This study examines the impact of innovation governance and policies on government funding for emerging science and technology sectors in Saudi Arabia, addressing key bureaucratic, regulatory, and cultural barriers. Using a mixed-methods approach, the research integrates qualitative insights from stakeholder interviews with quantitative survey data to provide a comprehensive under-standing of the current innovation landscape. Findings indicate a high level of policy awareness among stakeholders but reveal significant challenges in practical implementation due to bureaucratic inefficiencies and stringent regulations. Cultural barriers, such as a risk-averse mindset and traditional business practices, further impede innovation. Successful initiatives like the National Transformation Program (NTP) demonstrate the potential for well-coordinated efforts, highlighting the importance of regulatory reform and cultural shifts towards entrepreneurship. Strategic recommendations include streamlining bureaucratic processes, enhancing policy coordination, and fostering a culture of innovation through education and stakeholder engagement. This study contributes to the existing literature by offering actionable insights to enhance innovation governance, supporting Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 goals.

1. Addae, D., & Quan-Baffour, K. P. (2015). The place of mixed methods research in the field of adult education: Design options, prospects and challenges. International Journal of Education and Research, 3(7), 151-162.
2. Alanzi, A. A. (2020). Exploring the legal system in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Innovation, 11.
3. Alkhoraif, A. (2024). A Qualitative Analysis of Cross-cultural Adjustment and Job Performance in the Hotel Industry: The Case of Saudi Arabia’. Journal of Ecohumanism, 3(4), 1473–1485. https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v3i4.3676
4. AlSaied, M., McLaughlin, P. (2024). Ambidextrous Innovation in Project Management: A Systematic Literature Review. Administrative Sciences, 14(7), 151. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14070151
5. AlSaied, M. K., Alkhoraif, A. A. (2024). The role of organizational learning and innovative organizational culture for ambidextrous innovation. The Learning Organization, 31(2), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1108/tlo-06-2023-0101
6. AlSaied, M., McLaughlin, P., Alkhoraif, A. (2024). Advance Methodology for Effective Implementation of Ambidextrous Innovation Culture. Journal of Ecohumanism, 3(5), 115–142. https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v3i5.3878
7. Alsamaani, A. (2018). Small and medium enterprises and the effectiveness of technology business incubators in Saudi Arabia. Available online: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228183721.pdf (accessed on 23 July 2023).
8. Anis, M. Z. A., Hadi, S., Rajiani, I., et al. (2021). The managerial effects of leadership, knowledge sharing and innovation in higher education. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 23. http://doi.org/10.17512/pjms.2021.23.1.04
9. Bason, C. (2016). Design for policy. Routledge.
10. Blind, K. (2012). The influence of regulations on innovation: A quantitative assessment for OECD countries. Research policy, 41(2), 391-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.08.008
11. Borrás, S., & Edquist, C. (2013). The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological forecasting and social change, 80(8), 1513-1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.002
12. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
13. 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.2009.023374
14. Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Harvard Business Press.
15. Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press.
16. Cowan, D., (2018). The Coming Implosion of Saudi Arabia. Boston College: USA
17. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Sage publications.
18. Denzin, N. K. (2017). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Routledge.
19. DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications. Sage publications.
20. Dodgson, M., Gann, D. M., & Phillips, N. (2013). The Oxford handbook of innovation management. OUP Oxford.
21. Edler, J., & Fagerberg, J. (2017). Innovation policy: what, why, and how. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 2-23. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx001
22. Edquist, C. (2011). Design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis: identification of systemic problems (or failures). Industrial and corporate change, 20(6), 1725-1753. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtr060
23. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research policy, 29(2), 109-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
24. European Commission. (2017). Horizon 2020: The EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/ (accessed on 1 July, 2024).
25. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., & Nelson, R. R. (2005). The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford university press.
26. Faisal, C. N., Gonzalez-Rodriguez, M., Fernandez-Lanvin, D., et al. (2016). Web design attributes in building user trust, satisfaction, and loyalty for a high uncertainty avoidance culture. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 47(6), 847-859. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2016.2620901
27. Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage publications limited.
28. Freeman, C. (1995). The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of economics, 19(1), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309
29. Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., et al. (2011). 30 years after Bayh–Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research policy, 40(8), 1045-1057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.04.005
30. Hakami, S. (2021). The role of social entrepreneurship in community development. A case study of social entrepreneurship in Saudi Arabia. Psychology and Education Journal, 58(2), 154-161.
31. Hung, K. V., Ngoc, A. M., & Thanh, H. H. (2024). Investigation of modal integration for transit-access trips in motorcycle dependent cities—The case study of Hanoi, Vietnam. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 8(8). https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i8.5351
32. Jamaiudin, N. (2019). Good Governance in Malaysia: Assessing Public Perceptions on the Implementation of National Transformation Policy, 2011-2016. Intellectual Discourse, 27, 719-743.
33. Jia, J., Hu, Y., & Wu, P. (2024). Does negative political coverage affect the completion of cross-border mergers and acquisitions—Evidence from BRICS in the US market. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 8(8). https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i8.5491
34. Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(2), 112-133. https://doi.org/10.1177/155868980629822
35. Kapczynski, A. (2009). Commentary: Innovation policy for a new era. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 37(2), 264-268. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2009.00370.x
36. Kimm, R. D. (2021). Vision Redux: Power and Policy in Saudi Arabia. Available online: https://fount.aucegypt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2653&context=etds (accessed on 23 July 2024).
37. Kitchin, R. (2014). The data revolution: big data, open data, data infrastructures and their consequences. Sage.
38. Kline, S. J., & Rosenberg, N. (2010). An overview of innovation. Studies on science and the innovation process: Selected works of Nathan Rosenberg. World Scientific Pub Co Inc. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814273596_0009
39. Lasswell, H. D. (1956). The decision process: Seven categories of functional analysis. Oxford Academic.
40. Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National systems of innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter: London.
41. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131-142. https://doi.org/10.3898/136266211798411183
42. Mazzucato, M. (2018). Mission-oriented innovation policies: challenges and opportunities. Industrial and corporate change, 27(5), 803-815. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty034
43. Miles, I. (2010). The development of technology foresight: A review. Technological forecasting and social change, 77(9), 1448-1456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.07.016
44. Moonen, P. (2017). The impact of culture on the innovative strength of nations: A comprehensive review of the theories of Hofstede, Schwartz, Boisot and Cameron and Quinn. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 30(7), 1149-1183.
45. Moshashai, D., Leber, A. M., Savage, J. D. (2020). Saudi Arabia plans for its economic future: Vision 2030, the National Transformation Plan and Saudi fiscal reform. British journal of Middle Eastern studies, 47(3), 381-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/13530194.2018.1500269
46. Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., et al. (2001). The growth of patenting and licensing by US universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980. Research policy, 30(1), 99-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00100-6
47. Nelson, R. R., Dosi, G., Helfat, C. E., et al. (2018). Modern evolutionary economics: An overview. Springer.
48. OECD. (2015). The innovation imperative: Contributing to productivity, growth and well-being. OECD.
49. Qadri, F. A., Rabbani, M. R., & Imeri, A. (2019). Saudi Vision 2030 Places High Demand on Saudi Business Schools’ Curriculum to Ensure Graduate Acquire Appropriate Entrepreneurial Skills. ResearchGate.
50. Ramesh, M. (2003). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystems. Don Mills, Ont.: Oxford University Press.
51. Ranga, M., & Etzkowitz, H. (2015). Triple Helix systems: an analytical framework for innovation policy and practice in the Knowledge Society. Entrepreneurship and knowledge exchange, 117-158.
52. Rodrik, D. (2008). Normalizing industrial policy. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.
53. Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1993). Policy changes and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Westview Press.
54. Silander, D. (2019). The European Commission and Europe 2020: Smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. In Smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Edward Elgar Publishing.
55. Stiglitz, J. E. (2012). The price of inequality: How today’s divided society endangers our future. WW Norton & Company.
56. Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., & McQueen, K. (2009). Themes and variations: Taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework. Policy studies journal, 37(1), 121-140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00299.x
57. West, J., & Bogers, M. (2014). Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. Journal of product innovation management, 31(4), 814-831. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12125