Volume 35, Issue 3 (Autumn 2022)
JMDP 2022, 35(3): 3-56 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rahnavard F. Mega-Policies of The Development Plan: A Case Study of Iran. JMDP 2022; 35 (3) :3-56
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4416-en.html
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4416-en.html
Management Public of Department, Institute for Management and Planning Studies, Tehran, Iran. , frahnavard@imps.ac.ir
Abstract: (1072 Views)
Purpose: In the present study, an attempt is made to explain and rationalize the formulation of mega-policies in Iran.
Methodology: This research was an analytical study based on the focus group and tried to use a process method to formulate mega-program policies with an emphasis on the Seventh Development Plan in Iran.
Findings: Results show that there is no structured method to formulate general policies for development programs. Therefore, by adopting the process of formulating public policies, the following processes have been obtained for formulating policy rulings: 1) identifying priority public issues as the main axes of policy rulings; 2) identifying the requirements arising from the upstream documents in formulating general program policies; 3) identifying policy options (as sub-categories) to solve general problems by combining theoretical resources, general policies, and expertise intervention; 4) Feasibility study of policy options; 5) enumerating the main categories as policy rulings.
Originality: Studies have been conducted on how to formulate general program policies in Iran with a governance approach. This study has been able to propose a defensible process for formulating general program policies in Iran by focusing on policy-making methodology. In addition, in this study, 21 priority public issues have been identified and the corresponding policy rulings for each of them have been formulated.
Methodology: This research was an analytical study based on the focus group and tried to use a process method to formulate mega-program policies with an emphasis on the Seventh Development Plan in Iran.
Findings: Results show that there is no structured method to formulate general policies for development programs. Therefore, by adopting the process of formulating public policies, the following processes have been obtained for formulating policy rulings: 1) identifying priority public issues as the main axes of policy rulings; 2) identifying the requirements arising from the upstream documents in formulating general program policies; 3) identifying policy options (as sub-categories) to solve general problems by combining theoretical resources, general policies, and expertise intervention; 4) Feasibility study of policy options; 5) enumerating the main categories as policy rulings.
Originality: Studies have been conducted on how to formulate general program policies in Iran with a governance approach. This study has been able to propose a defensible process for formulating general program policies in Iran by focusing on policy-making methodology. In addition, in this study, 21 priority public issues have been identified and the corresponding policy rulings for each of them have been formulated.
Type of Study: Case-Study |
Received: Feb 17 2022 | Accepted: May 07 2022 | ePublished: Mar 13 2023
Received: Feb 17 2022 | Accepted: May 07 2022 | ePublished: Mar 13 2023
References
1. Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2011). Generating Research Questions through Problematization. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 247-271. [DOI:10.5465/AMR.2011.59330882]
2. Anderson, J., E. (1984). Public Policy Making: An Introduction Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
3. Arrington Jr, C. B., & Sawaya, R. N. (1984). Issues Management in an Uncertain Environment. Long Range Planning, 17(6), 17-24. [DOI:10.1016/0024-6301(84)90214-0]
4. Association for Community Health Improvement (ARCHI) (2017). Community Health Assessment Toolkit. [https://www.healthycommunities.org/resources/community-health-assessment-toolkit]
5. Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (2002). Policy Dynamics: University of Chicago Press.
6. Choudhary, N. (2018). Development Governance. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance (pp. 1-14): Springer International Publishing. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_2029-1]
7. Dror, Y. (1970). Social Science Metapolicy: Some Concepts and Applications. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
8. Engeli, I., & Allison, C. R. (2014). Conceptual and Methodological Challenges in Comparative Public Policy. Comparative Policy Studies: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges, 1-13. [DOI:10.1057/9781137314154_1] [PMID]
9. Howlett, M., Cashore, B. (2014). Conceptualizing Public Policy. In: Engeli, I., Allison, C.R. (eds) Comparative Policy Studies. Research Methods Series (pp. 17-33). Palgrave Macmillan, London. [DOI:10.1057/9781137314154_2]
10. Jenkins, W. I. (1978). Policy Analysis: A Political and Organisational Perspective: Martin Robertson.
11. Mukherjee, M., & Roy, S. (2017). Feasibility Studies and Important Aspect of Project Management. International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Management, 2(4), 98-100. [DOI:10.24999/IJOAEM/02040025]
12. Nagel, S. S. (2002). Handbook of Public Policy Evaluation: Sage. [DOI:10.4135/9781412973533]
13. Salevao, I. (2005). Rule of Law, Legitimate Governance & Development in the Pacific: ANU Press. [DOI:10.22459/RLLGDP.12.2005]
14. Tamanaha, B. Z. (2004). On the Rule of Law: History, Politics, Theory: Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511812378]
15. Taylor, J. (2007). In Praise of the Feasibility Study. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 16(10), 1789-1791. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.01989.x] [PMID]
16. Zahariadis, N. (2016). Setting the Agenda on Agenda Setting: Definitions, Concepts, and Controversies. In Handbook of Public Policy Agenda Setting (pp. 1-22): Edward Elgar Publishing. [DOI:10.4337/9781784715922.00007]
17. Zarei, M. H., & Babakhani Ghazijahani, F. (2017). Exploring the Causal Mechanism on the Rule of Law. Social Analysis of Order and Social Inequality, 8(1), 185-232. [https://jsoa.sbu.ac.ir/article_99249.html?lang=en]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
