Targeted Subsidies Policy and Social Cohesion in Iran

Mirashe, Somayeh; Taj Mazinani, Ali Akbar; Qarakhani, Masoumeh

doi:10.22054/qjsd.2024.76798.2544

Targeted Subsidies Policy and Social Cohesion in Iran

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Somayeh Mirashe

Ali Akbar Taj Mazinani

Masoumeh Qarakhani

Allameh Tabataba'i University

https://doi.org/10.22054/qjsd.2024.76798.2544

Abstract

Considering the close relationship between social policies and the increase or decrease of social cohesion, this article seeks to answer the question of what relationship (increasing and positive or erosive and negative) the policy of targeting subsidies can have with social cohesion in Iran? For this purpose, the opinions of citizens on the Instagram social network (April 2017 to the end of August 2023) as well as the published opinions of experts in this field have been analyzed. Sampling of Instagram data was multi-stage. Also, experts' opinions (189 sources including articles, interviews, media meetings and newspaper notes) have been counted and analyzed in this regard. Based on the theoretical implications of the research and the qualitative analysis of the opinions of the users of, as well as the views of experts, the following themes were reached: "short-term policymaking", "state-nation conflict", "supporting the policy", "subsidies' ineffectiveness" and "dual interpretation of fair distribution". Also, a three-dimensional model of social cohesion in relation to the policy of targeting subsidies (including "vertical trust", "inequality assumption" and "social polarization") was presented. According to this research, although selective cash support at the beginning of the introduction and implementation of the policy, increases trust and improves the relationship between the government and the nation, it causes discrimination, protest, tension and, as a result, a decrease in social cohesion.

Keywords

"Social cohesion"

"Targeted Subsidies Policy"

" short-term policy-making"

"social polarization"

"social protection"

"nation-state conflict"

Subjects

۸۰/۵۰۰۰ Social Development Social Welfare Globalization Family abuse Job Satisfaction social participation

Amiri, F., Scerri, S., & Khodashahi, M. (2015). Lexicon-Based Sentiment Analysis for Persian Text. In Proceedings of the International Conference Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (pp. 9–16).
Atansah, P., Khandan, M., Moss, T., Mukherjee, A., & Richmond, J. (2017). When Do Subsidy Reforms Stick? Lessons from Iran, Nigeria, and India. Center for Global Development. Retrieved from:

https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/When-Do-Subsidy-Reformsstick-Lessons-Iran-Nigeria-and-India.pdf

Babajanian, B. (2012). Social Protection and Its Contribution to Social Cohesion and State-Building. Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft Für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).
Berger-Schmitt, R. (2002). Considering Social Cohesion in Quality of Life Assessments: Concept and Measurement. Social Indicators Research, 58(1–3), 403–428.
Berka, P. (2020). Sentiment Analysis Using Rule-Based and Case-Based Reasoning. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 55(1), 51–66.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Burchi, F., & Strupat, C. (2018). Unbundling the Impacts of Economic Empowerment Programmes: Evidence from Malawi.
Burns, J. (2018, August 8). Stanford Scholar Explores Pros and Cons of Basic Income. Stanford News. https://news.stanford.edu/2018/08/08/stanford-scholar-explores-pros-cons-basic-income/
Cameron, L., & Shah, M. (2014). Can Mistargeting Destroy Social Capital and Stimulate Crime? Evidence from a Cash Transfer Program in Indonesia. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 62(2), 381–415.
Chohan, U. W. (2017). Universal Basic Income: A Review. Available at SSRN 3013634.
Council of Europe. (2004). A New Strategy for Social Cohesion; Council of Europe Strategy for Social Cohesion: Revised.

https://www.coe.int/t/dg3/socialpolicies/socialcohesiondev/source/RevisedStrategy_en.pdf

Dankmeyer, C. (2019). Universal Social Protection – What It Means and Why It Concerns All of Us. OECD Development Matters Blog.

https://oecd-development-matters.org/2019/02/06/universal-social-protection-what-it-means-and-why-it-concerns-all-of-us/

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. (2020). Social Protection. Retrieved from www.giz.de/expertise/html/60024.html
European Commission. (2011). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Youth Opportunities Initiative. European Commission Brussels, Belgium.
Ferroni, M. A., Mateo, M., & Payne, M. (2006). Social Cohesion in Latin America and the Caribbean: Analysis, Action, and Coordination. Inter-American Development Bank, Sustainable Development Department.
Fonseca, X., Lukosch, S., & Brazier, F. (2019). Social Cohesion Revisited: A New Definition and How to Characterize It. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 32(2), 231–253.
International Labour Organization. (2019). Collaborating for Policy Coherence and Development Impact. Social Protection Inter-Agency Cooperation Board, SPIAC-B. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@dgreports/@nylo/documents/genericdocument/wcms_644769.pdf
Jenson, J. (2010). Defining and Measuring Social Cohesion (1st ed.). Commonwealth Secretariat.
Khoo, C. S. G., & Johnkhan, S. B. (2018). Lexicon-Based Sentiment Analysis: Comparative Evaluation of Six Sentiment Lexicons. Journal of Information Science, 44(4), 491–511.
Kidd, S., Nycander, G. A., Tran, A., & Cretney, M. (2020). The Social Contract and the Role of Universal Social Security in Building Trust in Government. Development Pathways.
Koehler, G. (2011). Social Protection and Socioeconomic Security in Nepal. IDS Working Papers, 2011(370), 1–20.
Langer, A., Stewart, F., Smedts, K., & Demarest, L. (2017). Conceptualising and Measuring Social Cohesion in Africa: Towards a Perceptions-Based Index. Social Indicators Research, 131, 321–343.
Leininger, J., Burchi, F., Fiedler, C., Mross, K., Nowack, D., von Schiller, A., ... Ziaja, S. (2021). Social Cohesion: A New Definition and a Proposal for Its Measurement in Africa (Discussion Paper No. 31/2021). Bonn.
Loewe, M. (2020). Community Effects of Cash-for-Work Programmes in Jordan: Supporting Social Cohesion, More Equitable Gender Roles and Local Economic Development in Contexts of Flight and Migration. DIE Studies, 102.
Loewe, M., Zintl, T., & Houdret, A. (2021). The Social Contract as a Tool of Analysis: Introduction to the Special Issue on ‘Framing the Evolution of New Social Contracts in Middle Eastern and North African Countries’. World Development, 145, 104982.
(2011). Perspectives on Global Development 2012: Social Cohesion in a Shifting World. Paris.
Peters, M. A., & Besley, T. A. C. (2014). Social Exclusion/Inclusion: Foucault’s Analytics of Exclusion, the Political Ecology of Social Inclusion and the Legitimation of Inclusive Education. Open Review of Educational Research, 1(1), 99–115.
Rajulton, F., Ravanera, Z. R., & Beaujot, R. (2007). Measuring Social Cohesion: An Experiment Using the Canadian National Survey of Giving, Volunteering, and Participating. Social Indicators Research, 80, 461–492.
Tabatabai, H. (2012). From Price Subsidies to Basic Income: The Iran Model and Its Lessons. In K. Widerquist & M. W. Howard (Eds.), Exporting the Alaska Model: Adapting the Permanent Fund Dividend for Reform around the World (pp. 17–32). Springer.