Exploring the Mediating Role of Innovation in the Nexus Between National Culture and Sustainable Competitiveness

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between national culture, innovation, and sustainable competitiveness, addressing a critical gap in empirical research. This study engages in a rigorous investigation of the interconnections among national culture, innovation, and sustainable competitiveness, effectively addressing a significant void in the existing empirical literature. It offers a detailed and systematic analysis of the interrelationships among the three variables within the purview of an international economic framework. After conducting a comprehensive evaluation of data completeness and availability, it was determined that only 88 data points fulfilled the criteria for inclusion in the final sample. The analysis operationalizes national culture through Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, measures innovation using the World Intellectual Property Organization’s Global Innovation Index, and assesses sustainable competitiveness via Solability’s Sustainable Competitiveness Index, employing a quantitative path model across the selected countries. The findings reveal that national culture exerts a statistically significant, moderate influence on both innovation and sustainable competitiveness. Furthermore, innovation demonstrates a robust positive effect on sustainable competitiveness, indicating its crucial role in driving long-term national competitive advantage. Mediation analysis suggests that innovation partially mediates the relationship between national culture and sustainable competitiveness, though national culture retains a direct effect on competitiveness independent of innovation. These results underscore the multifaceted interplay between cultural and innovation-related factors in shaping national competitiveness. The study contributes to the literature by providing empirical validation of the complex interdependencies between these constructs and offers critical insights for policymakers focused on fostering innovation in alignment with cultural contexts to achieve sustainable competitiveness. Future research may explore additional mediating variables and employ longitudinal designs to further substantiate these findings.

1. Introduction

In the contemporary globalized context, investigating the interplay between national culture (NC), innovation, and sustainable competitiveness (SC) is critically important (Mihaela et al. 2011). This investigation is necessitated by globalization, the imperative for human capital development, and the formulation of policies to address societal needs while enhancing competitive advantage. Scholars such as Guiso, Hofstede, and North have conceptualized NC as a set of enduring values and beliefs that fundamentally shape behavior and decision-making processes (Mertzanis and Tebourbi 2023). SC is a nation’s capacity to meet current needs while preserving or enhancing resources for future generations, without depleting them (Solability 2023). Innovation pertains to the generation and implementation of novel ideas and concepts (Tian et al. 2018). These elements are essential for advancing sustainable development and formulating effective policies. The neglect of innovation can undermine both economic (Hardi et al. 2024) and environmental sustainability (Nwokediegwu et al. 2024), whereas the disregard for SC can lead to diminished competitive advantage, reduced market share, and lower profitability (Ejaz 2024). Despite the theoretical connections, empirical research exploring these relationships remains sparse and frequently overlooks the dimension of cultural diversity.

Understanding NC is crucial for promoting cross-cultural empathy and fostering international relations (Langlitz and Althaus 2024), necessitating a balance among economic, environmental, and social factors (Herciu and Ogrean 2014). The assessment of NC is often based on a nation’s ability to sustain per capita gross domestic product growth and adhere to global standards (Despotovic et al. 2018). Meanwhile, SC, which integrates principles of sustainable development, poses challenges for quantification due to its expansive scope (Popescu et al. 2017). Soini and Dessein (2016) have delineated three paradigms concerning culture and sustainability: “Culture in Sustainability” (culture as an independent entity vital for heritage preservation), “Culture for Sustainability” (culture aligned with sustainability frameworks), and “Culture as Sustainability” (culture as integral to achieving sustainability goals). The significance of culture in sustainable development is well-documented (Kavaliku 2000; Meng et al. 2018; Lara and Silva 2023), underscoring the need to recognize culture’s role in fostering sustainable values and adaptive mechanisms (Kong 2010; Duxbury et al. 2017). Integrating cultural diversity with social equity, environmental conservation, and economic viability is also essential (Nurse 2006), although the separation of sustainable development from socio-cultural factors presents considerable challenges (Sedita et al. 2022).

As awareness of culture’s role in sustainable development grows, there is a pressing need for further research to explore these relationships. Initiatives such as the Hangzhou and Florence Declarations advocate for the integration of cultural dimensions into sustainable development frameworks (Wu et al. 2016; Wiktor-Mach 2020). Aligning NC with the 2030 Agenda goals (Leonavičienė et al. 2022; Kangas et al. 2017) and incorporating culture into the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (Tehrani et al. 2021) is imperative.

Sustainable human development is contingent upon fostering innovation that drives national progress. Therefore, innovation can act as a pivotal determinant of a country’s sustainability and significantly influence its SC. Additionally, innovative societies are often characterized by traits such as individualism, low masculinity, pragmatism/long-term orientation, and indulgence (Cox and Khan 2017). Previous research has investigated the relationship between culture and innovation at the national level (Efrat 2014), revealing that various facets of NC substantially affect innovation, with studies from 1980 to 2017 illustrating an evolving understanding of this relationship (Tian et al. 2018).

This study is aligned with several theoretical frameworks that elucidate the complex interrelationships among the three constructs under investigation. The first framework, Dynamic Capabilities Theory, posits that the capacity of an organization to integrate, develop, and reconfigure both internal and external competencies is paramount for effectively navigating volatile environments. This theoretical perspective is particularly salient within the context of innovation, as it underscores the necessity for firms to cultivate dynamic capabilities that enable sustainable innovation in response to shifting market exigencies and competitive pressures (Teece et al. 1997).

Complementarily, the Resource-Based View (RBV) advances the argument that firms possess idiosyncratic resources that provide a foundation for sustained competitive advantage. This perspective facilitates a discourse on how cultural values and innovation capabilities can be construed as strategic resources essential for the attainment of sustainable competitiveness (Barney 1991). The RBV emphasizes that the effective mobilization and management of these resources are critical for ensuring long-term viability, particularly within contexts marked by heightened competition and rapid technological evolution.

In addition, the Triple Helix Model presents a nuanced framework that accentuates the intricate interplay among academia, industry, and government in the promotion of innovation. This model is particularly instrumental in elucidating how collaborative endeavors—shaped and influenced by national cultural contexts—can engender sustainable innovation and enhance competitiveness, thereby fostering an environment conducive to the generation of creative solutions to multifaceted challenges (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000).

Furthermore, Porter’s Diamond Model provides a robust analytical framework for examining the competitive advantages of nations. It elucidates how national culture significantly influences innovation practices and contributes to sustainable competitiveness, identifying the determinants that enhance a nation’s capacity to innovate and compete effectively on a global scale (Porter 1990). This model is invaluable for understanding the interplay between cultural attributes and economic performance.

Finally, Innovation Diffusion Theory offers a foundational paradigm for comprehending the mechanisms through which new ideas and technologies proliferate within societies. This theory explicates the processes by which innovations are adopted, investigating the factors that influence the rate and manner of adoption, while emphasizing the role of cultural determinants in shaping the acceptance and integration of innovative practices across diverse contexts (Rogers 2003). Collectively, these theoretical frameworks provide a comprehensive and rigorously academic foundation for analyzing the multifaceted interplay among innovation, national culture, and sustainable competitiveness within contemporary organizational landscapes.

This study aimed to investigate the relationships between NC, innovation, and SC within an international framework. By employing Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, the Global Innovation Index (GII), and the Global Sustainable Competitiveness Index (GSCI), the research addressed two critical issues: (1) the direct impact of NC on innovation and SC, and (2) the mediating role of innovation in the relationship between NC and SC. The findings of this study were intended to contribute to the scholarly discourse on the interdependencies among culture, innovation, and sustainability on a global scale, offering valuable insights for national policymakers. These insights support the development of policies that align with national cultural values while advancing sustainability objectives.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Innovation as an Effect of National Culture

Global shifts in the cultural lives of communities and nations first became noticeable in their attitudes toward NC (Mitter et al. 2024). On this broad scale, culture has long been recognized as a fundamental environmental factor driving systematic differences in behavior (Agag et al. 2024). NC identity serves as a stable characteristic within mobilization methods that safeguard a nation from competitors for resources, power, or prestige. Research on cultural development involves studying how cultural factors affect social, economic, and political development within a country. This research spans disciplines such as economics, anthropology, sociology, and political science.

Cultural variances profoundly impact how individuals interpret and address strategic issues in their lives (Schneider and De Meyer 1991; Brewer and Venaik 2012). NC is evident in the structural composition of organizational culture (Iorgulescu and Marcu 2015; Li and Harrison 2008), which pertains to the shared, collective values that either differentiate or unify diverse human communities (López-Duarte et al. 2015). In a broad sense, NC encompasses a constellation of shared values, norms, and practices that are distinctive to a particular country, thereby shaping the behavioral patterns and attitudinal orientations of its populace.

One conceptualization of culture underscores its role as a reflection of dominant societal values and beliefs, which in turn influence economic development and political behavior (Inglehart and Welzel 2010). This model delineates a bifurcation between traditional versus secular-rational values and survival versus self-expression values. Hofstede’s seminal cultural framework (Tadesse and Kwok 2005) represents a cornerstone study on NC. Hofstede’s initial research, conducted during his tenure at International Business Machines (IBM) Corporation from 1967 to 1973, led to the development of four pivotal cultural dimensions. Analyzing data from over 116,000 survey responses across 66 nations, Hofstede identified key dimensions including uncertainty avoidance, power distance, masculinity/femininity, and individualism/collectivism (McCoy et al. 2005; Van Everdingen and Waarts 2003).

Despite facing criticism regarding its empirical and theoretical robustness—such as the reliance on single-time data and data from a single corporation, as well as the factor analysis-derived dimensions—Hofstede’s framework (1980) remains largely validated as a robust representation of national cultural attributes (Li and Harrison 2008). Contemporary research on NC continues to regard it as a significant contingency factor, exploring a diverse array of themes, perspectives, and research questions through various theoretical lenses. NC encompassed six dimensions: power distance, individualism, motivation towards achievement and success, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, and indulgence (The Culture Factor 2023).

Among the myriad frameworks developed for elucidating cultural differences, Hofstede’s model is distinguished as one of the most seminal and influential. Geert Hofstede, a pioneering scholar in the domain of cultural studies, conducted extensive empirical research to examine cultural diversity and distinctions. Initially articulated in the early 1980s, Hofstede’s original framework comprised four cultural dimensions: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism versus collectivism, and masculinity versus femininity. These dimensions were derived from an extensive IBM survey conducted across fifty nations during the 1960s and 1970s.

Subsequent iterations of the model incorporated additional dimensions and countries, facilitated by replication studies and informed estimations. The dimension of long-term versus short-term orientation was integrated into the framework in 1988, with further country-specific data derived from the World Values Survey conducted between 1994 and 2004. In 2007, Hofstede’s model underwent further refinement with the introduction of the indulgence versus restraint dimension. This addition was significantly influenced by the contributions of Misho Minkov and other scholars. The indulgence versus restraint dimension was developed as a critical framework for cross-cultural communication, underpinned by sophisticated factor analysis methodologies (Anlaş 2019).

Innovation, encompassing all scientific, technological, organizational, financial, and commercial activities necessary to create, implement, and market new or improved products or processes (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD 1999)), was historically presented in past models as a linear phenomenon (Feinson 2003). The national innovation concept first appeared in the mid-1980s in the context of debates over industrial policy in Europe. Since then, an international body of literature documents the growing influence of the National Innovation Systems approach. Innovation interacts with NC in varied ways (Sharif 2006). Since the 1980s, the concept of national innovation has gained popularity as a fundamental conceptual framework for analyzing technological changes that form the indispensable foundation for a country’s long-term economic development. This idea emerged from the understanding that a country’s ability to innovate and adapt to new technologies is key to achieving sustainable and competitive economic growth in the global market (Intarakumnerd et al. 2002). A national innovation can be conceptualized as a historically evolved subsystem of the national economy, wherein diverse organizations and institutions engage and exert mutual influence in the process of fostering economic innovation (Balzat and Hanusch 2003).

Innovation was measured by science and innovation investment, technological progress, technology adaptation, and socioeconomic impact; SC was assessed across four dimensions: natural resources, resource intensity, sustainable innovation, and social cohesion (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) 2023). In the contemporary context of rapid technological advancements and competitive global markets, the challenges associated with fostering innovation within nations have become increasingly salient. Concurrently, there has been a growing emphasis on the role of cultural factors within the broader discourse of business and management (Tian et al. 2018). A seminal study by Cox and Khan (2017) explored the interplay between NC and innovation by employing Hofstede’s cultural dimensions alongside the GII. The research findings demonstrated that nations exhibiting high levels of innovation are characterized by individualistic tendencies, a feminine orientation, long-term strategic perspectives, and an indulgent cultural stance.

Hypothesis 1.

National culture is related to innovation.

2.2. Innovation as a Determinant of Sustainable Competitiveness

Innovation, characterized as a knowledge-intensive endeavor, is expected to be intricately interconnected with human capital in multifaceted ways (De Clercq and Dakhli 2003). It is widely acknowledged in the academic discourse that innovation constitutes a fundamental mechanism by which nations can sustain their competitive advantage while simultaneously adhering to a pathway of sustainable development (Varblane et al. 2007). NC plays a pivotal role in shaping values and behaviors, thereby driving SC. By cultivating a cultural ethos that prioritizes innovation, countries can significantly augment their SC in the global arena.

Moreover, NC exerts a profound influence on a nation’s SC through its impact on workforce dynamics. By effectively leveraging cultural nuances, organizations can enhance productivity, foster collaboration, and stimulate innovation, resulting in more efficient business operations and enhanced competitiveness within both domestic and international markets. Consequently, it is imperative for policymakers to consider cultural values and priorities when formulating policies, ensuring that these align with the aspirations of the populace and support long-term sustainable development objectives.

NC plays an indispensable role in shaping a country’s competitive stance within the intricately interconnected and competitive global economy. Its influence on SC is manifest through a comprehensive framework encompassing values, behaviors, social norms, and institutional structures. The evaluation of SC was conducted using the GSCI as outlined by Solability (2023). Societies that prioritize environmental sustainability tend to adopt policies that promote renewable energy, conservation, and sustainable resource management. Such values, in conjunction with an unwavering commitment to innovation, are crucial for fostering technological advancements necessary for maintaining competitive sustainability.

In collectivist cultures, which prioritize community welfare and social equity, there is a notable tendency to embrace inclusive and sustainable economic policies (Hofstede 1980; Triandis 1995). Conversely, cultures that are highly individualistic may prioritize personal gain over collective well-being, potentially undermining efforts toward sustainability (Schwartz 1994; Kjell 2011). Additionally, cultures that emphasize corporate social responsibility (CSR) encourage businesses to adopt sustainable practices, thereby enhancing national competitiveness through innovation and positive public perception (Kramer and Porter 2006; Eccles et al. 2014).

Furthermore, cultures that value collaborative knowledge-sharing foster innovation, which is critical for effectively addressing sustainability challenges (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995; Chesbrough 2003). In contrast, cultures that promote simplicity and minimalism typically exhibit a lower environmental impact compared to those that encourage excessive consumption and waste (Kasser 2002; Jackson 2005). While a strong work ethic and high productivity contribute significantly to economic growth, it is essential to strike a balance with sustainable practices to ensure long-term competitiveness (Senge 1990; Elkington 1997).

Lastly, flexibility and adaptability are crucial attributes for responding to global sustainability challenges such as climate change and technological advancements (Holling 2001). Cultures that embrace change and demonstrate adaptability are better equipped to navigate these issues, which is essential for maintaining competitiveness in a rapidly evolving global economy (Meyer et al. 1993; Teece 2014).

Examples include Nordic countries such as Sweden, Denmark, and Norway, where cultures emphasize environmental protection, social welfare, and high institutional trust, consistently ranking high in sustainability and competitiveness indexes (Hahn et al. 2006; Rahman 2018). In Japan, the focus on innovation, efficiency, and community welfare has driven technological advancements and sustainable practices, significantly contributing to its competitive edge (Park and Hong 2022). Conversely, in the United States, a mix of individualism and innovation promotes substantial technological advancements; however, high consumption patterns pose significant sustainability challenges (Cho et al. 2013; Schor 2011).

The necessity for innovation to address sustainability issues is not a recent phenomenon (Adams et al. 2013). The fields of innovation and sustainability share many similarities in their evolution and integrating key aspects of both concepts into a single framework, such as “sustainable innovation,” has gained traction (Maier et al. 2020). Furthermore, innovation, while a fundamental element of sustainable development, can also contribute to environmental degradation, resource overuse, and socio-economic disparities (Chaparro-Banegas et al. 2024). Research indicates that individuals with high levels of individualism and low uncertainty avoidance are more inclined to introduce innovations, with cultural values influencing their collaborative efforts, ultimately enhancing organizational sustainability performance (Agoraki et al. 2024).

Hypothesis 2.

Innovation is related to sustainable competitiveness.

Hypothesis 3.

National culture is related to sustainable competitiveness.

Hypothesis 4.

Innovation mediates the relationship between national culture and sustainable competitiveness.

Building upon the four articulated hypotheses, a comprehensive research framework is formulated, as demonstrated in Figure 1. In this model, NC operates as the primary independent variable, exerting direct influence on both innovation and SC. Innovation, in turn, functions as a mediating construct, facilitating the indirect transmission of effects from NC to SC. Simultaneously, SC is conceptualized as the dependent variable, subject to both direct and mediated influences from NC through the innovation pathway. This framework encapsulates the multi-dimensional interactions among these variables, thereby providing a robust basis for subsequent empirical analysis.

3. Methods

This study employed a quantitative research design to rigorously examine the relationships among three variables: NC (as the independent variable), innovation (as the mediating variable), and SC (as the dependent variable). A path analysis was utilized to assess these relationships, given its suitability for testing complex models that involve both direct and indirect effects. This approach is particularly advantageous when exploring mediating variables, as it allows for an understanding of how NC influences SC both directly and through the intermediary role of innovation.

The conceptual framework of the study, as depicted in Figure 1, is grounded in four hypotheses. These hypotheses were formulated based on a thorough review of the existing literature and theoretical underpinnings related to NC, innovation, and SC. The path analysis was guided by these hypotheses, which are designed to test not only the direct effects of NC on SC but also to elucidate the potential mediating effects of innovation within this context.

Additionally, the study sought to address two research questions, as introduced in the concluding paragraph of the Introduction. These research questions were crafted to further investigate the dynamics between the variables, particularly focusing on how innovation mediates the relationship between NC and SC. The path analysis provided a robust statistical framework for testing these hypotheses and research questions, enabling a comprehensive examination of the structural relationships among the variables. This approach ensures a deep, multifaceted understanding of the interdependencies and offers valuable insights into the mechanisms through which NC and innovation influence SC.

NC was evaluated using Hofstede’s cultural dimensions provided by The Culture Factor, innovation was measured using the GII from WIPO, and SC was assessed via the GSCI by Solability. The Culture Factor was a source from websites that present survey data: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison-tool (accessed on 7 June 2024), while WIPO and Solability were publications presenting survey data.

In this study, the assessment of the variables—NC, innovation, and SC—was conducted using established indices and frameworks renowned for their methodological rigor and empirical grounding. NC was evaluated utilizing Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, which are widely recognized for their comprehensive approach to understanding cultural differences across countries. The data for NC were sourced from The Culture Factor, a tool that presents comparative cultural insights based on extensive survey data. This tool, available through Hofstede Insights’ country comparison website (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison-tool (accessed on 7 June 2024)), provides detailed cultural profiles of countries using Hofstede’s dimensions, such as power distance, individualism, motivation towards achievement and success, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, and indulgence. These dimensions were instrumental in quantitatively capturing the nuances of national cultural differences, which serve as the independent variable in this study.

Innovation, the mediating variable, was measured using the GII, which is published by the WIPO. The GII is a comprehensive framework that assesses the innovation performance of countries through a combination of indicators that encompass various facets of innovation, such as research and development, market sophistication, and knowledge and technology outputs. This index is based on robust survey data and provides a nuanced understanding of a country’s innovation capacity and performance. The use of the GII in this study allows for a multifaceted exploration of innovation as a mediator, considering the broader economic and institutional contexts that influence innovation processes.

The dependent variable, SC, was measured using the GSCI, developed by Solability. This index evaluates countries based on their ability to sustain long-term economic development while ensuring environmental sustainability and social equity. It encompasses a range of indicators that measure natural capital, resource efficiency, social cohesion, and governance, thereby providing a holistic perspective on SC. Like the GII, The GSCI relies on extensive survey data and provides a comprehensive measure that integrates economic, environmental, and social dimensions.

Both the WIPO and Solability publications are esteemed within academic and policy communities for their methodological rigor and their capacity to effectively capture complex phenomena through empirical survey data. The GII by WIPO, for instance, provides a detailed assessment of innovation capabilities across different economies by integrating a wide range of indicators, from research and development expenditures to the innovation outputs of firms. Similarly, the GSCI by Solability offers a comprehensive evaluation of a country’s ability to maintain long-term economic growth while balancing environmental sustainability and social well-being. These indices are particularly valued for their thorough data collection processes and robust analytical frameworks, which ensure comprehensive coverage and accurate representation of the constructs being measured.

By incorporating these well-regarded indices, this study leverages robust, multidimensional datasets that allow for a nuanced analysis of the relationships among NC, innovation, and SC. The use of such reputable sources ensures that the measures of these variables are characterized by a high degree of validity—accurately reflecting the constructs they are intended to measure—and reliability—consistently producing similar results under consistent conditions. This methodological choice is crucial for the study’s objectives, as it allows for a deeper and more sophisticated exploration of the structural relationships proposed in the research framework. The adoption of these comprehensive indices not only enhances the credibility of the study’s findings but also facilitates a more detailed understanding of how NC influences SC both directly and indirectly through the mediating role of innovation. This approach underscores the importance of using robust, empirically grounded tools to dissect complex social, economic, and cultural dynamics in a global context.

Data collection for this study was carried out between June and July 2024, utilizing the comprehensive datasets available from established indices.

Following an exhaustive screening process that prioritized data availability and completeness, it was ascertained that only 88 data points satisfied the established criteria for inclusion in the final sample. This rigorous approach ensured that only data points demonstrating the requisite levels of integrity and reliability were incorporated, thereby reinforcing the study’s methodological rigor and enhancing the validity of its subsequent findings.

The data for each of the three variables were standardized as scores ranging from 0 to 100 to facilitate comparability across different scales. For example, the innovation and SC scores for Switzerland, Sweden, and the United States were 68 and 59, 64 and 60, and 64 and 51, respectively. In contrast, the NC score for each country was calculated as the aggregate of six cultural indicators provided by Hofstede’s framework, resulting in values of 58.17 for Switzerland, 47.00 for Sweden, and 54.33 for the United States. These scores enabled a standardized comparison of the countries across all three variables.

Path analysis, a statistical methodology employed to investigate both direct and indirect relationships among variables within a defined theoretical model, was used to analyze the data. This technique extends traditional regression analysis by enabling researchers to simultaneously evaluate the interconnections between multiple dependent and independent variables. Path analysis is particularly effective for examining complex relationships, as it allows for the precise specification of the model and the systematic evaluation of these relationships, ultimately providing valuable insights into the underlying structures of the data.

The initial step involved testing the direct relationship between NC and SC to establish whether NC has a significant effect on SC. Following this, the direct relationship between innovation and SC was assessed to determine the influence of innovation on SC independently. The final step of the analysis entailed calculating the values of these direct relationships to derive the indirect effect of NC on SC, mediated by innovation. This step-by-step approach allowed for a comprehensive understanding of both the direct and indirect pathways through which NC and innovation influence SC, thereby providing a robust examination of the proposed theoretical model.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Results

This section meticulously delineates the descriptive statistical analysis of a dataset comprising 88 observations. The statistical measures include the mean and standard deviation for each variable under consideration. Specifically, the mean values for NC, innovation, and SC are determined to be 51.33, 36.87, and 47.38, respectively. The corresponding standard deviations are 7.230 for NC, 14.237 for innovation, and 6.631 for SC. These descriptive statistics provide a detailed understanding of the central tendency and dispersion of the data, offering insights into the typical values and variability associated with each variable.

Further, the examination of the direct relationships posited in Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 reveals positive correlation coefficients of 0.403, 0.833, 0.479 (

Table 1. Correlations.

Construct	Correlation Coefficient	Significance (1-Tailed)	R-Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate	Hypothesis and Conclusion
NC and Innovation	0.403	0.000	0.163	0.153	13.104	Hypothesis 1 Accepted
Innovation and SC	0.833	0.000	0.694	0.690	3.691	Hypothesis 2 Accepted
NC and SC	0.479	0.000	0.229	0.220	5.855	Hypothesis 3 Accepted

Source: Authors’ own research (2024).

). These positive coefficients suggest a significant and favorable association between the variables examined. The correlation between NC and innovation, as well as between NC and SC, demonstrates a moderate degree of strength. This implies that variations in NC are associated with moderate changes in both innovation outputs and SC metrics. Conversely, the correlation between innovation and SC is notably strong, reflecting a robust and substantive relationship between these two constructs.

The examination of the indirect relationship between NC and SC, with innovation posited as a mediating variable, elucidates a statistically significant positive association. The computation of this indirect effect is executed by multiplying the coefficient that correlates NC with innovation (0.403) by the coefficient that connects innovation to SC (0.833), yielding an estimated value of 0.334. This positive outcome underscores the substantial mediating function of innovation within the intricate interplay between NC and SC, thereby affirming its pivotal role as an intermediary in this conceptual framework. Notably, although the indirect effect value (0.334) is inferior to that of the direct effect (0.479), both values consistently indicate a reinforcing influence within the model.

These findings corroborate the theoretical assertion that innovation operates not merely as a passive conduit but also as an active facilitator in the modulation of NC’s effects on SC. This dual function of innovation, which has the capacity to either enhance or attenuate its impact, underscores the complexity intrinsic to its mediating mechanism. Specifically, the statistical evidence suggests that advancements in innovation possess the potential not only to facilitate but also to amplify or diminish the intensity of the relationship between NC and SC. This implies that the mediating effect of innovation is contingent upon both the magnitude and directionality of its influence, thus rendering it an essential construct for a comprehensive understanding of the nuanced interrelations among these variables.

Moreover, the elucidation of the positive indirect effect accentuates the central role of innovation in enhancing and delineating the pathways through which NC exerts influence on SC. This analysis offers a more profound understanding of the underlying dynamics within the model, reinforcing the assertion that innovation serves as a crucial and impactful intermediary. Consequently, the documented mediating role of innovation not only provides robust empirical support for the theoretical framework but also enriches our understanding of the mechanisms by which innovation can shape the strength and nature of the NC–SC relationship within the specified context.

In aggregate, the integration of descriptive statistical metrics with correlation analyses facilitates a profound and nuanced comprehension of the interrelationships among the constructs NC, innovation, and SC. The empirical analysis elucidates that NC exerts a moderate, yet statistically significant, influence on both innovation and SC. Furthermore, the relationship between innovation and SC is identified as particularly robust, signifying a substantial and substantial interaction between these constructs. This finding underscores the critical role of innovation as a pivotal mediating variable within the theoretical framework. Specifically, the data demonstrate that the influence of NC on SC is not merely direct but is substantially mediated through the intermediary effect of innovation. These findings illuminate the complex, multidimensional nature of these interdependencies, thereby contributing to a deeper theoretical and empirical understanding of their interplay and advancing the scholarly discourse on the dynamics governing these variables within the study’s context. The findings from the statistical evaluation indicate that Innovation plays a substantial role in mediating the relationship between NC and SC. However, this mediation is characterized as partial rather than full. Specifically, while innovation significantly influences the dynamics between NC and SC, there remains a direct effect of NC on SC independent of the mediating role of innovation. This partial mediation suggests that the impact of NC on SC is not exclusively channeled through innovation but also manifests through a direct relationship.

This detailed statistical analysis provides a foundational framework for understanding the complex interplay between these variables. The insights gained have profound implications for both theoretical development and empirical investigation in the domain of cultural influences on innovation and competitiveness. Future research should further explore the direct and indirect pathways through which NC affects SC and delineate the specific mechanisms by which innovation mediates this relationship. Such inquiries will contribute to a more comprehensive theoretical and practical understanding of the role of cultural factors in shaping innovation and sustainable competitive advantage.

Table 2. Coefficient ^a.

Model 1	Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	T	Significance
	B	Std. Error	Beta
(Constant)	26.213	2.739		9.571	0.000
NC	0.157	0.058	0.171	2.716	0.008
Innovation	0.356	0.029	0.764	12.144	0.000

^a Dependent Variable: SC; Source: Authors’ own research (2024).

furnishes compelling empirical evidence affirming the statistical significance of all relationships analyzed within this study. The reported significance levels—0.000, 0.008, and 0.000—are substantially lower than the conventional alpha threshold of 0.05, thereby indicating an exceedingly low probability that these findings could be attributed to random chance. This substantial deviation not only corroborates the statistical relevance of the observed relationships but also underscores their considerable practical implications within the framework of the research.

The remarkably low p-values suggest that the identified relationships possess a high degree of robustness and are indicative of authentic underlying phenomena. Consequently, the findings reinforce the proposition that the interconnections among national capabilities (NC), innovation, and sustainable competitiveness (SC) are not mere statistical anomalies but rather critical constructs that warrant extensive scholarly inquiry.

Specifically, the analysis elucidates both direct and indirect positive relationships among NC, innovation, and SC. The positive direct correlation between NC and innovation suggests that enhancing national capabilities can significantly promote innovation initiatives. This finding is particularly salient in the context of contemporary economic landscapes, where innovation is increasingly recognized as a pivotal driver of competitive advantage.

Moreover, the study reveals a positive association between innovation and SC, indicating that organizations and nations that prioritize innovation are more likely to attain sustainable competitive advantages. This underscores the dual role of innovation, functioning not only as a potential outcome of enhanced NC but also as a vital contributor to SC. Furthermore, the observed positive relationship between NC and SC suggests that fortifying national capabilities has a direct and beneficial impact on the competitive outcomes experienced by both nations and organizations.

Significantly, innovation also serves a mediating role in the indirect relationship between NC and SC. This mediation implies that while NC exerts a direct influence on SC, the realization of these advantages is contingent upon the facilitation of innovation. Therefore, cultivating an environment that fosters innovation is imperative for optimizing the benefits derived from national capabilities, suggesting that policymakers should strategically prioritize investments in innovative practices and technologies.

In conclusion, the findings of this study illuminate the intricate and multifaceted interrelationships among NC, innovation, and SC. They posit that strategic initiatives aimed at enhancing NC are essential not only for fostering innovation but also for ensuring long-term sustainable competitiveness in an increasingly complex and dynamic global environment.

Moreover, the analysis reveals that the computed t-values for the examined relationships are consistently positive, with notably significant values of 2.716 and 12.144. These t-values were subjected to rigorous evaluation against a critical t-value of 1.664, which is derived from a significance level of 0.05. The substantial exceedance of the computed t-values over this critical threshold provides robust evidence for the validity of the findings.

This statistical validation serves multiple purposes: It not only corroborates the significance of the observed effects, but also mitigates potential concerns regarding the possibility that these results may be spurious or artifacts of sampling error. Instead, the elevated t-values substantiate the existence of authentic relationships that reflect genuine underlying phenomena, warranting further scholarly inquiry.

The implications of these findings extend well beyond mere statistical significance; they necessitate a critical reevaluation of existing theoretical frameworks and models within the discipline. The substantial t-values underscore the imperative for additional empirical investigations aimed at elucidating the mechanisms underpinning these relationships. Furthermore, they accentuate the importance of considering the practical ramifications of these results within real-world contexts.

By establishing a robust statistical foundation, this analysis contributes significantly to the broader academic discourse, positing that the identified relationships merit comprehensive examination in future research endeavors. Scholars and practitioners alike are urged to delve deeper into the complexities inherent in these relationships, as they possess profound implications for understanding the dynamics at play within the research domain. Ultimately, this rigorous analysis not only reinforces the credibility of the current findings but also lays the groundwork for subsequent scholarly explorations aimed at clarifying the intricate interconnections among the variables under study.

4.2. Discussion

This section meticulously elucidates how the results previously articulated substantiate and validate the theoretical frameworks and empirical findings of extant research concerning the nuanced interrelationships among NC, innovation, and SC.

Primarily, the empirical evidence demonstrates a robust positive association between NC and SC, a relationship that is manifested both directly and through an indirect pathway mediated by innovation. The findings associated with Hypothesis 1 are consistent with the theoretical constructs proposed by Balzat and Hanusch (2003). Their work posits that diverse organizational and institutional entities are engaged in a complex matrix of interactions and reciprocal influences, which collectively drive the process of economic innovation (Balzat and Hanusch 2003). This conceptualization is further reinforced by the study conducted by Cox and Khan (2017), which employed Hofstede’s cultural dimensions and the GII to explore the intersection of NC and innovation. Their research reveals that societies distinguished by high levels of innovation tend to exhibit specific cultural characteristics, including individualism, femininity, long-term orientation, and indulgence. Furthermore, the findings from this study extend to assert that all dimensions of NC—namely power distance, individualism, motivation towards achievement and success, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, and indulgence—are integral to understanding the complex dynamics between NC and SC. This comprehensive analysis underscores the multifaceted and profound impact of NC on SC, mediated through the innovation process, thereby offering a nuanced understanding of these interrelations.

The results derived from the second hypothesis exhibit substantial congruence with the theoretical elucidations advanced by Sharif (2006), who articulates that the interaction between innovation and NC is not only multifarious but also subject to a spectrum of interdependencies that manifest through complex mechanisms. Shafir’s analysis contends that innovation, far from being a unidirectional or isolated process, is profoundly contingent upon the interplay with NC across various domains, including technological, institutional, and socio-economic dimensions. This interaction, as Shafir delineates, operates through non-linear pathways where the extent and efficacy of NC fundamentally modulate the trajectory, magnitude, and qualitative outcomes of innovative endeavors. In this context, NC serves as a critical infrastructure that enables or constrains the capacity for innovation to materialize into concrete advancements, whether technological, economic, or social. The entanglement of these factors underscores the necessity of conceptualizing innovation as embedded within a wider socio-economic framework, where endogenous capabilities and exogenous global pressures converge to shape its realization.

Furthermore, the outcomes align with the intricate theoretical discourse posited by Intarakumnerd et al. (2002), who emphasizes that a nation’s prowess in fostering innovation and its agility in assimilating emergent technologies constitute pivotal determinants of long-term economic resilience and competitive positioning within the global market. Intarakumnerd’s analysis, rooted in a broader historical and empirical context, posits that innovation is not an isolated economic variable but a systemic force intertwined with the overarching goals of sustainable economic development. This view builds upon earlier studies (Intarakumnerd et al. 2002), which assert that the capacity for technological innovation and adaptation is inextricably linked to national strategies aimed at ensuring sustained economic competitiveness in the context of increasing globalization. The ability to innovate, according to this framework, functions as a critical mediating variable that enhances a nation’s ability to navigate the challenges posed by rapid technological changes and shifting global market dynamics. Consequently, nations that effectively leverage their NC to foster innovation are better positioned to not only achieve economic growth but to sustain it over the long term, thus avoiding the pitfalls of stagnation or technological obsolescence. The convergence of these theoretical perspectives with the empirical findings underscores the complex, yet critical, role that innovation plays in the broader schema of national economic strategy and development.

Hypothesis 3 exhibits a marked alignment with the comprehensive theoretical framework expounded by Varblane et al. (2007), which postulates that innovation constitutes an essential and integrative mechanism by which nations not only maintain but also enhance their competitive positioning within the global economic system. According to this perspective, innovation transcends its conventional role as a mere catalyst for economic activity, functioning instead as a fundamental determinant of a nation’s ability to sustain its competitive advantage amidst the rapidly shifting dynamics of international markets. Varblane et al. (2007) underscore that innovation is not peripheral to economic growth but lies at the very heart of a nation’s strategic capacity to foster continuous advancements in technology, productivity, and industrial sophistication, thereby securing its place in an increasingly interconnected and technologically driven global economy.

In this regard, innovation is conceptualized as an indispensable driver of sustainable development, defined not solely in terms of economic expansion, but more comprehensively as the capacity for a nation to achieve long-term resilience and adaptability in the face of evolving global challenges. Varblane et al. (2007) contend that innovation enables countries to anticipate, respond to, and shape the multifaceted forces that influence their developmental trajectories, including those related to environmental sustainability, social equity, and technological disruption. By embedding innovation as a core component of national policy frameworks, countries can more effectively balance the imperatives of short-term economic growth with the exigencies of long-term sustainable development. This view aligns with broader theoretical models that posit innovation as central to addressing global challenges such as climate change, resource depletion, and technological displacement, thus ensuring that national development pathways are congruent with the goals of environmental stewardship and social well-being.

The congruence of Hypothesis 3 with the propositions advanced by Varblane et al. (2007) further elucidates the critical role that innovation plays in the strategic calculus of nations seeking to maintain their competitive edge while navigating the complexities of the global economic landscape. Nations that prioritize the systematic integration of innovation into their economic, social, and institutional frameworks are better equipped to not only sustain their competitive advantage but also to pursue development models that are robust, adaptive, and aligned with the principles of long-term sustainability. Hence, innovation emerges not as a static or isolated phenomenon but as a dynamic and multidimensional process that is central to both economic competitiveness and sustainable development.

The practical implications derived from this discourse suggest that policymakers should strategically harness both cultural and innovation frameworks to enhance sustainable competitiveness. This necessitates a sophisticated approach that integrates cultural dimensions with innovative practices, thereby augmenting a nation’s competitive positioning within the globalized economy. By cultivating an environment that not only values and promotes cultural diversity but also fosters robust innovation ecosystems, policymakers can create synergies that contribute to the development of enduring competitive advantages. This integrative approach addresses both immediate economic and technological challenges while aligning with broader objectives of long-term resilience and adaptability in a continually evolving global market.

Nations should adopt a comprehensive dual-faceted strategy that intricately weaves together cultural factors with innovation frameworks to fortify their standing in the global marketplace. Embracing and institutionalizing cultural diversity enables countries to leverage distinctive cultural assets and perspectives, which are pivotal for fostering creativity and driving innovative capacity. This cultural dynamism is instrumental in creating an inclusive and adaptable environment conducive to generating novel ideas and solutions that enhance competitive advantage.

Concurrently, it is imperative for countries to establish and sustain robust innovation ecosystems that encompass the full spectrum of research and development, technological advancement, and entrepreneurial endeavors. A pronounced emphasis on innovation is crucial for enabling nations to continuously evolve and adapt to technological transformations and market fluctuations, thereby reinforcing and expanding their competitive edge over time.

The effective integration of these dimensions requires the formulation of advanced policies and institutional frameworks that promote cross-cultural collaboration and facilitate the dissemination of innovative ideas. For instance, nations could invest in sophisticated educational programs that underscore the critical importance of both cultural competence and technological expertise, support initiatives that amalgamate diverse cultural perspectives into problem-solving processes and foster synergistic partnerships between cultural institutions and technological sectors.

Overall, the strategic focus on both cultural and innovation dimensions empowers nations to navigate and address both immediate and long-term challenges effectively. This holistic approach not only ensures sustained economic growth but also enhances global competitiveness. By leveraging their unique cultural strengths and innovative capabilities, nations can achieve enduring success in the complex and dynamic global economic landscape.

4.3. Theoretical Implications

In the framework of this academic inquiry, it has been rigorously demonstrated that innovation serves as a fundamental mediator within the positive nexus between NC and SC. This mediation effect elucidates the essential role of NC as a determinant that critically influences the capacity for innovation, which, in turn, significantly impacts the attainment and maintenance of SC.

The empirical evidence presented highlights that innovation should be conceptualized not as a peripheral or ancillary element but as a central mechanism that facilitates the translation of NC into enhanced SC. Specifically, the analysis reveals that the robustness and sophistication of NC—including variables such as technological infrastructure, institutional support, and human capital—play an instrumental role in creating an environment that fosters innovation. This, in turn, drives the development and implementation of advanced technologies, processes, and practices that are indispensable for securing and sustaining a competitive advantage within the global economic arena.

Moreover, the findings underscore that the effective facilitation of innovation through well-established NC frameworks is crucial for achieving long-term sustainable competitiveness. Innovation acts as a pivotal conduit through which the strategic advantages conferred by NC are actualized and leveraged, thereby augmenting a nation’s capability to adeptly navigate and adapt to the complexities and volatilities of the global market. This mediating role of innovation provides a nuanced understanding of the interplay between NC and SC, accentuating the necessity for policies and strategic interventions that bolster NC. Such interventions may include targeted investments in research and development, enhancements in educational and skill development programs, and the creation of conducive institutional environments.

Thus, the study’s findings underscore the imperative to enhance NC as a precondition for driving innovation, which is subsequently crucial for achieving and maintaining sustainable competitive positioning. The theoretical and empirical insights derived from this research offer a sophisticated framework for comprehending the mechanisms through which national capabilities impact competitive outcomes, thereby providing valuable guidance for policymakers and scholars engaged in addressing the multifaceted challenges of fostering sustained economic growth and resilience in a globalized context.

4.4. Practical Implications

It is incumbent upon policymakers to recognize innovation as a cardinal element within strategic objectives, necessitating the formulation of policies that effectively enhance NC. The empirical findings underscore the necessity for robust NC—encompassing a well-developed technological infrastructure and supportive institutional frameworks—to be strategically aligned with innovation facilitation. In light of this, governments must prioritize substantial investments in research and development while concurrently enacting institutional reforms to engender a culture of creativity and the dissemination of knowledge. Failure to emphasize innovation in tandem with NC could result in suboptimal SC. Hence, the establishment of comprehensive policy frameworks that cultivate an environment conducive to technological advancements and innovative practices is essential to ensuring long-term competitiveness in the global economic landscape.

The study underscores the pivotal role of human capital in advancing innovation, thereby elucidating the imperative for reforms in educational and vocational training systems. To this end, policymakers and educational institutions should engage in collaborative efforts to realign curricular frameworks with the evolving exigencies of industries, ensuring the workforce is equipped with the requisite skills to adapt to emergent technologies and innovative processes. By fostering technical proficiency, creativity, and critical analytical capacities, such educational reforms can cultivate a workforce capable of implementing innovative solutions and contributing substantively to national competitiveness. This strategic alignment not only advances national policy objectives but also enhances the ability of individuals to thrive in an innovation-driven economy.

The findings delineate the significance of fortifying institutional frameworks as an essential prerequisite for the conversion of NC into sustainable SC. This requires that governments and regulatory bodies concentrate on establishing an enabling environment for entrepreneurial activities through the provision of incentives, improved access to financial resources, and the removal of bureaucratic impediments that inhibit innovation. Furthermore, the enhancement of public-private partnerships is crucial, as these collaborations facilitate the synergistic exchange of knowledge, technologies, and resources between sectors. A well-structured institutional architecture that promotes such synergies can markedly augment a nation’s innovative capacity and overall competitiveness.

The study’s implications for corporate strategies are profound, emphasizing the exigency for firms to strategically leverage NC to bolster their innovative capacities. Organizations should prioritize investments in the modernization of technological infrastructure and actively seek collaborative opportunities with research institutions to sustain their competitive positioning. By embedding innovation within their core strategies, firms can synchronize their objectives with national policies while simultaneously fortifying their resilience against uncertainties within global market dynamics. This proactive orientation toward technological advancement and process innovation is integral to ensuring that firms remain competitive and adaptive in an increasingly volatile global landscape.

The findings indicate that governments should adopt targeted interventions to rectify disparities within innovation ecosystems and reinforce national innovation capacities. Such interventions may encompass the establishment of specialized innovation hubs, the provision of tax incentives to stimulate research and development, and the allocation of grants to support technological startups. These initiatives are indispensable not only for fortifying NC but also for directly contributing to the realization of sustained SC at the national level. By fostering an enabling environment for innovation, such policy measures promote the development and deployment of advanced technologies, which are fundamental to securing and perpetuating a competitive edge within the global economy.

The study posits that policymakers must conceptualize innovation as the linchpin for sustainable competitiveness over the long term. This necessitates a strategic approach whereby NC frameworks are continuously evaluated and recalibrated in alignment with emergent global trends and technological advancements. By adopting such a strategic posture, governments can enhance resilience against external perturbations and ensure that national policies retain their efficacy amidst dynamic economic challenges. A robust and adaptive policy framework will empower nations to adeptly navigate the complexities of global markets and maintain their competitive positioning over an extended temporal horizon.

5. Conclusions

To commence, this research enriches the theoretical framework by positing that innovation functions as a pivotal intermediary through which NC exerts its influence on SC. In contrast to previous models that have traditionally treated innovation as a secondary or ancillary component, the findings presented herein recontextualize innovation as a fundamental mechanism that not only facilitates but also amplifies the strategic advantages associated with NC. This nuanced understanding serves to advance theoretical discourse surrounding the dynamic interrelationship between NC and SC, thereby providing a sophisticated perspective on how nations can systematically enhance their competitive standing through targeted innovation policies.

Furthermore, the empirical findings offer robust evidence that well-established national capabilities—characterized by a strong technological infrastructure, supportive institutional frameworks, and a well-equipped human capital base—are indispensable for fostering an environment conducive to innovation. This insight underscores the critical role that NC plays in shaping and driving the development of cutting-edge technologies and innovative practices. Consequently, this study contributes to the empirical knowledge base by delineating the specific elements of NC that are instrumental in catalyzing innovation-led growth in competitive outcomes.

Moreover, through a systematic examination of the mediating role of innovation, this research contributes to a more nuanced comprehension of the pathways through which NC impacts SC. The identification of innovation as a crucial conduit through which strategic advantages are realized provides valuable insights into the mechanisms that underlie competitive advantage in the context of global economic dynamics. This underscores the imperative for policy interventions aimed at fortifying NC to effectively harness the potential of innovation.

Additionally, this research not only enhances theoretical constructs but also offers a comprehensive framework for the formulation of policy interventions that can bolster national competitiveness. The findings emphasize the necessity of aligning national capabilities with innovation-driven strategies to sustain competitiveness in a rapidly evolving global environment. By integrating empirical insights with theoretical reflections, this study presents a valuable roadmap for policymakers and scholars engaged in the conceptualization of strategic initiatives that reinforce both NC and innovation.

Finally, this research opens new avenues for future inquiry by suggesting that the efficacy of innovation as a mediator may exhibit variability across different contexts and industries. This revelation invites comparative studies that explore how specific dimensions of NC interact with innovation to shape SC in diverse economic landscapes. Additionally, the study encourages subsequent researchers to investigate other potential mediators or moderators that could influence the NC–SC relationship, such as cultural dimensions, regulatory frameworks, and the dynamics of international trade.

5.1. Limitations

The methodological approach adopted in this study is inherently constrained by the relatively modest sample size, which remains below the critical threshold of 100 observations. It is posited that augmenting the dataset to encompass over a hundred, and ideally exceeding two hundred observations, would facilitate a more nuanced and robust analytical output. Currently, the research findings are restricted to examining the relationships between NC and innovation, as well as NC and SC, with these relationships exhibiting limited empirical strength and robustness.

To achieve a more rigorous validation of the examined hypotheses, it is imperative to enhance the sample size. An expanded dataset would enable a more comprehensive analysis, thereby potentially increasing the statistical significance of the results to surpass the 80 percent threshold. This would substantiate the hypothesized relationships with a higher degree of empirical precision and reliability. Such an increase in data volume would contribute to the development of a more robust and detailed understanding of the interconnections between NC, innovation, and SC, thereby providing a more authoritative validation of the proposed theoretical constructs and empirical associations.

In light of the methodological constraints identified in this study, it is imperative for future research to address these limitations and further explore the relationships between NC, innovation, and SC within a more expansive and varied context. Specifically, subsequent studies should aim to augment the current dataset by incorporating a significantly larger sample size, ideally exceeding two hundred observations. Such an expansion would enhance the statistical power and generalizability of the findings, thereby facilitating a more nuanced and robust analysis.

Moreover, it is essential for future research to investigate these relationships across a diverse array of contexts, including different industrial sectors, geographic regions, and cultural environments. This broader contextual examination would provide a more comprehensive understanding of how NC and innovation interact to influence SC across various settings. By examining the dynamics within different national and regional contexts, researchers can ascertain the extent to which the observed relationships are consistent or vary across different environments, thereby contributing to a more generalized theoretical framework.

5.2. Future Research

Future research endeavors should employ longitudinal methodologies to meticulously examine the evolution of the interrelationship among NC, innovation, and sustainable competitiveness over extended periods. Such investigations are poised to yield critical insights into the dynamics of these relationships as they adapt to the complexities of shifting economic, technological, and geopolitical landscapes. Additionally, there exists a pressing need for sector-specific analyses that investigate the intricate interactions between NC and innovation across diverse industries. A comprehensive understanding of these dynamics within sectors such as technology, manufacturing, and agriculture could facilitate the formulation of bespoke strategies aimed at enhancing SC, thereby addressing the unique challenges and opportunities intrinsic to each sector.

Furthermore, cross-national comparative studies should be conducted to elucidate best practices and contextually relevant strategies by scrutinizing the interplay between NC and SC in various countries characterized by differing levels of innovation ecosystems. Such a comparative framework would enrich our understanding of how distinct national contexts shape the relationship between these vital components. Future inquiries must also concentrate on the implications of emerging technologies—such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, and renewable energy solutions—within the innovation–NC–SC nexus. Identifying the mechanisms through which these technological advancements can be leveraged to augment national competitiveness constitutes a substantial avenue for scholarly contribution.

In addition, there is a critical need for research that evaluates the efficacy of specific policy interventions aimed at enhancing NC and fostering innovation. Systematic analyses of the outcomes associated with investments in research and development, educational reforms, and institutional enhancements would provide invaluable evidence-based recommendations for policymakers. Moreover, qualitative research that captures the perspectives of diverse stakeholders—including policymakers, industry leaders, and academics—could yield profound insights into the multifaceted challenges and opportunities inherent in cultivating innovation and competitiveness.

Moreover, it is imperative to investigate the specific skills and competencies requisite for a workforce capable of underpinning innovation. This research could involve identifying deficiencies within existing educational frameworks and proposing curricular modifications that align more closely with industry requirements. In conjunction with this, studies should examine the role of public-private partnerships in enhancing innovation capabilities, identifying successful collaborative models that can inform strategies to fortify inter-sectoral synergies.

Finally, future research should focus on the mechanisms through which nations can build resilience via innovation, particularly in the context of economic disruptions stemming from pandemics or fluctuations in global markets. The development of adaptive policy frameworks that respond to such challenges would be of particular relevance. Additionally, investigations into the cultural influences on innovation practices and the effectiveness of NC would provide a more comprehensive understanding of innovation ecosystems. By analyzing societal attitudes toward risk, entrepreneurship, and the adoption of emerging technologies, this research could significantly enhance the academic discourse surrounding innovation. By pursuing these avenues, future studies can contribute to a nuanced understanding of the factors influencing the relationship between national capabilities, innovation, and sustainable competitiveness, thereby offering valuable insights for both scholars and policymakers engaged in the complexities of fostering economic growth and resilience.