Entrepreneurial universities and integrated sustainability for the knowledge-based economy: self-perception and some structural challenges in the Gulf region

The paper investigates how higher education institutions in the Gulf—particularly Qatar University (QU)—are repositioning towards entrepreneurial university models to advance national knowledge-based economy (KBE) agendas. Set against the political economy of hydrocarbon-based rentier states, it explores whether KBE is compatible with redistributive public-sector policies and whether national universities can overcome structural constraints (e.g., small national population, risk-averse culture, public-sector job preferences) to foster innovation and entrepreneurship. The study frames HEIs as central actors expected to expand beyond traditional teaching and research to a third mission of economic development, aligning with national strategies like Qatar National Vision 2030. It aims to analyze QU’s entrepreneurial reforms in teaching, research, and governance, and to contextualize them within national ecosystem gaps and broader socio-political factors.

The conceptual background links KBE to the primacy of knowledge, innovation, and highly skilled human capital as drivers of growth. Entrepreneurship is presented as a key mechanism enabling innovation, firm creation, job growth, and competitive dynamism, including social entrepreneurship’s role in addressing societal challenges. Expectations on HEIs in KBE include university–industry collaboration, technology transfer, incubators/accelerators, and diversified funding. The entrepreneurial university is defined as an institution integrating entrepreneurship into teaching, research, and governance to cultivate an entrepreneurial culture and contribute to regional development. The literature highlights heterogeneity of local implementation, limits of neoliberal reforms, and the importance of context. Frameworks such as Cunningham et al.’s stages of entrepreneurship (latent, emergent, launch, growth) and Guerrero et al.’s missions (human, knowledge, and entrepreneurial capital) guide analysis. The review emphasizes Gulf-specific challenges: rentier-state dynamics, nascent ecosystems, cultural risk aversion, and regulatory constraints, while noting international models (US/UK, Singapore, Malaysia) often inspire but require contextual adaptation.

A qualitative case study of Qatar University was conducted in two stages. Stage 1: Semi-structured interviews (May–June 2022) with key QU informants responsible for entrepreneurship strategy and implementation, including leaders from the Center for Entrepreneurship and Organizational Excellence (CEOE), the Office of Strategic Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Economic Development (SIEED), deanships of the College of Engineering and the College of Business and Economics, and Graduate Learning Support. Interviews covered the status of reforms, perceived successes/challenges, and unit roles. Contemporaneous notes were taken and supplemented immediately post-interview. Insights were triangulated with policy documents, observations, and academic/non-academic sources. Researchers (current/former QU academics) also engaged in participatory observations at major entrepreneurship conferences at QU in 2022–2023 and selected activities to validate findings. Stage 2: A structured Scopus literature review searched for terms combining “entrepreneurship/entrepreneurial university,” “university/higher education,” and “GCC/Gulf,” yielding 191 items; after screening for relevance to university entrepreneurial ecosystems and context, 20 papers remained to contextualize findings. The analysis applied Guerrero et al.’s framework on the three missions and considered internal reforms alongside national ecosystem and political economy factors.

- Qatar’s KBE performance lags peers despite strong infrastructure and political will. In the 2021 Global Innovation Index (GII), Qatar ranked 68/132 overall; fell below the high-income average across all pillars; education sub-pillar scored 40.1 with rank 94. Strengths include tertiary inbound mobility (rank 1) and university–industry R&D collaboration (rank 14); weaknesses include low education expenditure (rank 105), ease of getting credit (rank 101), and very low investment indicators. - QU’s scale and role: QU is Qatar’s oldest and largest university (founded 1977) with over 21,000 students in 2022 (70%+ female), 10 colleges and 94 programs, and is the main implementing partner for national research strategy since 2019. It hosts most of Qatar’s undergraduates and is central to entrepreneurial reforms. - Teaching and learning reforms: Entrepreneurship is embedded via five Educational Excellence Themes (Digitally Enriched; Learner-Centric; Experiential; Entrepreneurial; Research-Informed), with training through CETL and use of experiential methods (living labs, simulations, case studies, entrepreneur talks). “Entrepreneurial” is a graduate attribute (with creativity/innovation, collaboration, management, interpersonal and leadership competences). An undergraduate major in Entrepreneurship and Innovations and the CEOE (with an executive master’s) were established; the Honors Program includes modules on design thinking, launching businesses, leadership, digital technologies, 4IR and SD. - Student engagement and early research: QU funds student grants, includes students in internal/external grants (e.g., QNRF), and runs programs like the National Science Promotion Program. Increased co-authorship by students in publications and capstone projects was reported (unquantified). - Research and partnerships: Entrepreneurship is a Transformative Priority within QU’s Social Sciences and Humanities Research Pillar. QU reported ~400 projects with partners in 130+ countries and over $400 million in research grants in the past decade, with growing collaborations with QDB, QSTP, and QBIC to support pre-seed, incubation, and acceleration. - Institutional reorientation: QU’s 2018–2023 Transformational Strategy positions entrepreneurship and innovation as enabling strategies (Goals 1, 2, and 6). The SIEED office (under the President) coordinates cross-sector innovation and entrepreneurship, providing consultations, pre-seed funds, program design support, and access to external finance alongside CEOE. Advisory boards with industry enhance curricular relevance. - Example outcomes: Student venture support through QU Business Incubator (e.g., Xdensity, Bonocle, SUBOL, Sky Climbers, Being You). Increased exposure to real-world problem-solving, entrepreneur interactions, and training are fostering entrepreneurial attitudes. - Contextual limitations: Novelty of reforms and emergent ecosystem; cooperation focuses on large state-linked actors; high national expectations concentrated on QU; gaps linking school education and industry with university efforts; regulatory hurdles; cultural risk aversion and preference for public-sector jobs; difficulty defining/measuring long-term entrepreneurial outcomes. A top-down approach alone is less effective; incentives and bottom-up culture-building are needed.

The findings indicate that QU has internalized the entrepreneurial university model by integrating entrepreneurship across teaching, research, and governance while preserving its academic identity. This addresses the research questions by showing: (1) KBE ambitions in a rentier-state context face binding constraints—cultural risk aversion, regulatory barriers, and public-sector preferences—that dampen entrepreneurial outcomes; and (2) national universities can partially overcome structural limitations through systematic, institution-wide reforms and partnerships, but broader ecosystem changes are crucial. QU’s efforts span both exploration and exploitation stages, reflecting a dynamic, hybrid trajectory rather than a linear path. Success hinges on leadership, governance, and consistent strategies that cultivate an entrepreneurial ethos, with institutionalized monitoring and learning. The analysis underscores that imported models must be contextualized; imitation without fit risks unrealistic expectations. Current interventions emphasize economic goals (commercialization, private-sector job creation) over broader sustainability aims, aligning with national diversification imperatives. The study situates Gulf experiences within debates on neoliberalization and academic capitalism, highlighting differences from regions with long-standing university–industry linkages and indicating the importance of political economy in shaping feasible outcomes.

The study contributes a contextualized account of how a national university in a rentier state advances entrepreneurial university reforms in pursuit of a KBE. It documents QU’s comprehensive integration of entrepreneurship into curricula, research priorities, governance, and external partnerships, and shows initial outcomes such as student venture support and increased industry engagement. It also identifies ecosystem and cultural constraints that limit rapid translation into innovation outputs and private-sector employment. Recommendations include: developing long-term, consistent strategies to nurture entrepreneurial mindsets; pluralistic approaches engaging internal and external stakeholders; incentive structures for entrepreneurial behavior; recruiting and retaining leadership that embodies entrepreneurship; and diversifying financial strategies to reduce reliance on public funding while sustaining ideas from conception to implementation. Future research should assess labor-market impacts, examine the role of foreign talent, and explore social implications of entrepreneurship reforms. Clarifying facilitators for innovation culture and constituents of home-grown models in Gulf HEIs is needed.

The study is qualitative and centered on a single-institution case (Qatar University), relying on semi-structured interviews with key administrators, document analysis, and participatory observations; generalizability is limited. Interview data were recorded as contemporaneous notes rather than transcripts. Some outcomes (e.g., student publication increases, venture performance) are reported without quantification, and long-term impacts are inherently difficult to measure given the time horizons for entrepreneurial culture change. The literature review, while structured, narrowed to 20 papers and may omit relevant studies. Ecosystem-level metrics and external firm-level data were not systematically analyzed.