Semantic Reconstruction of the Inefficiency of Development Policymaking in Iran: A Grounded Theory Approach | ||
| پژوهشهای اقتصادی ایران | ||
| Article 5, Volume 29, Issue 100, October 2024, Pages 153-199 PDF (2.02 M) | ||
| Document Type: Research Paper | ||
| DOI: 10.22054/ijer.2024.80094.1284 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Amirhossein Pooreh* 1; Abbas Hatami2 | ||
| 1Ph.D. Candidate in Political Sociology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran | ||
| 2Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran | ||
| Abstract | ||
| More than three decades have passed since the adoption of development policies in Iran following the Islamic Revolution. Despite these efforts, Iran remains in the fourth quarter of development and the first quarter of underdevelopment. While development and underdevelopment cannot solely be attributed to policymaking, it is widely recognized as a critical factor influencing development. Employing the grounded theory approach, the present study sought to uncover the underlying reasons for the failure of development policy in Iran from the perspectives of experts and policymakers. First, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 experts and development policy managers. The collected data was analyzed through three stages of coding: open, axial, and selective. The analysis resulted in 629 primary concepts, which were refined and reduced into 78 subcategories, 24 main categories, and ultimately, one core category. The core category revealed that development policy in Iran suffers from a triangle of inefficiencies: the inefficiency of governance, the inefficiency of social structure, and the inefficiency of the elite order. These three inefficiencies are not isolated but interconnected, forming a kind of ominous triangle that undermines the efficiency of development policy in Iran. If these inefficiencies persist, Iran risks facing a double underdevelopment that can significantly hamper the pursuit of sustainable development. Introduction Development is one of the most pressing concerns for societies and nations worldwide. Various societies have pursued comprehensive and multidimensional progress by implementing diverse strategies, which are often structured as development policies. In the case of Iran, more than three decades have passed since the adoption of development policies following the Islamic Revolution. Yet, the country remains in the fourth quarter of development and the first quarter of underdevelopment, struggling to move beyond this phase. While development and underdevelopment cannot be attributed solely to policymaking, it is widely recognized as a critical factor influencing development. Relying on a grounded theory approach, this research sought to investigate the underlying reasons for the failure of development policy in Iran. It aimed to address the following questions: What are the causal conditions contributing to the inefficiency of development policy in Iran? What are the contextual conditions influencing the inefficiency of development policy in Iran? What are the intervening conditions affecting the inefficiency of development policy in Iran? What strategies can effectively improve the efficiency of development policy in Iran? What are the consequences of implementing strategies to improve the efficiency of development policy in Iran? Materials and Methods The current research used a grounded theory approach. The participants included experts, university professors, managers, and former administrators involved in development policy. A purposive sampling method with a homogeneous approach was applied to enrich the categories, dimensions, and components, as well as to achieve theoretical saturation. As a result, a total of 22 individuals were selected as participants. The data was collected through semi-structured interviews, and the interview process continued until theoretical saturation was reached. For data analysis, the three-stage coding method outlined by Strauss and Corbin (2015) was employed, encompassing open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. Results and Discussion The interviews were analyzed in three stages. During the open coding phase, 629 initial codes were extracted. At the next level of abstraction, these codes were organized into 78 subcategories, and finally categorized into 24 main categories. In the axial coding phase, the main and secondary categories were arranged according to paradigmatic dimensions, including causal conditions, contextual conditions, intervening conditions, strategies, and consequences. In the selective coding phase, a core category was identified, linking all the categories together. The causal conditions contributing to the inefficiency of development policy included: discourse conflicts, an anti-scenario futurism, a weak civil society coupled with a large mass society, the breakdown of elite communication, low institutional quality, an overly interventionist yet weak government, and the unrealistic, wishful thinking in program planning. The contextual conditions exacerbating development policy inefficiency were found to include poor timing, economic–political instability, and a lack of historical awareness. Intervening conditions identified were: epistemic foundations of anti-development, an absence of dialogue, an economic-focused and budget-oriented approach to planning, and an inappropriate composition of policy formulators. The strategies to enhance the efficiency of development policy in Iran, as identified by experts and policymakers, included: downsizing the government while empowering civil society, strengthening social capital, undertaking institutional and organizational reconstruction, adopting strategic foresight, achieving consensus among policymaking elites, and modernizing and screening development plans. If these strategies are implemented, Iran could experience multidimensional development, including improvements in life quality, social development, individual-cum-mental development, environmental livability, political development, and economic development. Conversely, failure to implement these strategies risks perpetuating multilayered underdevelopment, characterized by increasing unbalanced development, declining quality of life, reduced social satisfaction, rising costs, intensification of violence, and underdevelopment across economic, social, political, and environmental dimensions. Finally, the core category underlying these findings is the trinity of inefficiencies: incompetent governance, weak society, and elite disorder. Conclusion According to the research results, development policymaking in Iran suffers from a triangle of inefficiencies: the inefficiency of governance, the inefficiency of social structure, and the inefficiency of elite order. These inefficiencies are not isolated but are deeply interconnected, forming an ominous triangle that undermines development policymaking in Iran. If left unaddressed, it will entrench the country in a state of double underdevelopment and further delay the achievement of sustainable development. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Development Policymaking; Governance System; Elite Order; Civil Society; Grounded Theory | ||
| References | ||
|
Ahmadinejad, F., Kamali, Y. & Sheikhzadeh Joshani, S. (2021). Challenges of development policies implementation in Iran: a thematic analysis. Management and Development Process, 34(2), 29-62. [In Persian]. Doi: 10.52547/jmdp.34.2.29 Arliament Research's Center. (2022). Strategic analysis of the country's economic and social situation on the eve of the 7th development plan along with the presentation of corrective strategies and approaches. Islamic Council Research Center (Economic Studies Office). [In Persian]. Ashtarian, K. (2016). Public Policymaking in Iran, Tehran. Tehran: Mizan Publishing. [In Persian]. Azimi, H. (2011). Iran's economy: planning, politics and culture. Tehran: Ney Publishing. [In Persian]. Boostani, D. & Mohammadpur, A. (2009). Meaning reconstruction of young men's gender orientation toward young women (a grounded theory study). Women's Strategic Studies, 11(44), 142-172. [In Persian]. Doi: 20.1001.1.20082827.1388.11.0.6.9 Chavance, B. (2011). Institutional economics. Translated by Mahmoud Motavaseli and Ali Nikonsabati, Tehran: University of Tehran. [In Persian]. Chilcote, R. H. (1974). Dependency: a critical synthesis of the literature. Latin American Perspectives, 1(1), 4-29. Doi: 10.1177/0094582X74001001 Creswell, J.W. & Miller, D.L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative research. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. Doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 Dadgar, Y. & Nazari, R. (2018). Difficulties of public sector structure as main obstacle for economic progress in Iran. OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development, 11(01), 41-64. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3147821 Dadgar, Y. & Orooji, Z. (2020). Dutch disease, rentier state, and resource curse: A characteristic triangle and ultra-challenge in the Iranian economy. Iranian Economic Review, 24(1), 129-157. Doi: 10.22059/ier.2020.74477 Eyzadi, R. & Heydarpour Inanlu, M. (2014). Investigating the consequences of the five economic development programs of the first and second Pahlavi periods and its role in the formation of the Islamic Revolution of Iran. Economic Sociology and Development, 4(2), 1-27. [In Persian]. Foran, J. (2019). Fragile resistance: Social transformation in Iran from 1500 to the revolution. Routledge. Johnson, C. (1982). MITI and the Japanese miracle: The growth of industrial policy, 1925-1975. California: Stanford University Press. Katouzian, H. (1981). The political economy of modern Iran: Despotism and pseudo-modernism, 1926–1979. Translated by Mohammad Reza Nafisi and Kambiz Azizi, Tehran: Center [In Persian]. Kuye, J.O. (2011). Leadership and governance imperatives in a developmental state: The debate for a public policy dialogue. African Journal of Public Affairs, 4(1), 170-185. https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/17597 Kyianytsia, L.L. (2021). The modernization theory paradigm and its discontents: reviewing the contribution and fallings of the modernization theory to social and political research. Ukrainian policymaker, 8(8), 41-50. Doi:10.29202/UP/8/5 Leftwich, A. (2006). States of development: On the primacy of politics in development. Translated by Javad Afsharkhan, Tehran: Marandiz. [In Persian]. Levy, B. & Fukuyama, F. (2010). Development strategies: integrating governance and growth. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper. Doi: 10.1596/1813-9450-5196 Moameni, F., Mirzaei, H. & Jafari Shahrestani, A. (2022). Evaluating the thoughts of contemporaneous intellectuals concerning the causes of underdevelopment in Iran with an emphasis on property right according to political economy approach. Iranian Journal of Economic Research, 29(99), 5-48. doi: 10.22054/ijer.2022.67001.1084. [In Persian]. Mossalanejad, A. (2022). Syndromes of economic development policy in Iran. Iranian Journal of Public Policy, 7(4), 211-235. [In Persian]. Doi: 10.22059/JPPOLICY.2021.84830 Nafziger, E.W. (2012). Economic development. Cambridge university press. North, D.C. (1994). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Translated by Mohammad Reza Moini, Tehran: Publications of the management and planning organization. [In Persian]. Parliament Research's Center. (2010). General evaluation of development programs after the revolution, program and budget studies (program group). [In Persian]. Pieterse, J.N. (1998). Development theory. London: Sage. Pieterse, J.N. (2016). Development theory: deconstructions/reconstructions. Translated by Anwar Mohammadi, Tehran: Gol-Azin. [In Persian]. Rausser, G.C. & Swinnen, J. (2011). Governance structures, political economy, and public policy. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 93(2), 310-316. Doi: 10.1093/ajae/aaq079 Sajadi, H. (2017). Meta-synthesis of weak points and facilitators of Iran’s national development plans. State Studies, 3(10), 65-108. [In Persian]. Doi: 10.22054/tssq.2017.14044.130 Shariati, SH. (2014). Development Janus in Iran; comparing the results of unbalanced development policies in the Pahlavi regime and the Islamic republic. Cognitive Studies in Islamic University, 19(1), 75-92. [In Persian]. Sifouri, B. & Taqvi, R (2017). Pathology of Iran's development programs before and after the revolution and presentation of key strategies. Afaq Human Sciences, 22, 23-1. [In Persian]. http://pazhouheshha.ir/List.aspx?volume=9035 So, A.Y. (1990). Social change and development: Modernization, dependency and world-system theories. Translated by Mahmoud Habibi Mazaheri, Tehran: Strategic Studies Research Institute Publications. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (2015). Basics of qualitative research. Translated by Ebrahim Afshar, Tehran: Ney.[In Persian]. Tipps, D.C. (2001). Modernization theory and the comparative study of national societies: A critical perspective. Comparative studies in society and history, 15(2), 199-226. Doi: 10.1017/S0010417500007039 Uddin, I., Ahmad, M., Ismailov, D., Balbaa, M.E., Akhmedov, A., Khasanov, S. & Haq, M.U. (2023). Enhancing institutional quality to boost economic development in developing nations: New insights from CS-ARDL approach. Research in Globalization, 7, 100137. Doi: 10.1016/j.resglo.2023.100137 Vitola, A. & Senfelde, M. (2010). The optimization of national development planning system as a precondition for competitiveness and sustainability of national economy. Economics and Management, 15, 325-331. Doi: 15/1822-6515-2010-325 Vlados, C. & Chatzinikolaou, D. (2020). Institutional dynamics and economic development in Greece: An Acemoglian approach. Research in Applied Economics, 12(1), 12-32. Doi: 10.5296/rae.v12i1.16631 Wahid, M. (2015). Public policy. Tehran: Mizan Publishing. [In Persian]. Wallerstein, I.M. (2015). Geopolitics and geoculture: essays on the changing world -system. Translated by Pirouz Izadi. Tehran: Ney Publishing. [In Persian]. Wallerstein, I.M. (2000). The Essential Wallerstein. New York: New Press. Wallerstein, I.M. (1980). The modern world-system II: Mercantilism and the consolidation of the European world-economy, 1600–1750 (Vol. 2). California: University of California Press. Willis, K. (2011). Theories and Practices of Development. London & New York: Routledge. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 333 PDF Download: 229 |
||