Innovation and dimensions of sustainable development: mediating role of ICTs

Abstract

This study examines the synergies between innovation, ICT, and sustainable development in the context of Saudi Arabian organizations, through the data derived from the responses of 407 top-level administrative employees from different organizations within the government and the private sectors via the structural equation modeling, PLS-SEM. Innovation is shown to have profound beneficial consequences in the area of social sustainability, it is, however, likely to have a negligible influence on economic and environmental aspects. ICT adoption, however, has been rightly identified as a prime mediator in the relationship between innovation and sustainability, whereby it positively mediates over all the dimensions of sustainability, and the strongest mediation effect was observed on environmental sustainability. The findings bear testimony to the fact that Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) is crucial factor for achieving sustainable development and hence prompts policymakers and organizational leaders to invest money in technology-related advancement, devise policies that foster ICT adoption and put them into practice to squeeze the full potential of ICT. Hence, highlighting the sector that has promising strategic importance for ICT, the approach is an effective one that could fuel creativity and contribute highly to the sustainability agendas everywhere, therefore, it should be the future path for organizations in Saudi Arabia to truly advance to the next level and effectively play in the sustainable development field.

Keywords:

• Innovation
• information and communication technology
• sustainable development
• PLS-SEM
• social dimension
• economic dimension
• environmental dimension
• Saudia Arabia

JEL Classification:

• O10
• O30
• Q32
• D80
• Q01

REVIEWING EDITOR:

• Huifen (Helen) Cai, Middlesex University Business School, United Kingdom

SUBJECTS:

• Sustainable Development
• Management of Technology & Innovation
• Administration and Management

1. Introduction

The increasing use of ICTs in Saudi Arabia presents an opportunity to leverage these technologies for sustainable development, particularly in energy, water, and waste management. This is important given the significant challenges that the country faces related to sustainable development, such as energy consumption, water scarcity, and environmental degradation. However, both the government and private sector institutions in Saudi Arabia have recognized the importance of sustainable development and have launched several initiatives to promote it (CITC, 2023). The government’s Vision 2030 program, which aims to diversify the economy and reduce dependence on oil, strongly emphasizes sustainable development. The program includes specific goals related to environmental sustainability, such as increasing the use of renewable energy sources and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Private sector institutions in Saudi Arabia have also recognized the importance of sustainable development and have begun to invest in innovation and ICTs to promote it, with Saudi Aramco being an example of a company that has launched initiatives to reduce its environmental impact through advanced technologies for carbon capture and storage (Bahman et al., 2023). Adopting innovation and ICTs in Saudi Arabia can contribute to economic growth and job creation while promoting sustainable development. The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) predicts that adopting renewable energy technologies in Saudi Arabia could create up to 220,000 jobs by 2030. (UNDP, 2022). In addition, using ICTs can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public services, such as healthcare and education, thereby contributing to the social dimension of sustainable development. Innovation and ICTs can be vital in addressing Saudi Arabia’s environmental and social challenges while promoting economic growth and competitiveness (UNDP, 2022).

Innovation is often considered a driving force behind sustainable development, as it can enable economic growth while reducing negative impacts on the environment and society (Chovancová et al., 2023). Sustainable development, a concept the Bruce Commission report emphasized in 1987, aims at the same time the interest of the present while securing for the future its ability to meet its needs (Wced, 1987). This approach entails the integration of economic development, social justice, and protection of nature and the world in which we live as the three main components. The stereo-probe is populated by, among others, Turner and Pearce (1990), on the sustainable economy Daly (1990), on environmental sustainability, as well as Sen (2000) on social equity and inclusion, all of them helping to structure a full picture of sustainable development.

There are several dimensions of sustainable development, including economic, environmental, and social. Numerous studies have shown a positive relationship between innovation and sustainable development. For example, a study by Schiederig et al. (2012) found that environmentally sustainable innovations can help companies gain a competitive advantage while reducing negative environmental impacts. Similarly, a study by Kivimaa and Kern (2016) found that innovation policies that promote sustainability can lead to more sustainable energy systems. In addition, innovation can also contribute to social sustainability by promoting inclusive growth and improving access to essential services. For instance, a study by UNDP (2022) found that innovation can improve access to healthcare, education, and other essential services in developing countries, thereby contributing to the social dimension of sustainable development. Overall, the relationship between innovation and dimensions of sustainable development is complex and multifaceted and requires careful consideration of the potential trade-offs and synergies between different dimensions (in terms of social, economical, cultural, environmental, political, education, technological, ethical and moral dimensions) (Omri, 2020; Silvestre & Ţîrcă, 2019). Nonetheless, the evidence suggests that innovation has the potential to play a critical role in promoting sustainable development.

In recent years, innovation and Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs)—tools and resources for communication, information processing, and management—have been increasingly recognized for their potential to promote sustainable development (Abbas et al., 2020). Innovation has been identified as a critical driver of sustainable development, as it can create new products, services, and processes that are more environmentally friendly and socially responsible (United Nations, 2022). At the same time, ICTs have the potential to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of sustainable development initiatives by enabling better communication, collaboration, and knowledge sharing (Ye et al., 2023). However, the relationship between innovation, ICTs, and sustainable development is complex and multifaceted, and there is a need for more research to understand the mechanisms by which these factors interact (Ndemo, 2016). The rationale for examining ICT’s mediating role between innovation and sustainable development dimensions is anchored in the diffusion of innovations theory and empirical insights (Mazzucato, 2018; Rogers, 2003). Rogers (2003) posits that ICT facilitates the adoption of innovative practices, enhancing sustainability outcomes. Similarly, Mazzucato (2018) illustrates how ICT-driven innovations can promote economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental sustainability. Thus, ICT is hypothesized to act as a pivotal intermediary, linking innovation with sustainable development. Thus, the study used the partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) technique to measure this relationship. By doing so, the study contributes to understanding the complex relationship between innovation, ICTs, and sustainable development and identifies potential avenues for promoting sustainable development in Saudi Arabia. Incorporating public and private institutions in a study is crucial for broader relevance, comprehensive insights, robust generalizations, transparency, and the formulation of targeted recommendations that cater to the specific needs of each sector, ultimately benefiting policy formulation and resource allocation.

2. Literature review and hypothesis

In this section, we will review relevant studies from the literature to construct the conceptual framework, examine the connections between different elements, and formulate hypotheses.

2.1. Innovation and the social dimension

Several studies examined the inter relationship between innovation and social dimension of sustainable development (Eichler & Schwarz, 2019; Omri, 2020; Ravazzoli & Valero, 2020). An analysis of the existing literature on innovations that have the potential to bring about transformations in individuals, organisations, supply chains, and communities in the direction of a socially sustainable future is presented here (Fahad S. Almawishir & Benlaria, 2023; Eichler & Schwarz, 2019; Ravazzoli & Valero, 2020; Roth, 2009). The findings, recommendations, and contributions of the research that were examined in this review are encouraging as we make progress towards a sustainable society through innovation and change. This is despite the fact that many of the studies that were examined reported on existing serious social challenges (Silvestre & Ţîrcă, 2019; Omri, 2020).

Innovation in organizations has the potential to contribute significantly to the social dimension of sustainable development by improving social sustainability outcomes. Organizations prioritizing innovation and sustainability can create new products and services that benefit society and the environment while improving their financial performance. One way in which organizations can contribute to social sustainability through innovation is by developing new products and services that address social challenges such as poverty, inequality, and social exclusion (Yeşil & Doğan, 2019). For example, social enterprises aim to create social value through innovative business models and products and can contribute to social sustainability by addressing societal challenges (Mair & Marti, 2006).

Another way organizations can contribute to social sustainability is by investing in the well-being of their employees and stakeholders. Innovation in human resource management practices can contribute to social sustainability by promoting fair employment practices, ensuring occupational health and safety, and providing opportunities for professional development and lifelong learning (UNCTAD annual report, 2016). Moreover, by investing in the well-being of their employees and stakeholders, organizations can contribute to creating sustainable and resilient communities. In addition, innovation can also promote social sustainability by facilitating stakeholder engagement and collaboration. Organizations that innovate in their stakeholder engagement and collaboration approach can foster a more inclusive and democratic decision-making process, resulting in a stronger sense of community ownership and participation in organizational activities (Watson et al., 2017).

Overall, innovation in organizations has the potential to contribute significantly to the social dimension of sustainable development by creating new products and services that address societal challenges, promoting fair employment practices and well-being, and facilitating stakeholder engagement and collaboration. However, it is essential for organizations to carefully consider the potential risks and unintended consequences of different types of innovation and ensure that innovation is harnessed in a way that promotes social sustainability and equitable outcomes for all stakeholders. (Friday, 2021; UNCTAD, 2016; Watson et al., 2017).

Socially, although technology and automation enhance working conditions, replacing men with machines can lead to fewer jobs. Technological innovation can reduce this impact by creating new markets, lowering consumer goods prices, and creating profitable investment opportunities, according to the research (Hysa et al., 2020). These include the social impact of technology, ICT and sustainable growth, sustainable development technologies, education and e-learning, globalisation and forecasting technology, social entrepreneurship and technology, green energy technology and sustainability, and others. Hence, it is noted that a relationship exists between Innovation and the social dimension. Therefore, the first hypothesis is formulated as follows:

• HP1: There is a positive relationship between organizational innovation and the social dimension of sustainable development in Saudi Arabia.

2.2. Innovation and the economic dimension

Innovation is a critical factor in economic growth and competitiveness, and businesses that put innovation first are more likely to be successful in the long run. In particular, organizational innovation can lead to new products and services, creating new markets and driving economic growth (European Commission, 2016; Schlaile et al., 2017). Also, innovative organizations can improve their productivity and efficiency, which can have significant economic benefits. Bresnahan et al. (2002) say that companies can streamline their operations and cut costs when they use new technologies and processes. This makes them more competitive in global markets.

The linkage between innovation and the economic dimension of sustainable development is of the utmost importance, when it comes to supporting long-term economic growth, enhancing productivity, and tackling difficulties related to poverty and inequality. As a crucial engine of economic development and sustainability, innovation is an essential component. This helps to cultivate an economic climate that is both dynamic and adaptable, which in turn enables society to confront issues, embrace new opportunities, and construct economies that are robust. In order to achieve sustainable development, it is necessary to incorporate innovation techniques that encourage economic growth, generate employment opportunities, and guarantee prosperity while taking into account the possible effects on society and the environment.

Organizational innovation can also help create sustainable business modelsand use resources efficiently, benefiting the economy, the environment, and society. For example, adopting sustainable production methods and technologies can reduce waste and emissions while improving the quality of products and services (Polasky et al., 2019; Rossi et al., 2020). This can lead to cost savings, improved customer satisfaction, and a stronger market position.Organizational innovation can also negatively affect the economy, such as putting people out of work and making a few companies dominate the market. So, it isessential for organizations to carefully manage the risks that come with innovation and ensure that innovation is used to promote economic growth and development while also tackling broader societal challenges. Innovation in organizations is an essential driver of economic growth and competitiveness and has the potential to generate significant economic benefits. However, it is essential for organizations to carefully manage the risks associated with innovation and ensure that it is harnessed to promote sustainable economic growth and development (Bresnahan et al., 2002; European Commission, 2016; Rossi et al., 2020; Schlaile et al., 2017).

Besides analyzing the Economics impact on society, the economy, and the environment, raising awareness of the community’s consumers and promoting the development of circular innovative business models and governmental policies to support them have been discussed and researched by many scholars. The novelty of this study is the association of the innovation variables with each of the sustainable development aspects: the social—environmental—economic. Although there are some limited studies using panel data to measure the impact of innovations, such as (Omri, 2020; Ravazzoli & Valero, 2020), none of them has considered the innovation variables to be associated with the three dimensions of sustainable development. Therefore, we observe that there is a relationship between innovation and the economic dimension of sustainable development. As a result, we formulate the second hypothesis as follows:

• HP2: There is a positive relationship between organizational innovation and the economic dimension of sustainable development in Saudi Arabia.

2.3. Innovation and the environmental dimension

Innovation is a key driver for achieving environmental sustainability by providing solutions that minimize resource depletion, reduce pollution, and address the impacts of climate change. Integrating technological advancements and innovative practices into environmental management strategies is essential for promoting a more sustainable and resilient planet (Fernandes et al., 2022; Guerrero‐Villegas et al., 2018). The collaboration between technology, research, and environmental stewardship is crucial for achieving the goals of the environmental dimension of sustainable development. Organizational innovation can contribute significantly to sustainable development’s environmental dimension by promoting resource efficiency, reducing waste and emissions, and supporting the transition to a low-carbon economy. In particular, innovation in technology and business models can help organizations reduce their environmental footprint while improving their financial performance (Demir et al., 2020; Hockerts & Wüstenhagen, 2010).

One way in which organizations can contribute to environmental sustainability through innovation is by adopting cleaner production methods and technologies. For example, using renewable energy, such as solar and wind power, can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental impacts associated with traditional fossil fuels (Markard et al., 2012). Similarly, adopting circular economy principles, such as product design for reuse and recycling, can help reduce waste and improve resource efficiency (Kirchherr et al., 2017). Innovation in organizations can also facilitate the transition to a low-carbon economy. For example, innovation in electric vehicle technology and charging infrastructure can help to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and promote the adoption of more sustainable modes of transportation (Sovacool et al., 2022). Similarly, innovation in energy-efficient buildings and smart cities can help reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions while improving citizens’ quality of life (Khahro et al., 2021).

However, it is essential to note that organizational innovation can also have unintended negative environmental impacts, such as creating new ecological problems or displacing environmental burdens to other regions or sectors. Therefore, it is essential for organizations to carefully consider the potential risks and unintended consequences of different types of innovation and ensure that innovation is harnessed in a way that promotes environmental sustainability and equitable outcomes for all stakeholders. Innovation in organizations can significantly contribute to the environmental dimension of sustainable development. Organizations can improve their environmental performance while driving economic growth and development by adopting cleaner production methods and technologies, supporting the transition to a low-carbon economy, and promoting resource efficiency. However, it is essential for organizations to carefully manage the risks associated with innovation and ensure that it is harnessed in a way that promotes sustainable development (Hockerts &Wüstenhagen, 2010; Khahro et al., 2021; Kirchherr et al., 2017; Markard et al., 2012; Sovacool et al., 2022).

Thus, the relationship between innovation and the environmental dimension of sustainable development is critical in addressing environmental challenges, promoting conservation, and fostering sustainable resource use (Abid et al., 2022; Demir et al., 2020; Omri, 2020). It is evident that a relationship exists between innovation and the environmental dimension of sustainable development. Consequently, we formulate the third hypothesis as follows:

• HP3: There is a positive relationship between organizational innovation and the environmental dimension of sustainable development in Saudi Arabia.

2.4. Innovation and information and communication technology (ICT)

Organizational innovation is crucial for survival and growth in today’s dynamic business environment. Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has become essential for organizations to enhance innovation capabilities. The integration of ICT in organizational innovation processes has been found to impact innovation outcomes and overall organizational performance significantly. The use of ICT in innovation processes enables organizations to access and process large amounts of data, facilitating knowledge creation and management. This can lead to improved decision-making, faster product development, and enhanced operational efficiency (Ben Khalifa, 2022). The integration of ICT can also enable organizations to collaborate with partners and customers from different geographic locations, creating new ideas and solutions (Dahan et al., 2010). Moreover, using ICT can enable organizations to adopt open innovation practices, which involve collaborating with external partners to create new ideas and technologies (Meng et al., 2021). This can lead to faster innovation and reduced costs for organizations, as they can leverage the expertise of external partners. However, integrating ICT in innovation processes also presents some challenges for organizations.

ICT platforms enable stakeholder communication, collaboration, and knowledge-sharing, promoting organisational sustainability. The use of ICT helps generate eco-friendly products by facilitating research, design, and the use of sustainable materials, as well as customer participation (Fernandes et al., 2022; Xiao & Su, 2022). Through modelling, simulations, and data analytics, ICT helps organisations understand and manage the sustainability impacts of their innovations. The use of ICT improves the efficacy, efficiency, and reach of sustainable practices and initiatives, mediating the relationship between innovation and sustainable performance (Omri, 2020). The use of ICT enables real-time monitoring, communication, and data-driven decision-making across an organization’s activities, supporting and amplifying sustainable ideas.

One of the main challenges is the management of the large amounts of data generated by ICT systems. This requires organizations to develop robust data governance frameworks and invest in analytics capabilities (Dahan et al., 2010). In addition, integrating ICT in innovation processes may require organizations to invest significantly in technology and infrastructure. This can be particularly challenging for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which may not have the resources to invest in expensive ICT systems (Thacker et al., 2019; Won & Park, 2020). The integration of ICT in organizational innovation processes can significantly impact innovation outcomes and overall organizational performance (Wu et al., 2018). However, it is essential for organizations to carefully manage the challenges associated with using ICT in innovation processes and ensure they have the necessary capabilities and resources to leverage the benefits of ICT for innovation. Thus, it is evident that a relationship exists between innovation in organizations and the use of communication technology (ICT) in Saudi Arabia. Consequently, we formulate the third hypothesis as follows:

• HP4: There is a positive relationship between organizational innovation and communication technology (ICT) use in Saudi Arabia.

2.5. ICT as a mediating effect on the relationship between innovation and sustainable development

Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) employment stands between innovation and sustainable development, as it is shown by a combination of theoretical approaches and empirical data that demonstrates ICT potential as a transformative force within the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of sustainability. Innovation diffusion theory (Rogers, 2003), as well as social capital (Ravazzoli & Valero, 2020), economic development (Mazzucato, 2018; Rogers, 2003), and eco-efficiency paradigm together can be understood as emerging as a leading factor of adoption of innovative practices, without which Evidence has proved that ICT performs two roles—it improves communication system and automatically the operations and the quality of decision-making processes—in person which is directly associated with social inclusivity increase, economic competitiveness growth, and environmental stewardship. This observable outcome puts ICT at the forefront of sustainability in not only supporting sustainable practices but also in having an amplifying effect of innovation on sustainable development. Thus, the research concludes to the fact that the ICT playing the mediating role is one of the factors to consider in the manner in which innovation is influencing the Sustainable Development Goals consideration in the context of Saudi Arabian companies. This leads to the formulation of the following hypotheses, aimed at dissecting the mediating role of ICT across the aforementioned dimensions of sustainable development: This leads to the formulation of the following hypotheses, aimed at dissecting the mediating role of ICT across the aforementioned dimensions of sustainable development:

• HP5: The relationship between innovation and the social dimension of sustainable development in Saudi Arabian organizations is mediated by the adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs).

• HP6: The relationship between innovation and the economic dimension of sustainable development in Saudi Arabian organizations is mediated by the adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs).

• HP7: The relationship between innovation and the environmental dimension of sustainable development in Saudi Arabian organizations is mediated by the adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs).

Based on the literature review discussed above, it can be inferred that this study comprises seven hypotheses illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Study model.

3. Methodology

The questionnaire was in Arabic and was used to increase its accessibility and comprehensibility toward the target population. This form was distributed online to minimize human error during the data collection process. A quota-sampling method along with expanding the number of respondents from all over the regions of Saudi Arabia made the study population diverse and also representative. By making use of the electronic distribution, the possibilities to the participants were made more broad which in turn made their work manageable. The application of this method made data collection easy and streamlined while guaranteeing that speed, as well as the accuracy of data aggregation, was maintained concerning feedback anticipated to be gathered through ICT through the dimensions of sustainable development (economic, social, and environmental) within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The survey was structured starting with the introductory part that briefly explained the study’s objectives, and then continued by asking the important demographic details of the respondents. Following that there was a series of detailed questions about ICT use, innovation activities and their influence on sustainable development, which was divided among the causal, prerequisite, and outcome impacts.

The research has been done in two contrasting fields; the public and private institutions in Saudi Arabia although different some of the institutions include government agencies as well as corporations in every sector. The choosing of the participants has been influenced by the combination of public directories, government and industry reports and expert opinions. To illustrate the contribution of ICT, innovation and environmental sustainability in these three areas, 407 administrative employees from these institutions took part in this study and offered their experiences. Thus, an approach aimed at gathering a complete yet representative sample was adopted. Data was collected using a self-administered questionnaire featuring a 5-point Likert scale, which met the recommended criteria for content, construct, and criterion-related validity. The questionnaire used in this study was adopted based on the study’s variables and the literature review. The use of ICT was adapted with 7 items from Wu et al. (2018) and Thacker et al. (2019); the innovation was adopted with 7 items from Silvestre and Ţîrcă (2019) and Abbas et al. (2020); and the sustainability development was adopted with 18 items (Abbas and Sağsan, 2020; Chams & García-Blandón, 2019; Polasky et al., 2019). The variables were selected according to the research problem, which aimed to determine the mediating role of information and communication technologies (ICTs) usage in the relationship between innovation and dimensions of sustainable development in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire was designed to gather data on the respondents’ demographic information and perceptions of the study variables. The questions related to the variables were based on the findings from the literature review, which identified the critical dimensions of sustainable development and the relationship between innovation and the use of ICTs in promoting sustainable development. Specifically, the questionnaire drew on Table 1, which detailed the relationship between innovation and the use of ICTs, and Table 2, which outlined the dimensions of sustainable development.

Table 1. Questionnaire development for ICTs and innovation.

Variables	Items	Code	Source	Alpha
Use of information and communication technology (ICTs)	owning computers	ICT1	Wu et al., 2018 Thacker et al., 2019	0.896
	Using computers	ICT2
	internal network	ICT3
	external network	ICT4
	using the Internet	ICT5
	Using modern technology	ICT6
	Spending on communications technology	ICT7
Innovation	Innovation and renewal of production	INV1	Silvestre & Ţîrcă, 2019 (Abbas et al., 2020)	0.909
	Innovation and renewal of products	INV2
	Innovation and renewal of administrative systems	INV3
	Innovation and renewal in the field of communication	INV5
	Funding of applied research projects	INV6
	Benefit from the results and outputs of scientific and applied research	INV7

Table 2. Questionnaire development for dimensions of sustainable development.

Variables	Items	Code	Source	Alpha
Economic dimension	Encouraging investment in sustainable infrastructure and technologies.	ECD1	(Polasky et al., 2019) (Rossi et al., 2020) (Schlaile et al., 2017)	0.903
	Adopting sustainable supply chain management practices.	ECD2
	Promoting responsible production and consumption patterns.	ECD3
	Implementing strategies to reduce waste and resource consumption.	ECD4
	Supporting local communities and economies.	ECD5
	Emphasizing long-term profitability over short-term gains.	ECD6
Social dimension	Ensuring fair labor practices and safe working conditions.	SOD1	(Chams & García-Blandón, 2019). (Watson et al., 2017). (Fridhi, 2021)	0.823
	Promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace.	SOD2
	Providing access to education, healthcare, and other basic services.	SOD3
	Supporting community development initiatives.	SOD4
	Engaging in philanthropic activities.	SOD5
	Fostering partnerships and collaborations with local organizations.	SOD6
Environmental dimension	Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating climate change impacts.	END1	(Abbas and Sağsan, 2020). (Hockerts & Wüstenhagen, 2010). (Kirchherr et al., 2017). (Sovacool et al., 2022).	0.915
	Protecting and restoring ecosystems and biodiversity.	END2
	Implementing sustainable water management practices.	END3
	Reducing pollution and minimizing waste generation.	END4
	Promoting renewable energy sources.	END5
	Incorporating circular economy principles into business operations	END6

The present study’s methodology was informed by a review of relevant literature, which led to an evaluation of three techniques to assess the study’s model: (i) multiple linear regression (MLR), (ii) system dynamics (SD), and (iii) structural equation modeling (SEM). Upon evaluation, it was determined that MLR was not applicable due to its inability to account for the interdependence of variables, which was a fundamental limitation of this study. On the other hand, SD could not be utilized due to the nature of the data, which was not time-dependent. Finally, SEM was deemed the most suitable approach as it enabled the examination of the relationships between various observable and unobservable factors. Specifically, partial least squares-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was considered a valuable tool for identifying and dealing with variable faults.

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive statistics (profile of respondents)

Table 3 presents a comprehensive breakdown of the survey participants, totaling 407 individuals. It is perceivable that most respondents are male, constituting 67.5%, while females represent 32.5%. The age distribution highlights a relatively youthful cohort, with 53.8% of participants falling below 40. Educational attainment among the respondents differs significantly, with a majority possessing a Bachelor’s degree (43.7%), followed by those with less than a bachelor’s level of education (28.3%). Notably, an extensive section has pursued higher education, with 20% possessing a Master’s degree and 8% holding a Doctoral degree. Concerning employment sectors, participants largely originate from government establishments, constituting 65%, as opposed to 35% from private establishments. Geographically, the sample is dispersed throughout various regions, with the most significant representation from the Al-Jouf region itself (26.6%), followed by the Mecca (20%) and Riyadh (19%) regions. The Northern border and Hail regions exhibit the lowest representation, constituting 21% and 13.4%, respectively.

Table 3. Profile of respondents (N = 407).

Variables	Category	Frequency	Percentage %
Gender	Male	275	67.5
	Female	132	32.5
Age	30 years & below	102	25
	31–40 years	115	28.3
	41–50 years	142	35
	Above 51 years	48	11.7
Education level	Less than bachelor	115	28.3
	Bachelor	178	43.7
	Masters degree	81	20
	Doctoral degree	33	8
Sector	Public Institutions	265	65
	Private Institutions	142	35
Regions	Al-Jouf region	109	26.6
	Mecca region	81	20
	Hail region	55	13.4
	Northern border region	85	21
	Riyadh region	77	19

4.2. Assessing the measurement model

To ensure a more valid and suitable model for research purposes, it is crucial to establish high levels of validity and reliability. In this study, the relationships between the constructs were analyzed using the Smart PLS program, which utilizes trajectory modeling algorithms to estimate the trajectory models through latent variables. Additionally, the measurement and structural model of the data were estimated (Tenenhaus, 2004). The reliability and validity of the study model were evaluated based on several indices, including Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability, and average variance extracted, which were calculated to assess the stability of the factors and their saturations with their underlying constructs.

The statistical analysis results of the concurrent validity test of the study data and model, conducted using Smart PLS 4, are presented in Table 4 and Figure 2.

Figure 2. Output loading of factors.

Table 4. Internal reliability and convergent validity.

Variables	Items	Loadings	Alpha Cronbach CA	Composite reliability CR	Average variance values AVE
Use of information and communication technology (ICTs)	ICT1	0.688	0.900	0.904	0.629
	ICT2	0.721
	ICT3	0.700
	ICT4	0.879
	ICT5	0.880
	ICT6	0.848
	ICT7	0.851
Innovation	INV1	0.780	0.899	0.902	0.625
	INV2	0.799
	INV3	0.838
	INV4	0.732
	INV5	0.757
	INV6	0.828
	INV7	0.790
Economic dimension	ECD1	0.856	0.903	0.917	0.673
	ECD2	0.883
	ECD3	0.867
	ECD4	0.899
	ECD5	0.861
	ECD6	0.848
Social dimension	SOD1	0.749	0.823	0.848	0.566
	SOD2	0.802
	SOD3	0.750
	SOD4	0.743
	SOD5	0.685
	SOD6	0.720
Environmental dimension	END1	0.785	0.915	0.920	0.702
	END2	0.741
	END3	0.831
	END4	0.742
	END5	0.797
	END6	0.806

Source: Prepared by researchers based on Smart PLS 4 outputs.

Internal reliability and convergent validity are crucial indicators of the quality of a research model. To assess internal reliability, several statistical measures such as Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability, and average variance extracted (AVE) are used (Sarstedt et al., 2022). On the other hand, convergent validity is evaluated by examining the degree to which different measures of the same construct are related (Henseler et al., 2015). The study variables’ reliability and convergent validity indicators achieved high values, as shown in Table 3 and Figure 2. The factor loadings ranged between 0.700 and 0.899, indicating good stability coefficients (Hair et al., 2019). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (CA) and composite reliability (CR) values ranged between 0.823 and 0.920, while the mean-variance values (AVE) ranged between 0.566 and 0.702. It is evident from the tables above that all mean variances (AVE) exceeded 0.5, and all composite reliability coefficients (CR) were statistically significant and acceptable as they exceeded 0.7. Furthermore, all Cronbach’s alpha coefficients (CA) were also statistically acceptable, exceeding 0.7 and within the recommended rates, according to Dijkstra and Henseler (2015).

4.3. Discriminant validity

Discriminant validity is a crucial aspect of construct validity in PLS-SEM (Hair et al., 2017). It refers to the degree to which a measure is distinct from other measures that should not be related. Discriminant validity is typically assessed using either the Fornell-Larcker or the HTMT criterion (Henseler et al., 2015). The Fornell-Larcker criterion compares the square root of each construct’s average variance extracted (AVE) to the correlations between constructs. In contrast, the HTMT criterion compares the correlations between constructs to the correlations between the items measuring each construct. Establishing discriminant validity is essential in ensuring data analysis results’ validity and reliability (Hair et al., 2017).

Table 5 displays the discriminant validity indicators per Fornell and Larcker (1981), which are determined when the diagonal elements (i.e. the root square of the average value of the common variance AVE for each construct) are more significant than the associated values in rows and columns. The results indicate that all the diagonal values exceed the associated values in the rows and columns, ranging between 0.752 and 0.890, signifying that the items have discriminant validity.

Table 5. The results of the discriminant validity of the items (Fornell-Larcker criterion).

	ECD	END	ICT	INV	SOD
ECD	0.820
END	0.755	0.838
ICT	0.304	0.322	0.849
INV	0.299	0.318	0.793	0.890
SOD	0.410	0.411	0.647	0.678	0.752

Source: Prepared by researchers based on Smart PLS 4 outputs.

According to Dijkstra and Henseler (2015), when the HTMT criterion is less than 0.90, the two reflective structures are considered almost identical and have a weak relationship. Table 6 demonstrates that all values are below 0.90, indicating that the items are dependable and valid. Consequently, the model’s discriminant validity (HTMT) is trustworthy because it satisfies the minimum values and excludes the presence of multiple collinearities.

Table 6. HTMT discriminatory validity test.

	ECD	END	ICT	INV	SOD
ECD
END	0.830
ICT	0.327	0.351
INV	0.321	0.347	0.643
SOD	0.458	0.469	0.677	0.712

Source: Prepared by researchers based on Smart PLS outputs.

4.4. Assessing the structural model

To check the model fit, the predictive relevance of the structural model can be assessed using the coefficient of determination (R²) and the effect size (f²). These measures quantify the amount of variance in the endogenous construct explained by the exogenous constructs and the effect size of the model, respectively (Avkiran, 2018).

The coefficient of determination (R²), which measures the impact of independent variables on latent dependent variables, was calculated using one of the parameters of the structural model. Hair et al. (2017) noted that R² values of 0.19, 0.33, or 0.67 generally indicate low, moderate, or high levels of impact, respectively. Additionally, adjusted R² values can be utilized to evaluate the overall quality of different models or to compare models under different conditions. The results of this study indicate that the exogenous factors exhibit significant variability, while the endogenous variables demonstrate substantial variation. By employing these statistical measures, the study was able to provide a rigorous evaluation of the structural model and the impact of its constituent variables on the dependent and independent constructs.

A set of criteria and statistical methods were employed to assess the suitability of the structural model used in the study, as presented in Table 7. The coefficient of determination, R², was utilized to measure the proportion of variance in the dependent variables that could be accounted for by the model. Specifically, the R² value for the path of innovation towards ICTs in the model was 0.715, indicating that the model could explain 71.5% of the variance in ICTs. In addition, R² was estimated for each of the dimensions of sustainable development to determine the variation in these dimensions due to the mediating role of ICTs, as outlined in Table 7. By employing these rigorous statistical methods, the study thoroughly evaluated the structural model and its ability to elucidate the relationship between innovation, ICTs, and sustainable development.

Table 7. Criteria for the study model structural fit.

Variables	R-Square	R-Square Adjusted	Variance Explained	Explanatory Power F2
ECD	0.690	0.688	High	0.588
END	0.505	0.502	High	0.316
SOD	0.476	0.474	High	0.215
ICT	0.673	0.672	High	/

The f2 effect size serves as a metric to gauge the potency of each exogenous variable in explicating endogenous variables. When the f2 value falls between 0.02 and 0.14, it is classified as a small effect. Conversely, if the f2 value varies from 0.15 to 0.34, it is deemed to have a moderate effect. On the other hand, if the f2 value surpasses 0.35, it is regarded as a significant effect. Any f2 value lower than 0.02 denotes that the construct lacks any impact on the endogenous construct, according to Dijkstra and Henseler (2015). To assess the influence of innovation on the various aspects of sustainable development via ICT, as per factor (F2). The results indicate that the impact on the economic dimension was strong, with a value of (0.588), in contrast to the impact on the environmental dimension, which was moderate, with a value of (0.312). Furthermore, the effect on the social dimension through ICT was weak, with a value of (0.215).

Table 8 shows the SRMR and NFI values for the saturated and estimated models. The SRMR values are acceptable, with the estimated model only slightly higher than the saturated model. The NFI value for the estimated model is 0.943, which indicates a reasonably good fit for the data. These results suggest that the estimated model fits the data well and can be used to conclude the study.

Table 8. Results of GOODNESS-OF-FIT.

	Saturated model	Estimated model
SUMMER	0.070	0.071
d_ULS	3.799	4.011
d_G	0.953	0.987
Chi-square	2229.145	2279.767
NFI	0.911	0.955

4.5. Testing the study hypotheses

The hypotheses were tested after ensuring that the variables’ dimensions do not overlap and that the study data adhered to a normal distribution. The minor squares analysis (PLS) based on the bootstrapping test was utilized to analyze the direct and indirect influence between the study variables.

Based on the results presented in Table 9, we can draw the following results:

Table 9. Hypothesis testing.

Relationship	β	t-Value	Significance level P	Decision
HP1: INV -> SOD	0.461	4.970	0.000	Hypothesis Accepted**
HP2: INV -> ECD	0.146	1.783	0.113	Hypothesis Rejected*
HP3: INV -> END	0.162	1.731	0.142	Hypothesis Rejected*
HP4: INV -> ICT	0.849	52.955	0.000	Hypothesis Accepted**

Significant at P** = < 0.01, p*<0.05.

HP1 was accepted, indicating a positive relationship between organizational innovation and the social dimension of sustainable development in Saudi Arabia. The β coefficient of 0.461 and the t-value of 4.970 indicate a statistically significant relationship, with a p-value of less than 0.01. This means we can reject the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between organizational innovation and the social dimension of sustainable development in Saudi Arabia.HP2 and HP3 were rejected, indicating no significant relationship between organizational innovation and sustainable development’s economic and environmental dimensions in Saudi Arabia. The β coefficients of 0.146 and 0.162 and the t-values of 1.783 and 1.731, respectively, have p-values greater than 0.05. This means we fail to reject the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between organizational innovation and sustainable development’s economic and environmental dimensions in Saudi Arabia.HP4 was accepted, indicating a positive relationship between organizational innovation and communication technology (ICT) use in Saudi Arabia. The β coefficient of 0.849 and the t-value of 52.955 have p-values less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship. This means we can reject the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between organizational innovation and communication technology (ICT) use in Saudi Arabia. These results suggest that innovation in organizations is more strongly related to the social dimension of sustainable development and communication technology (ICT) use in Saudi Arabia than sustainable development’s economic and environmental dimensions.

Table 10 shows the indirect effects of innovation on the three dimensions of sustainable development through the mediating variable of information and communication technologies (ICTs), bootstrapped confidence intervals, and the decision on the type of mediation (partial or complete).

Table 10. Indirect effects.

Relationship	Indirect effect			Bootstrapped confidence interval		Decision
	Path Coeff	t-Value	Significance level P	2.5%	97.5%
HP5: INV ->ICT-> SOD	0.153	1.904	0.047	0.006	0.303	Partial mediation
HP6: INV ->ICT-> ECD	0.156	1.831	0.037	0.016	0.320	Full mediation
HP7: INV ->ICT-> END	0.217	2.693	0.007	0.059	0.372	Full mediation

Significant at P** = < 0.01, p*<0.05.

For HP5, the indirect effect of innovation on the social dimension of sustainable development through ICTs is significant (indirect effect = 0.153), with a p-value of 0.047. The bootstrapped confidence interval for this effect ranges from 0.006 to 0.303. The decision on the type of mediation is partial, which means that ICTs partially mediate the relationship between innovation and the social dimension of sustainable development.

For HP6, the indirect effect of innovation on the economic dimension of sustainable development through ICTs is also significant (indirect effect = 0.156), with a p-value of 0.037. The bootstrapped confidence interval for this effect ranges from 0.016 to 0.320. The decision on the type of mediation is complete, which means that ICTs fully mediate the relationship between innovation and the economic dimension of sustainable development.

For HP7, the indirect effect of innovation on the environmental dimension of sustainable development through ICTs is significant (indirect effect = 0.217), with a p-value of 0.007. The bootstrapped confidence interval for this effect ranges from 0.059 to 0.372. The decision on the type of mediation is also complete, which means that ICTs fully mediate the relationship between innovation and the environmental dimension of sustainable development.

The table also indicates the significance level of the indirect effects (P** = < 0.01, p*<0.05), which shows that all indirect effects are statistically significant. These findings suggest that ICTs play an essential role in mediating the relationship between innovation and sustainable development in Saudi Arabian organizations, with full or partial mediation depending on the dimension of sustainable development.

5. Discussion

The results obtained in Table 9 and Table 10 are interconnected, as Table 10 focuses on the indirect effects of innovation on sustainable development dimensions mediated by the adoption of ICTs. In contrast, Table 9 directly tests the relationship between innovation and sustainable development dimensions and the relationship between creation and the use of ICTs.

The disproof of hypotheses bearing on the cogency of innovation in the economic and environmental aspects of sustainable development in the private firms calls for reflective analysis within the larger discursive domain of sustainability. As observed, solid positive correlations occur between innovation and the social dimension as well as ICT adoption illustrating a clear way to improve social sustainability and ICT absorption meanwhile the lack of statistical significance in the economic and environmental impacts clearly spot novel difficulties or some of the aspects that are ignored in the open nexus between innovation and sustainability.

This contrast can be considered as a major reflection of the accepted concept for the time being that Saudi institutions are basing their innovation efforts on the social sustainability and ICT modernization areas at the expense of the greater economic and environmental benefits. This may point to the fact that such an issue is of the utmost importance along with all other concerns inspiring civil society to champion issues of public well-being and equity (Fridhi, 2021; Thacker et al., 2019; Watson et al., 2017; Won & Park, 2020). Nevertheless, it should be stressed that the rise of new technologies does not undermine the crucial role played by the integration between the environmental and economic sustainabilities into the new tech agenda.

Through a study, the necessity of a balanced approach to innovation is highlighted, such that technological growth is not just relentless, but also it should be accompanied by a mere innovation in this era and addressing environmental sustainability and challenges. The necessity here probably refers to the existing conditions of MSA specifically that might challenge some the methodologies and/or contexts, for instance industry specific sustainability issues, macroeconomy policies, and the environmental regulations that the entities should comply with which might differ from such conditions in other parts of the world. The indirect impacts listed in Table 10 not only underline the intermediary role of ICT adoption as a factor in internalizing the effect of innovation to sustainable development across social, economic and environmental dimensions for Saudi organizations, but also generate a vivid picture of how ICT plays this role. In contrast, it is worth referring that the highest mediation effect here is identified in the sphere of environment which indicates the particular importance of ICT implementation in terms of ecological sustainability.

This study comes in line with the previous findings which involved ICT as a cardinal factor that drives development by notably achievement of the sustainable development goal especially in developing countries. ICTs adopt improved communication and collaboration among stakeholders, sustainability practices and efficiency of the organization, and can generally contribute to the goal of development, which makes the sustainable development a reality (Meng et al., 2021; Won & Park, 2020).

The mediation assessment has proved that ICT adaption indeed plays the role of a significant intermediator between which the innovation results determine the sustainability of development outcomes. This means that innovational resources can be better facilitated by the utilization of ICT for the purposes of sustaining organizational performance across different dimensions such as environment or product quality improvement. ICTs that assist organizations in implementation of sustainable practices by facilitating more efficient data management, communication and co-ordination. As an example, there are various instances where ICTs can be used to facilitate environmental data analysis and, depending on the results that we get, the ecological footprints can be managed through the development of strageties that mitigates the impact.

Another important mediator is the adoption impact of ICT. Consequently, the organizations promoting the replication of the ICT use are in a better position to exploit innovation for sustainable development goals. However, the view is rooted in studies proving that ICT adoption not only improves innovations by providing the latest gadgets and instruments but also by stimulating stakeholders’ contribution and shared knowledge base.

Generally speaking, by means of this study’s research the role of technology, exclusively informatics and computer technology, as the driver of sustainable development is highlighted and emphasized. The integration of ICT will surely raise the pace of innovation within an organization. This will have combined positive effects on the social, economic, and environmental aspects of sustainability.

6. Conclusions

The study confirmed that Information and Communication Technologies become the vital link between innovation and sustainable development within the Saudi Arabian framework for corporations. On the other hand, studies findings reveal that innovation and social development have relatively high correlations, and that the utilization of ICT is another significant factor in sustainable development. On the contrary, the integrance of ICTs has the biggest effect on the communication pattern between the mentioned two terms—innovation and the set of sustainable development dimensions: economic, environmental and social.

Throughout this research, the presentation of both policy- and organization-level ICTs application is advocated, through which the efficiency and innovation of organizations can be improved. This is believed to save huge amounts of money spent on the oil industry and a great number of impacts on the nature. Furthermore, Community information and communication technologies (ICTs) that act as coordinating platforms of people responsible for driving sustainable development are emphasized as imperative.

7. Recommendations

In the light of the research results, specific suggestions are given in most favorable contexts for both public and private sectors of Saudi Arabia where ICT-supported services are provided. These recommendations aim to guide policymakers, institutional owners, and sector officials in leveraging ICT for enhanced innovation and sustainability across environmental, economic, and social dimensions: These recommendations aim to guide policymakers, institutional owners, and sector officials in leveraging ICT for enhanced innovation and sustainability across environmental, economic, and social dimensions:

1. Authorities and senior office holders should set a budget to develop and the implementation of ICT infrastructure. Besides, the organizations should be equipped with adequate tools and technology needed to promote innovation and sustainability activities.

2. The environmental dimension has a lot of influence on innovation. Therefore, activities and policies that are directed towards an environmentally sustainable approach are worth consideration. This could be done by encouraging green technologies, green spacing layouts and building energy-efficient systems into the organization’s operations.

3. Create policies that make use of ICT for sustainable development, for instance, smart cities advancements, ICT programs for information sharing and education, and digital health solutions. Such policies need to be designed to tackle critical issues of society and give a glimpse of a sustainable life.

4. Stimulate the development of the sphere of innovation in organizations using demonstrating to people the practical ways, providing resources and influencing to it economically. The culture in question should promote an imaginative and abstract approach alongside testing and exploring, which in turn facilitate the invention of durable solutions.

5. Foster partnerships and others between organizations to be able to share knowledge, best methods of practice and technology. Collaboration helps to strengthen the deal about the role of innovation in reaching set goals about sustainability on all fronts.

6. Periodically review the conversion of ICT interventions to achieving sustainable development goals.

7. Design educational programs, awareness campaigns, and demonstrations that focus on the IT role in promoting sustainable development. Education is the number one goal which hence should incorporate all the organization levels to ensure that this understanding and commitment is received at all levels.

8. Limitations and future implications

The limitations of this study are due to three factors: the scheme of study covering most of the public and private sectors, the cross-sectional design aiming to survey injustice, the focus on the Saudi Arabian workforce, and the reliance on self-reported data. Along the same line, future research may focus on the relation between innovativeness and organizational performance of innovation-intensive organizations. Emphasis on conducting longitudinal studies with a causal approach, examining these relationships in different geographical contexts, and using a mixed-methods approach for enhancing the accuracy of findings are suggested. The steps will further enhance the understanding of the role of ICT in sustainable development unlike in providing actionable insights. The global and local policy and organizational strategies will be developed and implemented.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Jouf University through the Fast-track Research Funding Program.

Notes on contributors

Naeimah Fahad S. Almawishir

Dr. Naeimah Fahad S. Almawishir is an assistant professor at Jouf University in Saudi Arabia, where she actively teaches and conducts research. Her primary research interests include entrepreneurship, economics, and sustainability.

Houcine Benlaria

Dr. Houcine Benlaria serves as an Associate Professor at Jouf University in Saudi Arabia, engaging both in teaching and research. His research focuses predominantly on economics, sustainable development, the knowledge economy, and renewable energy sources.