total number: 1)
Agriculture information expert workstation

). Visiting the rural bases was considered the most suitable way of collecting the data, as the bases serve as platforms of interaction among AU researchers, industry, the government, and local communities. The specific 12 bases were considered because, in the recent past, they have demonstrated effort and initiatives in their response to rural revitalization (rural bases’ web). We thought it would be illuminative to explore these rural bases as they had been established for a varying number of years and thus had different levels of development, differing research activities, and were in different locations across China. These rural bases not only provide information about the rural revitalization practices, but also provide space for a recontextualization of the concept and act as examples for similar rural circumstances in developing countries.

Next, the data were collected using a direct observation approach coupled with interviews, which were conducted during the visits to the 12 rural bases in August 2018. Observation is useful when aiming to acquire information about processes and actions, and helps researchers to identify and guide relationships with informants, learn what constitutes appropriate questions, learn how to ask them, and determine which questions may be of the most help to the researchers when aiming to answer the research questions [14,15]. Observation was used in parallel with interviews, as recommended by Ciesielska, M. et al. [15].

The participants of this study included academic researchers (faculty members and graduate students of AU) and non-academic researchers (heads and directors of rural bases, industry people and local farmers) who were involved in the AU rural revitalization program. The final sample comprised 46 participants and the interview sessions lasted about 20–30 min, comprising open-ended questions for semi-structured conversations. The questions focused on the strategies, actions and activities carried out by the rural bases to promote rural revitalization, as well as the advantages of the collaborative initiative in advancing sustainability. The analysis of the data involved the formation of thematic codes that were used to transform the interview transcripts and analysis into a report. Finally, the reports were interpreted in a complementary manner relating to the literature on sustainable rural development.

3.2.2. Documentary Research

The second stage of data collection involved documentary research on the program. The primary source for documents was the webpages of the selected rural bases and AU, which were accessed primarily between September 2019 and January 2023. The official websites of the universities introduced themselves to the national and international community with their business card, emphasising their commitment to the pursuit of their missions [16]. As such, a university’s website is a suitable place to find out about its rural sustainable development practices.

3.2.3. Data Analysis

To analyze the empirical materials collected, a robust data analysis methodology was employed, shaped by the existing literature; it aimed to derive meaningful insights while considering the context of neo-endogenous rural development and the dynamics of quadruple helix relationships. This literature served as a foundation upon which our themes identification procedure was constructed.

The data were transcribed and systematically read and analyzed, utilizing content analysis as a method of text analysis; this was performed in order to understand the documents, as well as the informant’s views towards the program. Utilizing a dual inductive–deductive approach, we uncovered emerging themes organically, simultaneously aligning with our research objectives and employing existing knowledge and theories to interpret and contextualize these newly identified themes. This combination of approaches helped to ensure that a comprehensive analysis that incorporated both new insights and established concepts in the topic of neo-endogenous rural development was performed. This analysis unveiled four pivotal categories: agricultural science and technological innovation, education, entrepreneurship, and tourism. These categories effectively captured the amalgamation of participant insights and documentary evidence, enriching our comprehension of the program’s intricate dynamics.

4. Results and Discussion

The analysis revealed four themes representing four focus areas of the AU rural revitalization program. The themes included agricultural science and technological innovation, entrepreneurship, education and talent training, and tourism, as shown in Figure 1.

4.1. Agricultural Science and Technological Innovation

The AU rural revitalization program promotes agricultural science and technological innovation, which is the core source of competitive advantage for rural areas, as well as the key to building strong rural innovation and driving neo-endogenous growth [1,17,18]. The program maximizes the advantages of AU’s world-class agricultural research, while also adopting the quadruple helix approach of “engaged research”, in which the government, the university, industry, and the community are involved in the process of knowledge creation, transfer, and adoption (Figure 2).

At the core of this program lies collaboration, which has led to the establishment of over 50 rural service and industrial bases across 15 provinces in the country, serving as platforms for interaction and knowledge exchange. These bases serve as dynamic spaces in which stakeholders from academia, industry, the government, and local communities come together to foster meaningful interaction, share insights, and transfer knowledge. As such, the rural bases act as innovation hubs, facilitate technology transfer, and foster dynamic interactions, bridging the gap between research and real-world applications. Previous research [19,20] has highlighted the importance of multi stakeholder efforts that promote community engagement in agriculture innovation; this is because incorporating local knowledge and practices enhances the success of innovation interventions in rural communities, and enhances the acceptance and adoption of innovative agricultural practices, especially at the farm level.

The engaged research approach especially helps bridge the gap between scientific knowledge and on-the-ground implementation, enables researchers to gain valuable insights into the practical challenges and needs of local communities, and by involving various stakeholders in the research process, engaged research ensures that innovations are context-specific, relevant, and effective. In Majiang County, a leader at the Majiang County Blueberry Industry Development Centre referred to the advantages of collaboration when aiming to advance rural agricultural technology:

By interacting and working collaboratively with researchers from AU, our blueberry intensive processing technology has been improved and the quality has been optimized. We have then achieved good sales, which has contributed to poverty alleviation.

The significance of industry involvement in agriculture research and development is also highlighted in this study, echoing previous research [21], which revealed that direct collaboration with industry is useful in creating products that have the capacity to sustain competitiveness in regional and national markets. In Huai’an City, for instance, new brands of sustainably reared pigs were created, and later developed into 10 new high-quality pork products in collaboration with local industries; they were promoted to more than 20 provinces across the country, not only promoting agricultural innovation, but also promoting business and economic benefits for local farmers.

This study further highlights that agricultural science and technology can be effectively advanced by recognizing regional specificity as a valuable resource rather than viewing it as a constraint to development [22]. By embracing the unique characteristics, challenges, and opportunities present in different regions, agricultural innovation can be tailored to specific contexts, resulting in more targeted and impactful solutions.

With academia as a key participant in the quadruple helix approach, the agriculture sector can tap into a wealth of existing resources, including scientific insights, technological advancements, and best practices. In the case of the AU program, its collaborative initiatives clearly demonstrate a strategic approach that seeks to fully leverage the inherent rural resources and capitalize on the scientific advantages offered by the university. For instance, by leveraging distinctive advantages found in rural areas, such as soil quality and local agricultural knowledge, the program has successfully cultivated a range of new plant varieties that have gained recognition and have been established as valuable regional brands. Among them are the zinc–selenium garlic and rice of Majiang County, which were developed based on the zinc- and selenium-rich soils of the region and have since then been branded and marketed to become drivers of rural revitalization.

4.2. Entrepreneurship

The program helps invigorate entrepreneurship in rural regions, which is increasingly seen as a promising alternative to traditional economic development as it unlocks the potential of local citizens to create jobs and access larger markets [23]. It works in close collaboration with various regional stakeholders, including local authorities and businesses.

It has facilitated the identification of local gaps hindering economic growth, such as inaccessibility and limited local demand, and it has resulted in new mechanisms that enable collaboration between local communities and large cooperations, such as banks. The program signed a “consumer poverty alleviation cooperation memorandum” with an agricultural bank to enhance targeted procurement, as well as help to expand the sales channels of rural agricultural products to high-quality customer groups.

The university’s role of capacity building and skill development within the quadruple helix is emphasized in all interviews. A professor of economics and management at AU stated the following:

We designed a mobile classroom, relying on the three core Master of Business Administration (MBA) courses of marketing management, entrepreneurship management, and e-commerce, and moved the classroom to the main battlefield of rural revitalization.

The entrepreneurship and e-commerce development training helps local farmers and small businesses to improve their branding, marketing, and expand the sale of their agricultural produce online. As revealed by previous research, online sales can help rural communities, especially those with distance-based challenges, to compete for customers and sell agricultural products to them directly via the internet [24]. For example, in the mountainous county of Majiang, the blueberry industry covers 53 villages and 7 towns, and a planting area of 80,000 mu (acres). However, the mountains hinder the export of the blueberries, leading to rotting and loss. The program has helped improve the county e-commerce centre, specifically by tackling the existing challenges of poor packaging and branding. A professor from AU recommended both the use of unified visual elements and the creation of a new logo for the village’s blueberries to “ensure the uniformity of the entire brand’s image.”

Notably, the government’s contribution is evident in terms of policy implementation, as an official ascertained:

Henceforth, all series of products involving our blueberries will use the new logo to create a public brand.

It is therefore evident that quadruple helix programs in rural regions can play an important role in promoting the market access of small farmers, thus solving the most challenging issues facing rural commerce, including the small size and geographic isolation of rural communities, which limit access to broad markets for buying and selling [23]. Additionally, the quadruple helix approach facilitates better policy alignment by involving government stakeholders from the outset, ensuring that polices are tailored to the specific needs and challenges of rural entrepreneurs.

4.3. Tourism

The development of tourism in rural regions can promote rapid economic growth, create more jobs, and improve the quality of residents’ life, making it an alternative strategy for rural development [25]. By involving academia, the government, industry, and the community, the AU program promotes rural tourism, specifically agritourism, as well as heritage and culture tourism in various ways (

Table 3. Key characteristics of AU rural tourism initiative.

Aspects of Tourism	Community-Based Rural Tourism
Main operators	Rural villages/communities, AU, and local governments.
Main visitors	Group travellers (school, companies, and association), families, researchers, foreigners, and conference attendees.
Main facilities	Chrysanthemum flower theme parks.
Agriculture-based attractions	Chrysanthemum theme parks and farms; chrysanthemum-ornamented landscapes
Cultural/heritage-based attractions	Local communities’ cultural practices, such as dances, martial arts, and storytelling. AU students’ art troupes participating in rural charity performances. Art festivals co-organized by the AU program and local communities to promote local agricultural produce (e.g., the Blueberry Art Festival in Majiang County).
Tourism-related economic activities	Hospitality, catering, retail, and other operations for local communities.

).

Firstly, with academia as a key participant in the quadruple helix approach, there is a strong emphasis on research and innovation in rural tourism, thus promoting both innovative tourism products and the creation of collaborative destination management. For instance, the agritourism initiative of the AU program is rooted in ornamental chrysanthemum flowers; the program maximizes the advantages of the world-class scientific research centre for chrysanthemums at AU, which is the world’s largest chrysanthemum gene bank (more than 5000 chrysanthemum resources and more than 3000 varieties), and the largest chrysanthemum research team in China. As revealed by a recent study [26], ornamental flowers are increasingly being utilized in scenic sites that create special scenery to attract tourists. In Huai’an City, for example, the Lake Chrysanthemum Base of AU, built in collaboration with the municipal government and opened in 2016, has received more than 300 million tourists to date, driving the development of modern agricultural tourism in Huai’an City. This agrees with a recent study [27] that revealed that, in 2018 alone, rural tourism recorded 3 billion visitors, generated over CNY 800 billion (approximately USD 123.1 billion) in revenue, and elevated the income of 7 million rural households.

Secondly, the AU quadruple helix program emphasizes the importance of local communities in advancing cultural tourism, highlighting their significant role in ensuring that tourism activities align with local values, cultural heritage, and community aspirations. The program works with the local communities to promote cultural research, heritage trails and cultural festivals, and organize cultural collaborative initiatives between AU students and the local communities. Cultural tourism is an important and vast field that accounts for 39% of all tourism activities [28] and has the potential to transform regional economic development. Consequently, to promote cultural tourism in rural areas, it is particularly important to consider the knowledge provided by the traditions and values of local communities when implementing sustainable tourism initiatives [29].

These results show that the quadruple helix approach can play a significant role in facilitating rural tourism by fostering collaboration, innovation, and community involvement. By involving academia, the government, industry, and the community, this approach has specifically facilitated rural tourism in the following ways: the creation of collaborative destination management (such as the chrysanthemum theme parks); the introduction of research and innovation into rural tourism, thus promoting innovative tourism products, services and experiences; the involvement of local communities, whose input ensures that tourism activities are aligned with local values, cultural heritage and community aspirations; and finally, the coordination of policies able to promote regulations that support rural tourism development.

4.4. Education and Talent Training

Although education is one of the most important aspects of social and economic development, recent studies [30,31] have revealed that, in many countries, rural–urban education inequality is still a challenge and is often characterized by low education performance and a disadvantageous natural physical and social environment (e.g., parents’ cultural perspectives) [32]. Addressing these issues requires the implementation of multi-stakeholder approaches.

Consequently, the AU quadruple helix program has launched a rural education initiative that focuses on improving two main aspects of education equity: equitable educational opportunities and educational processes [30]. To promote equitable educational opportunities, the program raises funds for the development of rural schools’ infrastructure and offers students sponsorships. Further, the program seeks to improve the educational process in rural areas by sending postgraduate students from AU to fulfil voluntary teaching and administration roles in rural schools, as well as by establishing special student growth programs with targeted study plans that inspire middle school students to “enrol into the university and change their hometowns”. The initiative has not only helped to improve academic performance among middle schoolers, but has also facilitated their entry into higher education institutions, which can significantly drive social and economic development.

Our investigation reveals that addressing rural sustainability challenges requires a holistic lens that goes beyond the traditional agriculture-based rural intervention initiatives that aim to include education and talent training as way of unlocking the full potential of rural communities, creating a foundation for inclusive, prosperous, and sustainable rural development.

4.5. Opportunities for the Advancement of the SDGs

Figure 3 is a summarized list of the program’s actions and impacts that are aligned with the SDGs. Their explanation follows the figure and is sectioned into the three-pillar conception of (social, economic, and environmental) sustainability [33], which is discussed in the context of the reviewed literature for corroboration.

4.5.1. Economic Sustainability

The program’s role in advancing rural economic sustainability is emphasized by numerous interviews. For instance, its initiative of agricultural science and technological innovation has had a positive effect on farm yield (SDG 2) and household income (SDG 1); an AU graduate student working with the initiative to improve chicken farming noted the following:

Before 2013, when they were not working with us, their income was between CNY 20,000 to 30,000 per household per year. After working with us, their lowest in the year 2020 was CNY 70,000.

Additional economic opportunities include job creation and the growth of smallholder value chains (SDG 8). For instance, the chrysanthemum flower initiative of rural development has helped create smallholder value chains (e.g., chrysanthemum by-products, such as tea, cakes, and handicrafts), has helped poor households to find employment at their doorstep, and has promoted poverty alleviation, as noted about one village:

Villagers who work in the newly built chrysanthemum theme park can earn CNY 80 per person per day. Also, the annual chrysanthemum tasting season drives villagers to participate in catering, retail, and other operations, increasing the average income of each household by CNY 5000.

This is in alignment with SDG 1 (no poverty) and SDG 3 (good health and well-being), and SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth).

The results show that besides agriculture and tourism, quadruple helix programs can promote rural businesses and helps expand the sales channels of rural products through targeted procurement. For instance, the AU program actively pushes rural products into AU’s campuses and community using both online and offline channels; it also signs memorandums with financial institutions such as agricultural banks to help expand sales. This not only helps to achieve higher sales of agricultural produce, but also helps to reduce loss along the post-harvest, production, and supply chains, thus ensuring the efficient use of resources. This is in alignment with SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production).

4.5.2. Social Sustainability

The program’s initiative of rural revitalization through education-based poverty alleviation aims to offer rural communities access to quality education, which is an important tool for advancing human development and social sustainability. The program has sent more than six consecutive groups of outstanding AU graduate students to teach in rural schools and serve in school managerial capacities, and has helped raise funds for rural school infrastructure and student sponsorships. This is in alignment with SDG 4 (quality education) and SDG 10 (reduced inequalities).

The program also supports SDG 3 (good health and well-being) and SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities). Via its initiative of rural revitalization through literature, culture and health, the program organizes art and culture festivals, such as the Majiang County Blueberry Art Festival, in order to not only market local agricultural produce, but also preserve the cultural heritage of local communities. Furthermore, the program collaborates with healthcare providers to offer health services to rural students; in one village, for instance, it provided 25 in-need students with free glasses.

4.5.3. Environmental Sustainability

The program’s initiative of poverty alleviation through ecological revitalization helps villages to practice the concept of ‘lucid waters and lush mountains’, which seeks to foster poverty alleviation in tandem with environmental protection and green development. The program works with county governments to promote organic agricultural practices, which have proven sustainability benefits, including improved soil quality, enhanced biodiversity, and reduced pollution [34]. In Huai’an City, for instance, a researcher from AU stated that the program would perform the following:

Take the initiative to facilitate organic agricultural planning and design, promote industrial development and help the development of Huai’an green economy.

Besides county governments, the program collaborates with agricultural industries to solve existing ecological and environmental pollution problems. In Taizhou City, for instance, the program collaborated with an animal husbandry industry to solve the challenge of manure disposal by developing an ecological recycling program. A leader of the animal husbandry industry highlighted the significance of establishing a partnership in sustainable agricultural practices:

With the technical support of the AU program, the farm has achieved the proper utilization of manure resources, which not only solves the problem of environmental protection, but also reduces the use of chemical fertilizers by more than 50% on agricultural land using microbial fertilizers.

These initiatives are in alignment with SDG 15, which focuses specifically on the protection, restoration, and promotion of the sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems.

5. Conclusions

This study contributes to a better understanding of quadruple helix interactions and their contribution to knowledge-based rural development by investigating the case of the AU rural revitalization program. In a rural context characterized by fewer and weaker actors in the innovation ecosystem, collaborative interventions such as quadruple helix programs can be effective agents of knowledge-based development. The AU program aims to maximize the advantages of the respective partners: these are AU’s world-class agricultural research, the influence of government policy, industry’s innovation and procurement capacity, and the community’s role in the co-creation and utilization of new knowledge. This quadruple helix approach draws on the recognition that the nature of rural development is neo-endogenous, in which collaborations between internal and external actors must seek to develop locally embedded innovation initiatives. Accordingly, four actions (agricultural science and technological innovation, entrepreneurship, education and talent training, and tourism) that quadruple helix programs should perform in rural regions are identified in this study. The analysis of these actions and principles allows us to draw four main conclusions.

First is the significance of collaboration and partnerships, which are at the heart of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Partnerships between diverse stakeholders and institutions are crucial to knowledge exchange, collaborative research, and new forms of engagement, particularly in rural regions in which sustainable development is hindered by challenges like a lack of knowledge institutions and a scattered business community (which hinders innovation and entrepreneurship). As such, a robust science–policy–community–industry interface can offer solutions that extend beyond knowledge creation by facilitating connections between rural regions, essential industries, and business entities to foster entrepreneurship. Notably, the expansive network of rural demonstration, industrial, and services bases spanning across 15 provinces offers a critical structural factor for this program. By acting as collaborative hubs that unite the four cornerstones of the quadruple helix model, namely the university, community, government, and industry, these bases fuel innovation and the cross-sectoral exchange of knowledge.

Second is the importance of multidisciplinary approaches to sustainable rural development, as they integrate diverse perspectives, expertise, and disciplines to address the complex and interconnected challenges of rural communities. The program’s focus on agriculture, entrepreneurship, education, and tourism offers a holistic and integrated approach to sustainable rural development, representing a departure from a sectoral focus on agriculture, and the move towards a comprehensive understanding of rural innovation in which agricultural production is incorporated as one activity among many. Furthermore, real sustainability challenges are not bounded by disciplines, but rather demand the pooling of different types of knowledge possessed by different disciplines. For instance, while agricultural sciences colleges work with rural communities to increase their farm produce, economics and social sciences colleges offer business and e-commerce training to rural residents to help improve their capacity for entrepreneurship. Such holistic rural development interventions can help foster the SDGs, which are intertwined and interdependent; success in one sector often has a positive effect on another sector of the SDGs. Furthermore, the ultimate goal of sustainable development is to maintain the equilibrium and stability of our integrated socio-environmental system.

Third is the importance of dealing with sustainability within different contexts, as challenges and solutions depend on place-specific characteristics. For instance, in Majiang County, where the soil is rich in zinc and selenium, the program has developed a new variety of high-quality zinc–selenium rice, and further developed it into a regional brand that is now promoted country-wide, facilitating rural revitalization. Thus, connecting the broad and abstract global SDGs with locally specific actions requires tailored sustainability programs that better account for the local resources.

6. Limitations of the Study

This research has identified limitations that may provide opportunities for future research. The limitations are as follows: Firstly, the study only describes the good practices and positive impacts of the AU rural revitalization program. However, it does not identify the failure factors, which could lead to the further development of the quadruple helix approach. Secondly, there is limited generalizability due to the focus on a single case study, as the findings presented are highly dependent on the unique context of the selected case study. A comparative analysis between numerous case studies could provide deeper insights into the reasons behind certain phenomena.