Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

• Abbas Soleimani ¹
• Hakem Ghasemi ²
• Masoud Alborzi Verki ³
• Iraj Goljani Amirkhiz ⁴
• Abbas Moghtadaie ⁵

¹ Ph.D Student, Futures Studies, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

² Associate Professor, Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

³ Associate Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

⁴ Assistant Professor, Quran and Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Islamic Science and Research, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

⁵ Assistant Professor, Political Science and International Relations Group, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Shahreza Branch, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
This study aimed to analyze the conflictual futures in the legislative governance of the Islamic Consultative Assembly. It examined the relations of alternative futures, which entail conflict, cooperation, and balance, in order to examine the future of conflictual legislative futures. The study focused on the legislation and the legislative branch in the 2046 horizon. Monitoring in this context serves as a form of prognosis, emphasizing the importance of being prepared and alert to avoid surprises. It is thus necessary to address the issue to ensure that the legislative system remains agile, accountable, and proactively responsive with timely reactions in the face of new and emerging legislative changes. Although a few studies have touched upon the issue tangentially, there appears to be no comprehensive treatment of the interdisciplinary area where futures studies, legislative governance, and monitoring intersect. In this respect, the present study sought to address the following question: What is the future direction of conflictual futures in the legislative governance?
Literature Review
There appears to be no serious related study about monitoring legislative governance, or alternative futures in the context of the legislation. Concerning the latter, the literature has mainly discussed the future of conflict, contradiction, and opposition through concrete and practical instances derived from the field evidence. There seems to be no research about abstract, pure foundations of the relations of conflict, balance, and cooperation for different kinds of futures. An overview of the related foundations, theories, and models highlights the significance of a futures studies approach to legislation. The increasing intensity and pace of changes will give legislative governance a unique role, enabling it to handle wild cards, surprises, and uncertainties more effectively. The fields of policymaking and governance require more research and broader scholarly treatment. Field evidence and observations also indicate a growing trend and increasing attention to the future in the context of legislation, as the capabilities of legislative governance are beginning to emerge. At the intersection of legislation and futures studies, monitoring appears to be a neglected area of research at both macro and micro levels. In fact, no concrete system has been designed to illustrate the interaction and mutual influence of monitoring and legislation.
Materials and Methods
The study used the documentary and library research, questionnaires, and the fuzzy Delphi technique to collect and analyze expert opinions. The analysis was divided into two sections: the relations of alternative futures and the conflictual futures of legislation. Initially, the literature on alternative futures was reviewed, and a 5item questionnaire was designed accordingly. This questionnaire was then administered to the experts in futures studies. Next, the literature on conflictual futures in legislative governance was examined, and a 32item questionnaire was designed in the fuzzy Delphi style, focusing on the confrontation and conflict of futures in the field of legislation. This questionnaire was administered in two stages to a range of experts, including former members of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, lawyers, and scholars of governance studies. Then, the shared opinions were collected.
Results and Discussion
Monitoring is a process that offers the prognosis of alternative futures. The prognosis helps avoid surprises and unexpected circumstances, thereby reducing potential damage. The legislative system and governance in the Islamic Republic of Iran are influenced by various factors. The analysis of future scenarios suggested the possibility of multiple alternative futures. These alternative futures can be categorized into three types: those that conflict and oppose each other; those that interact and cooperate; and those that achieve a balance. Each presents a different scenario for the government and leadership, ranging from a disaster scenario to a desirable one. Understanding the scenarios and alternative futures, alongside preparing to deal with them, can reduce vulnerability. More importantly, understanding the alternative futures of legislative governance allows for the selection and creation of a desirable future. This can not only minimize vulnerability but also contribute to creating a more favorable legislative and governance environment.
Conclusion
The research results suggested several key implications: reinforcing the executive branch while weakening the role and position of the Islamic Consultative Assembly as the legislative body; reinforcing the customary and popular aspect; enhancing lobbying efforts while weakening legal procedures; increasing the prominence of technology and artificial intelligence compared to the anthropocentric aspect; maintaining centralism and the unicameral system; and facing challenges in achieving genuine partisanship and convincing the public to join political parties.

Keywords

• Monitoring
• Legislative Governance
• Legislative Futures
• Alternative Futures
• Conflict
• Balance
• Cooperation

Main Subjects

• Public policy