Introduction
Development in Iran has been guided by a series of seven- and five-year plans. Iran has implemented construction and development plans since 1948, albeit with occasional interruptions during the Revolution as well as the Iran–Iraq War. Given the ambitious goals set in these plans, even if only 50% of the objectives had been achieved, Iran’s current development status would have been far more advanced—notwithstanding the challenges of the Revolution, war, and sanctions. However, as stated by the head of the Majlis Research Center, the average implementation rate of the development plans over the last six periods was about 30%, and the implementation rate of the Sixth Development Plan was reported to be around 9% (Majlis Research Center, 2022, No. 1884). Development plans are deeply rooted in political thought, with justice being one of its most controversial concepts. Justice holds significant importance in development plans that actually serve as a mechanism for realizing justice as a form of power. It is thus of utmost importance to understand the theoretical foundations and intellectual paradigms underlying the relevant policies and policymaking followed in Iran. Moreover, it is essential to see to what extent Iran’s policymaking system adheres to a specific model of justice, as it is a matter of considerable concern in the discussion on development. In this respect, the present research aimed to examine the conceptual models of justice in Iran’s Five-Year Development Plans following the Islamic Revolution. The study sought to answer the following research questions: 1) How is justice conceptualized in Iran’s Five-Year Development Plans? And how does each individual Five-Year Development Plan conceptualize justice?
Literature Review
The related studies were reviewed in order to set the groundwork for analysis. They can be categorized under three general groups. The first group deals with the analysis and typology of the concept of justice (e.g., Barry, 1989; Colem, 1996; Khandozi, 2010; Kono, 2003; Nili et al., 2014; Pilehferosh, 2017; Tutuncian & Ayazlu, 2000). This body of literature, alongside the work of Hayek, Nozick, Sandel, Rawls, and Amartya Sen, helped develop a coherent theoretical framework and classification system to be effectively applied in the present study. The second group of research aims to investigate theoretical models in Iran’s policies and measures.
Hezavehi (2015) concluded that Iran’s Development Plans are influenced by Western models, which can be the main factor behind underdevelopment in Iran. Majidi and Farhadi (2015) found that since the inception of the modern State, policymaking and planning in Iran have followed intellectual paradigms and theoretical models proposed by Western thinkers.
Abdoli (2022) concluded that the primary issue in planning Iran’s development model is not the goals, vision, or social and economic development plans, but rather the performance and implementation of the development model in the country. The third group of studies explores theories of justice within specific models in the Five-Year Development Plans. For example, Ebrahim Bai Salami (2008) examined the theoretical models underlying Iran’s development policies and plans in the first four development plans. He identified the most important theoretical models over the past six decades in Iran, including modernization, structuralism, basic needs, economic liberalization, institutionalism, privatization, and business environment improvement.
According to Ebrahim Bai Salami, the First and Second Development Plans were based on economic freedom, itself inspired by the theoretical foundations of liberalism promoted by the World Bank. The theoretical model in the Third Development Plan was argued to be institutionalism, originated from the experience of Southeast Asia and Latin America. Finally, the theoretical model of the Fourth Development Plan was privatization, with neoliberal foundations inspired by the U.K. and the U.S. (trade and Reaganism).
Yousefi-Nejad and Ezzati (2015) argue that the Third and Fourth Development Plans were influenced by dominant models such as the neoclassical model, without considering the specific conditions of the
Iranian society. These plans prioritized economic growth over distribution. This is particularly evident in the Fourth Development Plan, which adopted the belief that economic growth would automatically solve problems of unemployment and poverty and thus establish justice.
Zahedi and Navaei (2015) concluded that the evaluation of welfare policies in development plans, particularly the Fifth Plan, showed a lack of a well-devised and purposeful approach to providing welfare justice. They suggested that applying Amartya Sen’s environmental, situational, and capability approach, along with Walzer’s multi-dimensional view, could address the lack of a codified, coherent, and applicable social justice theory in Iranian–Islamic theories.
Materials and Methods
This study used the content analysis technique to identify and analyze development models in the legal documents of Iran’s Five-Year Development Plans formulated after the Islamic Revolution (1989–2021). First, the main components of justice in each development plan were coded and extracted separately. These components were then categorized into three distinct models derived from the related literature. The findings were tabulated according to the frequency and type of categories associated with the prevailing model of justice. They were finally analyzed through the content analysis technique, and the results were presented and interpreted.
Results and Discussion
The study identified three main models conceptualized within Iran’s Five-Year Development Plans: the free market, human development,
and basic needs. The model of human development emphasize
empowerment, education, health, environment, per capita income, and basic freedoms, all contributing to the promotion of human development in the plans. The free market model endorses the private sector, competition, reduction of government intervention, elimination of discrimination, price liberalization, and economic growth. The model of basic needs focuses on the redistribution of resources, support for the underprivileged, social security, reduction or eradication of poverty, equality, and reduction of the class gap. Moreover, the analysis highlighted the disorganized policymaking, considering the contribution of each indicator within these models, their roles in the development plans, and the interplay of their components. According to the results, the policies of Iran’s Five-Year Development Plans lacked the necessary coherence to use the models of development and justice as based on a unified political philosophy.
Conclusion
The results showed that none of the Five-Year Development Plans were designed, formulated, or implemented based on a consistent and specific model of development and justice. The plans somehow failed to prioritize preserving the political and ideological identity of the Islamic Republic of Iran, as well as to consider the requirements of the specific temporal context. These plans mostly adopted contemporary global models, such as the free market, human development, and basic needs. However, as we progressed towards the Sixth Development Plan, there has been a concerted effort to conceptualize and institutionalize indigenous models of development and justice, exemplified by the Islamic–Iranian Model of Progress.
Despite more than a decade of scholarly work, this model has not yet been finalized by the end of the Sixth Development Plan.