Main Article Content
Abstract
This article explores how universities enact their civic engagement within regional knowledge ecosystems in Poland, Portugal, and Sweden. Using the civic university framework, it examines cooperation patterns between higher education institutions (HEIs) and local actors and identifies challenges shaping these collaborations. The analysis draws on qualitative interviews with civil society organizations and public authorities engaged in partnerships with universities. Findings indicate that Polish universities often serve as cultural and educational anchors, while Portuguese universities exhibit strong territorial engagement through participatory community projects. Meanwhile, Swedish universities function as mediators, connecting local initiatives with broader sustainability agendas. Despite these differences, all three contexts share challenges, including fragmented institutional structures, discontinuity in partnerships, and reliance on short-term funding. The study argues that civic engagement is a relational and context-dependent practice rather than a uniform institutional function. Strengthening policy frameworks and institutionalizing participatory approaches may enhance universities’ civic engagement and societal impact.
Keywords
Article Details
Copyright (c) 2026 Dimitrios Papadopoulos, Ewa Kurantowicz, Liliana Paulos, Amanda São Vicente, Carla Vilhena, Sandra T. Valadas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
TCE (INSTED) is an open access journal, which means that access to the full texts is free of charge. People using the journal may download publications, copy and print them, as well as post on their websites links to the full texts of the journal's publications. Texts can be used as long as readers do not exceed the licenses. Authors submitting manuscripts for publication obtain copyrights. Unless otherwise specified, published texts are available under the Creative Commons Attribution - Share Alike 4.0 International license.
References
- Austin, J. E., & Seitanidi, M. M. (2012). Collaborative value creation: A review of partnering between nonprofits and businesses. Part I: Value creation spectrum and collaboration stages. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(5), 726-758. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764012450777
- Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Pergamon.
- Edwards, M. (2010). Civil society (2nd ed.). Polity Press.
- Egetenmeyer, R. (2020). Comparative adult and continuing education: A guiding essay. In R. Egetenmeyer, V. Boffo, & S. Kröner (Eds.), International and comparative studies in adult and continuing education (pp. 17–30). Firenze University Press. https://doi.org/10.36253/978-88-5518-155-6.02
- Field, J., Schmidt-Hertha, B., & Waxenegger, A. (2016). Universities and engagement. International perspectives on higher education and lifelong learning. Routledge.
- Gifford, E., McKelvey, M., & Saemundsson, R. (2021). The evolution of knowledge-intensive innovation ecosystems: co-evolving entrepreneurial activity and innovation policy in the West Swedish maritime system. Industry and Innovation, 28(5), 651–676. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2020.1856047
- Goddard, J., Hazelkorn, E., Kempton, L., & Vallance, P. (2016). The civic university: The policy and leadership challenges. Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The enterprise university: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge University Press.
- Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. In L. Crothers & C. Lockhart (Eds.), Culture and politics: A reader (pp. 223-234). Palgrave Macmillan.
- Salamon, L. M., Anheier, H. K., List, R., Toepler, S., Sokolowski, S. W., & Associates. (1999). Global civil society: Dimensions of the nonprofit sector. Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies.
- Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Sage.
- Valkokari, 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/919
- Vodă, A. I., Bortoş, S., & Şoitu, D. T. (2023). Knowledge ecosystem: A sustainable theoretical approach. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 12(2), 47. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2023.v12n2p47
- Wihlborg, M., & Teelken, C. (2014). Striving for uniformity, hoping for innovation and diversification: A critical review concerning the Bologna Process – Providing an overview and reflecting on the criticism. Policy Futures in Education, 12(8), 1084–1100. https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2014.12.8.1084
References
Austin, J. E., & Seitanidi, M. M. (2012). Collaborative value creation: A review of partnering between nonprofits and businesses. Part I: Value creation spectrum and collaboration stages. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(5), 726-758. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764012450777
Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Pergamon.
Edwards, M. (2010). Civil society (2nd ed.). Polity Press.
Egetenmeyer, R. (2020). Comparative adult and continuing education: A guiding essay. In R. Egetenmeyer, V. Boffo, & S. Kröner (Eds.), International and comparative studies in adult and continuing education (pp. 17–30). Firenze University Press. https://doi.org/10.36253/978-88-5518-155-6.02
Field, J., Schmidt-Hertha, B., & Waxenegger, A. (2016). Universities and engagement. International perspectives on higher education and lifelong learning. Routledge.
Gifford, E., McKelvey, M., & Saemundsson, R. (2021). The evolution of knowledge-intensive innovation ecosystems: co-evolving entrepreneurial activity and innovation policy in the West Swedish maritime system. Industry and Innovation, 28(5), 651–676. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2020.1856047
Goddard, J., Hazelkorn, E., Kempton, L., & Vallance, P. (2016). The civic university: The policy and leadership challenges. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The enterprise university: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge University Press.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. In L. Crothers & C. Lockhart (Eds.), Culture and politics: A reader (pp. 223-234). Palgrave Macmillan.
Salamon, L. M., Anheier, H. K., List, R., Toepler, S., Sokolowski, S. W., & Associates. (1999). Global civil society: Dimensions of the nonprofit sector. Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies.
Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Sage.
Valkokari, 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/919
Vodă, A. I., Bortoş, S., & Şoitu, D. T. (2023). Knowledge ecosystem: A sustainable theoretical approach. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 12(2), 47. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2023.v12n2p47
Wihlborg, M., & Teelken, C. (2014). Striving for uniformity, hoping for innovation and diversification: A critical review concerning the Bologna Process – Providing an overview and reflecting on the criticism. Policy Futures in Education, 12(8), 1084–1100. https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2014.12.8.1084