The Future of AI in the GCC Post‐ NPM Landscape

A Comparative Analysis of Kuwait and the UAE

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6445472
AutoresMohammad Rashed Albous (0009-0008-8646-3810, autor de correspondencia), Bedour Alboloushi (0000-0001-5736-3185, Kuwait College of Science and Technology), Arnaud Lacheret (0000-0001-6134-7671, SKEMA Business School)
Año2025
Volumen53
Número6
Fecha de publicación2025-11-05
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaPolitics & Policy (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1555-5623 • E-ISSN: 1747-1346
EditorialWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/polp.70084
OpenAlexW4415948851
IdiomaEN
Referencias citadas67

Comparative evidence of how two Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states translate artificial intelligence (AI) ambitions into post–New Public Management (post‐NPM) outcomes are scarce because most studies focus on Western democracies. To fill this gap, we examine constitutional, collective choice, and operational rules that shape AI uptake in two contrasting GCC members, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Kuwait, and whether they foster citizen centricity, collaborative governance, and public value creation. Anchored in Ostrom's Institutional Analysis and Development framework, the study integrates a most similar/most different systems design with multiple sources: 62 public documents issued between 2018 and 2025, embedded UAE cases (Smart Dubai and MBZUAI), and 39 interviews with officials conducted from Aug 2024 to May 2025. Dual coding and process tracing connect rule configurations to AI performance. Our cross‐case analysis identifies four mutually reinforcing mechanisms behind divergent trajectories. In the UAE, concentrated authority, credible sanctions, pro‐innovation narratives, and flexible reinvestment rules transform pilots into hundreds of operating services and significant recycled savings. Kuwait's dispersed veto points, exhortative sanctions, cautious discourse, and lapsed AI budgets, by contrast, confine initiatives to pilot mode despite equivalent fiscal resources. These findings refine institutional theory by showing that vertical rule coherence, not wealth, determines AI's public value yield, and temper post‐NPM optimism by revealing that efficiency metrics advance societal goals only when backed by enforceable safeguards. To curb ethics washing and test the transferability of these mechanisms beyond the GCC, future research should track rule diffusion over time, experiment with blended legitimacy‐efficiency scorecards, and investigate how narrative framing shapes citizen consent for data sharing. Related Articles Robles, P. and D. J. Mallinson 2023. “Catching up With AI: Pushing Toward a Cohesive Governance Framework.” Politics & Policy , 51, no. 3: 355–372. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12529 . Veloso Meireles, A. 2024. “Digital Rights in Perspective: The Evolution of the Debate in the Internet Governance Forum.” Politics & Policy 52, no. 1: 12–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12571 . Zeng, J., T. Stevens, and Y. Chen. 2017. “China's Solution to Global Cyber Governance: Unpacking the Domestic Discourse of ‘Internet Sovereignty.’” Politics & Policy 45 no. 3: 432–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12202