State Studies

Abstract Introduction and Literature Review Democracy is commonly defined through formal institutions such as elections, political parties, representative assemblies, and constitutional arrangements. However, historical experience has demonstrated that the existence of democratic procedures does not necessarily guarantee democratic stability, institutional effectiveness, or public legitimacy. In many societies, electoral mechanisms and formal democratic institutions coexist with declining public trust, weak governance, corruption, ineffective public administration, and growing political disengagement. This condition creates a gap between formal democracy and effective democracy, where democratic institutions exist in appearance but fail to generate meaningful participation, accountability, and public confidence. The literature on democracy has generally approached this issue from three major perspectives. Institutional approaches emphasize constitutional constraints, the rule of law, accountability, and the organization of political power. Governance-oriented approaches focus on state capacity, bureaucratic effectiveness, regulatory quality, and institutional performance. Cultural approaches highlight the significance of political culture, social trust, civic engagement, and social capital in sustaining democratic life. Although each of these perspectives offers important insights, they often examine democracy through a single analytical lens. Consequently, the complex interaction between governance, institutional effectiveness, and political culture has received insufficient attention. This study argues that democracy cannot be adequately understood through institutional arrangements alone. Rather, democracy should be viewed simultaneously as an institutional order and as a lived social experience embedded in everyday interactions, patterns of communication, civic practices, and collective values. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of democratic sustainability requires integrating institutional, governance, and cultural dimensions within a unified analytical framework. Research Objective The primary objective of this study is to explain the relationship between political culture, social trust, governance, and institutional effectiveness in shaping the quality and sustainability of democracy. More specifically, the research seeks to answer why some societies experience declining democratic performance despite possessing formal democratic institutions and electoral mechanisms. The article examines how the interaction between the rule of law, institutional effectiveness, and democratic political culture influences democratic stability. It also investigates the conditions under which the gap between formal democracy and effective democracy emerges and expands. Methodology This research is a theoretical and explanatory study conducted through conceptual analysis and interpretive inquiry. Drawing upon the traditions of democratic theory, political sociology, institutionalism, governance studies, and political philosophy, the study employs a qualitative analytical approach to reconstruct the conceptual foundations of democratic sustainability. The research examines and synthesizes the ideas of major classical and contemporary thinkers, including Tocqueville, Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Barrington Moore, Raymond Aron, Robert Putnam, Francis Fukuyama, Anthony Giddens, Will Kymlicka, and other scholars of democracy, governance, and political culture. Through comparative conceptual analysis, the study identifies the mechanisms linking political authority, institutional effectiveness, social trust, and democratic stability. Findings The findings demonstrate that democracy is a multidimensional phenomenon that cannot be reduced to elections, legal procedures, or formal institutions alone. Democratic sustainability emerges through the interaction of three interconnected dimensions. The first-dimension concerns governance and the rule of law. Sustainable democracy requires the institutionalization of legal constraints on political power, the protection of citizens’ rights, judicial independence, political accountability, and mechanisms for the peaceful circulation of elites. The findings indicate that democratic stability depends not simply on governing through law but on the existence of genuine rule of law capable of limiting arbitrary power and ensuring accountability. Where power becomes concentrated and unconstrained, political legitimacy gradually erodes and public trust declines. The second dimension involves institutional effectiveness and governance capacity. The study finds that democratic legitimacy is closely related to the ability of public institutions to deliver services, control corruption, maintain transparency, and respond effectively to social demands. Elections alone cannot guarantee democratic success if public institutions remain ineffective. Weak bureaucratic capacity, clientelism, rent-seeking practices, and neopatrimonial forms of governance undermine institutional trust and weaken democratic performance. Consequently, institutional effectiveness constitutes a fundamental pillar of democratic sustainability. The third dimension relates to political culture, social trust, and lived democratic experience. The findings show that democracy extends beyond formal institutions and becomes meaningful only when citizens experience freedom, participation, dialogue, and recognition in their everyday lives. Democracy functions not merely as a political system but as a lived social experience expressed through civic interaction, tolerance, public dialogue, and respect for diversity. Social trust and social capital play a crucial role in strengthening civic participation and collective action. Conversely, widespread distrust encourages social fragmentation, weakens public engagement, and reduces the effectiveness of democratic institutions. The study further demonstrates that authoritarian and exclusionary political environments tend to reproduce fear, self-censorship, social passivity, and low-trust relationships. In contrast, democratic environments that encourage dialogue, pluralism, and civic participation contribute to the development of democratic political culture and stronger social capital. Based on these findings, the article proposes a three-dimensional model of democracy consisting of: (1) the governance dimension, including the rule of law, accountability, limitation of power, and elite circulation; (2) the institutional dimension, including state capacity, bureaucratic effectiveness, meritocracy, and control of corruption; and (3) the cultural-social dimension, including political culture, social trust, social capital, tolerance, dialogue, and acceptance of diversity. Democratic sustainability depends on the simultaneous functioning and interaction of these three dimensions. Conclusion The study concludes that democracy should be understood as both an institutional order and a lived social experience. Neither formal institutions nor cultural values alone are sufficient to sustain democratic governance. Rather, democratic stability emerges from the dynamic interaction between the rule of law, institutional effectiveness, and democratic political culture. The principal contribution of this research is the development of a three-dimensional analytical framework that integrates governance, institutions, and political culture into a unified model of democratic sustainability. This framework demonstrates that democracy becomes durable when political power is constrained by law, public institutions operate effectively, and citizens actively experience participation, trust, dialogue, and recognition in everyday social life. Accordingly, efforts to strengthen democracy should extend beyond electoral reforms and constitutional arrangements. Democratic consolidation requires accountable governance, effective institutions, social trust, civic education, public participation, and the cultivation of democratic values within everyday social relations. Democracy endures not only through institutions and laws but also through the lived experiences, interactions, and collective practices of citizens.

Abstract Introduction Over the past three decades, public policy studies have undergone a fundamental paradigm shift from traditional government centric models toward governance approaches that emphasise multi actor networks, cross sectoral collaboration, and nonlinear policy processes. This “governance turn,” initially articulated by Rhodes (1997) and further developed by the Anglo governance school, portrays the state as increasingly hollowed out, its power dispersed across functionally distinct networks of public, private, and voluntary organisations. While this perspective has enriched policy analysis by highlighting complexity and interdependence, it has also attracted substantial criticism. Stewart and Crowley (2020) argue that the governance turn has created an epistemological and operational dead end: excessive reliance on network governance and systematic marginalisation of the state have weakened policy coordination, undermined accountability, and contributed to state failures in addressing wicked problems such as climate change, health emergencies, and economic instability. In the global literature, three main approaches have sought to explain the role of the state in public policy. First, state less approaches (e.g., Rhodes’ network governance) remove the state from the centre of analysis, thereby neglecting its macro coordination capacity. Second, state centric approaches (Bell & Hindmoor, 2009; Jessop, 2016) reaffirm the central authority of the state but pay insufficient attention to systemic dynamics and nonlinear feedbacks. Third, new institutionalist approaches (March & Olsen, 1989; Schmidt, 2010) focus on formal and informal rules, norms, and values but fail to recognise the active role of the state as coordinator and guarantor of accountability. To fill this theoretical gap, Stewart and Crowley (2020) proposed a hybrid framework – here termed “systemic institutionalism” – which integrates three core components: (a) systems thinking (to identify feedback loops, interdependencies and leverage points); (b) institutional analysis (to understand formal and informal rules governing actor behaviour); and (c) state centric governance (to redefine the state as coordinator, regulator and guarantor of accountability). Despite its theoretical richness, the applicability of systemic institutionalism to countries with centralised state structures and multi layered complex problems, such as Iran, remains unexplored. Iran’s policy system is characterised by (1) extreme structural centralisation; (2) a high density of wicked problems (water crisis, energy imbalances, air pollution, health system instability, national security tensions, multi layered sanctions); and (3) a historical weakness in inter sectoral coordination and systemic feedback mechanisms. Indigenous research has shown that imported governance models, without deep adaptation to Iran’s institutional and political realities, have not only been ineffective but have sometimes exacerbated complexities. No systematic study has yet examined the feasibility of operationalising systemic institutionalism in Iran. Therefore, the main research question is: How can Stewart and Crowley’s (2020) systemic institutionalism framework be operationalised to analyse and improve public policy in Iran? Two sub questions are: (1) What are the core components of systemic institutionalism, and how do they differ from conventional governance and institutionalist approaches? (2) What are the main obstacles and opportunities for implementing this framework in Iran’s centralised policy system? Research Method The study adopts a qualitative, developmental applied approach using directed content analysis (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). The primary source is Stewart and Crowley’s (2020) Reconsidering Policy: Complexity, Governance and the State, complemented by fifteen domestic academic articles (2016 2023), two policy reports (the Development and Foresight Research Centre, 2021; WHO Iran COVID 19 report, 2021), and two Iranian case studies: (a) COVID 19 pandemic management (2020 2021) and (b) the gasoline price reform (November 2019). The unit of analysis was the paragraph. Coding proceeded in three stages: open coding (extracting all paragraphs related to policy systems, the state’s role, and institutions); axial coding (grouping the open codes into seven main categories); and selective coding (comparing the seven categories with the two Iranian case studies to determine whether each category has a strong instance, a weak instance, or is absent in Iran). Validity was ensured through data triangulation and peer debriefing; reliability was assessed by a second coder on 20% of the data, yielding an inter coder agreement of 86%. Findings The analysis extracted seven main categories with 28 sub codes: 1. Systemic boundaries and leverage points: Policymakers often assume boundaries are fixed, whereas boundaries themselves are policy objects. Changing boundaries (e.g., merging institutions) is the most effective but most difficult intervention. 2. Positive and negative feedback: Policy failure typically results from positive feedback (self reinforcing cycles) overpowering negative (balancing) feedback. Delayed feedback is regularly ignored. 3. Inter sectoral coordination and the state’s regulatory role: Effective coordination requires a strong cross sectoral body; the state must maintain a “shadow of hierarchy” even when delegating implementation. 4. Advisory systems and evidence based policy: A mature advisory system balances “cold” (scientific, replicable) and “hot” (values based, politically sensitive) advice. Excess of either leads to policy failure. 5. Policy implementation: Implementation is not linear but a dynamic, negotiated process where street level bureaucrats reinterpret policy. The separation of design from implementation is a dangerous illusion. 6. Policy change and double loop learning: Crises open windows for double loop learning (questioning fundamental assumptions), but most governments only engage in single loop learning (adjusting tools). 7. Accountable governance and transparency: Accountability is multi dimensional: vertical (to superiors), horizontal (to peers and stakeholders), and social (to citizens). Information transparency is the operating system of all accountability. Applying these categories to the two Iranian case studies revealed significant weaknesses. Regarding boundaries and leverage points, Iranian policymakers consistently prefer parametric adjustments (e.g., sudden price changes) over structural interventions. The November 2019 gasoline price hike, rather than targeting the underlying positive feedback loop of the subsidy system, triggered widespread protests. The energy subsidy system exhibits a classic positive feedback loop (higher subsidies → lower prices → higher consumption → higher subsidy needs), yet policymakers failed to design negative feedback mechanisms such as progressive taxation or targeted transfers. Delayed feedback was systematically ignored. Inter sectoral coordination is weak and crisis driven; permanent cross sectoral bodies are absent, although the state demonstrated relative resilience (“steering” capacity) during both crises. Iran’s advisory system is heavily tilted toward “hot” advice (political, factional considerations), while “cold” scientific advice is often marginalised. Policy implementation remains linear and centralised, ignoring local feedback and the interpretive power of street level bureaucrats. Double loop learning is absent: fundamental assumptions underlying both COVID 19 management and energy policy were never critically revisited. While vertical accountability is relatively acceptable, horizontal and social accountability are extremely weak, and information transparency is very low. Despite these weaknesses, opportunities exist: the centralised state structure is suitable for intervening in systemic boundaries; longitudinal data are available for modelling; the state has shown relative crisis resilience; and a pool of skilled scientific personnel is present. Conclusion Systemic institutionalism can be operationalised in Iran along seven dimensions: (1) identifying systemic boundaries and leverage points; (2) designing negative feedbacks to stabilise unstable systems; (3) creating permanent cross sectoral coordination bodies; (4) redesigning the advisory system to balance scientific and political advice; (5) shifting from linear to adaptive implementation with street level bureaucrats’ participation; (6) institutionalising double loop learning; and (7) strengthening information transparency as a prerequisite for horizontal and social accountability. Five concrete policy recommendations are offered: (i) establish or strengthen a Supreme Council for Policy Coordination as a permanent cross sectoral strategic body; (ii) create boundary spanners within the state’s advisory system to translate scientific evidence into political language and vice versa; (iii) mandate ex ante assessment of delayed feedbacks for all major policies using system dynamics modelling; (iv) institutionalise double loop learning through periodic “fundamental assessments” of policies older than five years; and (v) develop a National Policy Transparency System making all non classified policy documents and evaluation reports publicly accessible. Future research should pursue comparative studies with similarly centralised states, design tools to measure double loop learning capacity, conduct longitudinal studies of feedback patterns, and explore cultural and political barriers to information transparency.

Abstract Research Problem  The debate concerning the relationship between the state and moral good and human happiness constitutes one of the most central controversies in contemporary political theory. This contention is particularly manifested in the dichotomy between "perfectionist" and "anti-perfectionist" discourses regarding the state. In the perfectionist discourse, the state is deemed not merely permitted, but obligated to promote the good and a happy life for its subjects, whereas in the anti-perfectionist view, the state must maintain a neutral stance toward diverse conceptions of the good and happiness. What is determinative in this controversy is the theorist's conception of human nature and the essence of happiness. The core problem of the present inquiry is that, despite the immense capacity of the Holy Quran to elucidate human happiness, the implications of the Qur'anic theory of happiness for the perfectionism/anti-perfectionism debate concerning the state have been insufficiently explored. Hence, this research is formulated to address this fundamental question: What are the implications of the Qur'anic theory of human happiness and good for the state and political theory, viewed through the lens of perfectionism or anti-perfectionism? Background  An examination of the research background reveals that previous studies have primarily concentrated either on the political thought of Muslim philosophers (such as Farabi, Mulla Sadra, and Imam Khomeini) or have addressed the issue of perfectionism in constitutional law from a public law perspective. However, none have directly engaged in extracting the theory of happiness from the Quran and analyzing its implications for the perfectionist state. Therefore, the novelty of this paper lies in extracting the "worship-centered" theory of happiness from the Holy Quran and formulating its implications for the perfectionism versus anti-perfectionism debate concerning the state. Objective: The primary objective of this research is to elucidate the relationship between the Qur'anic theory of happiness and the perfectionist state, and to provide a theoretical framework for the state's role in the domain of the good and happiness based on human nature. Through this, it seeks to establish the necessary theoretical groundwork for formulating an effective theory regarding the religious state. Method: The research method employs thematic interpretation (tafsīr mawḍūʿī) through intra-Qur'anic contemplation. In this approach, the verses related to the purpose of creation and human happiness—particularly verse 56 of Surah Al-Zariyat—are taken as the focal point, and their implications are expounded within the framework of the research question. This fundamental qualitative method is conducted by focusing on the intra-textual connections of the verses to uncover the semantic system of happiness in the Quran. Findings  The findings indicate that the Holy Quran presents a worship-centered explication of human happiness, wherein the ultimate purpose of human creation is the worship and servitude of God, culminating in attaining divine proximity. This theory possesses a universal and comprehensive character and is formulated based on the existential structure and shared human nature. Consequently, servitude (worship) is posited as an "objective good" grounded in human nature, possessing inherent authenticity and value. The present study extracts two fundamental implications for the state: The first implication is the perfectionism of the state based on human nature. This means that because humans are perfectionist beings by virtue of their existential structure, and this perfection is contingent upon the servitude of God, political institutions must serve the actualization of this common good. The second implication is the determination of the content of perfection. This means that the state must not only be perfectionist, but must also pursue a specific content of perfection—namely, "servitude to God." The establishment and enforcement of general rules of social life, as the most critical function of the state, must be conducted with the aim of facilitating the realization of servitude (worship) within the political community. Conclusion There exists a robust theoretical connection between the Qur'anic theory of happiness and the perfectionist approach to the state, which is forged through attention to "human nature" and the "ultimate purpose of creation." This connection renders any theorizing about the religious state inevitably bound to engage with these two components and to formulate their implications in the public and political spheres. Furthermore, it is emphasized that the state's responsibility regarding the happy life of its subjects does not entail imposing a religious lifestyle. Rather, it signifies the preservation and promotion of that form of life which is congruent with the existential structure and enduring characteristics of human nature. Indeed, without the support of the state and the political structure, the expansion and perpetuation of the desirable and happy life within the political community would have little chance of realization and sustainability.

Abstract Introduction Liberal democracy, despite the continued preservation of its formal institutions—such as elections, political parties, and the separation of powers—has in recent decades undergone an erosion of its participatory substance alongside a gradual displacement of power toward elite networks, lobbying actors, and large corporations. Colin Crouch’s theory of post-democracy provides a persuasive account of this condition, demonstrating that behind the democratic façade, effective decision-making is relocated from the public sphere to mechanisms that are largely insulated from accountability. In the same trajectory, neoliberal rationality and late capitalism—by attenuating citizens’ political agency and consolidating structural inequalities—have intensified the crisis of representation. At the global level, these dynamics are mirrored in asymmetric North–South relations, where “democracy” is increasingly mobilized as a legitimating discourse for political and economic interventions. Accordingly, the central problem addressed in this study is the widening gap between democracy’s institutional form and its substantive operation within the broader context of neoliberal power and global capitalism. A review of the research literature suggests that a substantial strand of critical scholarship conceptualizes liberal democracy as marked by an expanding disjunction between its institutional form and its substantive content. Within this framework, Crouch’s post-democracy thesis explicates how decision-making authority has been progressively transferred from representative institutions to lobby groups, major corporations, and elite networks. Related contributions in neoliberalism studies and critical political economy further indicate that the weakening of citizens’ political role and the predominance of elite interests have exacerbated the representational crisis. Building on and synthesizing these perspectives, the present study examines the erosion of liberal democracy’s substantive content and its structural linkage to the reproduction of elite power. Research Objective The primary objective of this study is to offer a critical analysis of liberal democracy through the lens of post-democracy theory and to specify the mechanisms through which democracy is transformed from a participatory order into a managerial, elite-centered configuration. To this end, the study focuses on: (1) elucidating the theoretical foundations of post-democracy; (2) analyzing the institutional, economic, and discursive mechanisms through which elite dominance is consolidated; (3) examining the role of variables such as class, race, and political polarization in undermining democratic quality; and (4) analyzing the global articulation of this logic through the relationship between Western democracy, interventionism, and the reproduction of inequality in the Global South. Ultimately, the study seeks to provide a critical framework for accounting for the gap between the democratic appearance of institutions and the elite-centered realities of power. Research Method In terms of its analytical orientation, the study is situated within a critical-analytical approach. Drawing on concepts from critical political economy, post-democracy theory, and postcolonial studies, it examines the functioning of liberal democracy within the wider context of global capitalism. The emphasis is placed on analysing power relations, institutional mechanisms, and the structural logics through which inequality is reproduced, rather than on offering a purely normative appraisal of democratic institutions. Methodologically, the research adopts a comparative–theoretical design based on a conceptual comparison of liberal democracy’s operation at two levels: first, within the domestic arena of Western liberal states; and second, in its projection into global politics and its relations with the Global South. The purpose of this comparison is to explicate the linkage between internal post-democratic dynamics and the international patterns of action associated with liberal states. The unit of analysis is not states as discrete actors, but the institutional, discursive, and economic mechanisms that structure liberal democracies. Data are collected through document analysis and the use of credible quantitative indicators concerning democracy indices, inequality, lobbying, and the configuration of economic power. Data analysis proceeds through an interpretive–analytical strategy that synthesises theoretical and empirical evidence. The overarching aim is to produce a coherent, critical, and data-informed account of the dominant logics shaping contemporary liberal democracy at both national and global levels. Results and discussion The findings indicate that contemporary liberal democracy remains institutionally intact, yet its substantive and participatory content has been progressively hollowed out. Within the post-democratic condition, decision-making power has shifted from parliaments and political parties toward lobbying actors, major corporations, and elite networks, such that democratic institutions increasingly function in practice to reproduce elite interests. The analysis further underscores the role of global capitalism, deepening inequality, and the weakening of popular participation in accelerating this trajectory. At the transnational level, the same logic extends into global North–South relations, where democracy becomes an instrument for legitimising the political and economic interventions of Northern powers in the Global South. The pivotal mechanism of this transition is the displacement of the locus of decision-making from accountable institutions toward lobbying structures, large corporations, and transnational capital—thereby diminishing the capacity of parties and parliaments to shape economic decisions and international policy. The findings emphasise the structural link between this transformation and global capitalism as well as neoliberal rationality, which recasts the citizen primarily as an economic actor and constrains political agency and popular participation. Beyond the domestic sphere, the study identifies the international extension of this logic, in which “democracy” is transformed from a normative ideal into a hegemonic mechanism capable of legitimising North-led political–economic interventions in the Global South and reproducing asymmetric relations. Conclusion The study concludes that, under post-democratic conditions, liberal democracy is preserved in institutional form while its participatory and representative substance is emptied out in favour of elite, corporate, and lobby-centred networks. In this process, decision-making authority is relocated from parliaments and parties to economic actors and unaccountable networks, and neoliberal rationality reduces the citizen from a political agent to a primarily economic actor. This pattern is also projected globally, where democracy is increasingly deployed to legitimise intervention and to reproduce North–South inequalities. Hence, the core problem is not the absence of democratic institutions, but the growing distance between democracy’s institutional form and its substantive functioning.

Abstract Introduction In the contemporary era, the convergence of ecological vulnerabilities and geopolitical isolation has confronted states with unprecedented existential and security challenges. The Islamic Republic of Iran, with over 80% of its territory located in the global arid and semi-arid belt, is highly exposed to the consequences of climate change, recurrent droughts, and water stress (IPCC, 2023). However, beyond climatic damage, a decisive macro-variable that has accelerated and deepened this crisis is the imposition of comprehensive economic sanctions. In contemporary International Political Economy (IPE), environmental crises are no longer viewed as isolated phenomena but are deeply intertwined with geopolitical turbulence and sanction policies. Under this turbulent context, the imposition of extensive sanctions has transformed the internal dynamics of governance in Iran. Research Question(s) The central question of this research is: How do international sanctions affect the role, function, and approach of the state in Iran's environmental governance and security system? Furthermore, what are the primary drivers shaping the future of this interaction? Literature Review A critical review of existing literature reveals that previous studies on the consequences of sanctions on Iran have mainly focused on two primary trends. The first trend, with an economy-oriented approach, has dissected the macroeconomic consequences of sanctions, such as financial contraction, structural inflation, and infrastructure depreciation (Dizaji & Farzanegan, 2021). The second trend examines the ecological consequences of sanctions, showing how isolation leads to restrictions on the transfer of green technologies and a reduction in conservation budgets (Madani, 2021). Despite this literary richness, a "theoretical gap" remains in explaining the mechanisms of political economy regarding the state's institutional transformation. Previous research has often considered the state as a "passive variable," neglecting the structural change in the "state's institutional function" under the logic of survival. 2.1. The Geopolitics of Sanctions and Environmental Security Sanctions are not merely external shocks but structural catalysts that redefine the logic of resource allocation and sovereign behavior (Early, 2015). 2.1.1. Security Priority Displacement In states under pressure, the "future discount rate" increases significantly. The state, in an emergency, values today's survival far more than tomorrow's sustainability. This leads to the displacement of ecological stability by immediate economic resilience. Methodology This study employs a mixed-methods approach within a qualitative framework based on "Structured Horizon Scanning." To ensure the validity and reproducibility of the research, the implementation process was carried out in three main steps: Systematic Review: 42 core policy documents and scientific articles (2015-2026) were collected. Thematic Analysis: The data were coded using MAXQDA 2024 software through open, axial, and selective coding. Delphi Technique: Findings and drivers were validated through a two-round Delphi panel consisting of 12 experts in IPE, environmental policy, and national security. Results The findings indicate that the structural pressures of sanctions have shifted the state’s institutional function from an "ecological regulatory entity" to a "state reliant on domestic ecological rents." Through thematic coding, three critical drivers were identified: Table 1 Ranking of Environmental Governance Drivers Based on Delphi Consensus Driver Title          Impact Score      Uncertainty Score            IQR         Rank Import Substitution & Natural Capital Dissolution              9.15        7.50        0.75        1 Institutional Retreat & Structural Deregulation   8.60        8.00        0.80        2 Tech-Isolation Trap & Adaptation Blockage           8.20        9.00        1.10        3 *Note. Scores are based on a 1-10 Likert scale. The results suggest that international sanctions have activated a "burden-shifting" mechanism. The state, as a rational actor seeking to maximize system survival, has inevitably turned to the intensive extraction of "ecological rents" to compensate for lost oil revenues. Discussion The discussion highlights that the increasing degradation of Iran's environment is a systematic output of a "survival-based political economy." When a state is under commercial siege, "food security" is promoted from a welfare concern to an existential issue. In this paradigm, the policymaker sacrifices the sustainability of aquifers for short-term social cohesion. Furthermore, the "Strategic Deregulation" identified in industrial development shows that environmental regulatory bodies have lost their veto power to economic ministries. The "Environmental Impact Assessment" (EIA) standards have become flexible or suspended to facilitate revenue-generating projects. Finally, the "Technological Isolation Trap" has led to "Carbon Lock-in," where industries are forced to use inefficient, high-emission equipment due to blocked access to international climate funds like GEF and GCF. Conclusion The study concludes that under the pressure of international sanctions, the Iranian state has systematically converted economic costs into "ecological debts." This process, while ensuring short-term economic resilience, confronts national security and territorial sustainability with irreversible crises in the long term. Strategic recommendations include: Redefining food security through "Virtual Water Trade." Promoting the institutional independence of environmental regulatory bodies. Activating "Environmental Diplomacy" to decouple ecological issues from geopolitical tensions. Acknowledgments This study was supported by the Iran National Science Foundation (INSF) under Post-doctoral Grant No. 99020087. Notes EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment IPE: International Political Economy

Abstract Problem Statement and Background Neoliberal capitalism has generally been interpreted through what may be called a transcendental or epistemological logic. Within this framework, concepts such as human rights, freedom, private property, democracy, class conflict, and individual autonomy are considered the foundational categories through which neoliberalism is explained and criticized. Most traditional analyses seek to establish causal relationships between these transcendental concepts and the expansion of capitalist relations. In this sense, neoliberalism is often represented as an ideological system grounded in universal principles and normative assumptions. However, such interpretations frequently overlook the operational and functional dimensions of neoliberal power. They tend to focus on representation and ideology rather than on the practical mechanisms through which neoliberal capitalism governs societies and produces subjects. In contrast, strategic logic provides a different analytical perspective. Instead of asking what neoliberalism represents at the epistemological level, strategic logic investigates how neoliberalism functions within networks of power and institutions. This approach is based on an immanent understanding of existence in which social realities emerge from relations of forces rather than transcendental truths. Consequently, the primary concern becomes the production of subjectivities, experiences, and social behaviors. Strategic logic examines how discourse formations, institutions, and governance practices shape individuals and regulate populations in ways that sustain capitalist accumulation and social order. Existing literature on neoliberalism has largely emphasized ideological critiques or economic analyses of free-market capitalism. Comparatively less attention has been devoted to the strategic mechanisms through which neoliberal capitalism reorganizes civil society, transforms resistance, and governs everyday life. This research addresses this theoretical gap by focusing on governance mechanisms embedded in neoliberal institutions and discourses. Through this perspective, neoliberalism is understood not merely as an economic doctrine but as a complex system of power that continuously produces and reproduces social relations, forms of knowledge, and modes of subjectivity.   Research Objective The main objective of this research is to identify and analyze the governance mechanisms of neoliberal capitalism from the perspective of strategic logic. More specifically, the study seeks to explain how neoliberalism governs societies through institutional arrangements, discursive practices, and mechanisms of subject formation. The research aims to move beyond transcendental explanations and demonstrate how neoliberal capitalism strategically transforms resistance, regulates populations, and expands capitalist relations globally. Another important objective is to clarify the relationship between governance mechanisms and the reproduction of capitalist social relations. The study investigates how neoliberalism produces economically efficient subjects and how disciplinary, security, and civil-society mechanisms contribute to the continuity of free-market order. By identifying the interconnected mechanisms of neoliberal governance, the research attempts to provide a comprehensive understanding of contemporary capitalist power structures. Research Methodology This study adopts a theoretical and analytical methodology grounded in strategic logic and discourse analysis. Rather than relying on normative or transcendental categories, the research focuses on the functional dimensions of neoliberal governance. Institutional arrangements, discourse statements, and practices of power are analyzed in order to understand how neoliberal capitalism organizes social life and produces subjectivities. The research examines governance mechanisms as interconnected components of a broader neoliberal strategy. Through a conceptual analysis of discourse formations and institutional practices, the study explores the operational logic of neoliberal capitalism. The analysis draws on perspectives related to biopolitics, disciplinary power, and security mechanisms in order to explain how neoliberalism regulates populations and organizes capitalist circulation. Instead of evaluating neoliberalism from a moral or ideological standpoint, the study investigates the strategic functions performed by different governance mechanisms within capitalist societies. Research Findings The findings of the study indicate that neoliberal capitalism operates through four interconnected governance mechanisms that must be understood relationally rather than independently. The first mechanism is the principle of “live dangerously.” This mechanism involves the removal of transcendental concepts and epistemic systems as central elements of governance. By weakening prior forms of knowledge and universal epistemological foundations, neoliberalism redirects governance toward economic productivity and market rationality. In this framework, uncertainty, insecurity, and risk become essential conditions for the operation of free-market capitalism. The governance of society is therefore no longer grounded in stable moral or epistemological principles but in the management of economic competition and productivity. The second mechanism is the “NGO-ization” of social and collective activities. Through this process, neoliberal capitalism transforms political resistance into manageable social demands within civil society. Instead of directly confronting state power, social movements become institutionalized through NGOs and civil organizations. As a result, resistance loses its revolutionary dimension and becomes integrated into the neoliberal system as a regulated and commodified activity. NGO outputs, whether material or symbolic, are presented as commodities within the logic of supply and demand. This mechanism not only neutralizes radical opposition but also contributes to the expansion of capitalism into different regions of the world. The NGO-ization process also disconnects populations from direct political engagement with governments. Consequently, governance alternatives themselves become commodified products circulating within civil society. Even critical and leftist discourses are transformed into consumable intellectual commodities. This condition facilitates the expansion of neoliberal capitalism while enabling the exploitation of natural and primary resources through the seemingly humanitarian activities of international NGOs. The third mechanism involves disciplinary power. Neoliberal capitalism continuously produces and reproduces specific subject positions that allow disciplinary policies to regulate everyday life. Within transcendental logic, phenomena such as criminality may be interpreted through moral or medical categories. However, strategic logic reveals that delinquency serves important functions within capitalist systems. Criminality contributes both to the circulation of capital and to the expansion of disciplinary institutions and practices. Thus, disciplinary governance becomes an essential mechanism for maintaining social order and economic productivity. The fourth mechanism consists of security and biopolitical governance. Since the nineteenth century, modern societies have increasingly been understood as social bodies constantly exposed to risks, diseases, and dangers. Neoliberal capitalism utilizes these conditions to regulate populations through security mechanisms and differential vulnerabilities. Threats related to health, crime, and social instability generate new forms of capital circulation while justifying extensive forms of social regulation. Through biopolitical strategies, neoliberal governance seeks to produce healthy, productive, and economically efficient subjects whose lives remain compatible with free-market relations. Differential policies aimed at managing risks and vulnerabilities simultaneously increase the diversification and expansion of capitalist accumulation. Conclusion The study concludes that neoliberal capitalism cannot be adequately understood solely through transcendental or epistemological categories such as freedom, rights, or private property. Instead, neoliberalism operates primarily through strategic governance mechanisms embedded within institutions, discourses, and everyday practices. These mechanisms collectively transform resistance into commodified demands, regulate populations through disciplinary and security systems, and sustain the global expansion of capitalist relations. Strategic logic therefore provides a more comprehensive framework for understanding neoliberal governance because it focuses on the operational functions of power rather than merely its ideological representations. Neoliberal capitalism emerges as a dynamic system that continuously produces subjects, organizes risks, commodifies alternatives, and expands capital circulation through interconnected mechanisms of governance. Understanding these mechanisms is essential for critically analyzing contemporary forms of power and the transformation of social and political life under neoliberalism.

Abstract Introduction Contemporary global challenges such as injustice and poverty within nation-states have increasingly drawn attention to shared human vulnerabilities across the world. One of the analytical consequences of the growing scale and complexity of these problems is the evident incapacity of nation-states to provide effective governance at both national and international levels, despite sustained efforts to establish international organizations and institutions. Given humanity’s enduring pursuit of improved conditions of collective life, addressing these fundamental challenges raises a critical question: which political arrangements are capable of responding to global crises and fostering a desirable condition of human coexistence? One proposed response has been the development of institutional–political mechanisms grounded in universalist principles, among which the idea of a world state occupies a prominent position. The idea of a world state has long been advanced as a theoretical response to transnational crises and the inability of nation-states to supply global public goods. Nevertheless, its normative legitimacy and theoretical feasibility remain deeply contested. The central problem addressed in this article is whether theories of the world state possess sufficient normative and functional coherence when evaluated against established criteria in the literature on global justice. Accordingly, the main research question asks: on the basis of which theoretical criteria of global justice can it be argued that the idea of a world state lacks normative and functional coherence? Literature Review Extant literature reveals that the critique of the world State Concept operates predominantly at three levels: philosophical, conceptual, and theoretical. Philosophically, critiques concentrate on the moral feasibility and normative legitimacy of such a global entity; notably, even scholars who viewed it as a vehicle for perpetual peace cautioned against its despotic or authoritarian risks. Conceptually, the core challenge entails reconciling a world State with the preservation of diverse national and cultural identities—an obstacle that theorists argue severely constrains the development of a shared global identity. Theoretically, the contestation among Realists, Liberals, and Constructivists underscores that even advocates of international institutions acknowledge the structural and institutional impediments to realizing a world State. Methodology This study is conducted within an interpretive–critical paradigm and adopts a fundamental research orientation. Methodologically, it employs conceptual analysis and normative evaluation to examine philosophical, theoretical, and conceptual critiques of the world state and global justice as articulated by key thinkers in this field. The research is based on systematic engagement with library and scholarly sources. Results Evaluating the idea of a world state is essential for assessing its feasibility and ensuring the realization of justice. This entails that any examination of the concept must address fundamental moral, social, and political questions, thereby guaranteeing that the idea, in practice, fosters equality and eradicates global injustices among humanity. In fact, while a world state may be structurally viable—through the establishment of supranational institutions and integrated governance systems—this viability does not equate to its justness or desirability. Under this argument, any governance framework devoid of popular acceptance and ethical standards is destined to fail; hence, a world state maintains legitimacy only if global citizens perceive that their interests and rights are protected. Therefore, if the concept of a world state is pursued without due consideration of justice, it will encounter popular resistance, non-recognition, and both agency-based and structural defiance, akin to the historical collapse of unjust political unions. In essence, justice is what confers legitimacy upon the idea of a world state. Simultaneously evaluating the feasibility of a world state and its capacity to ensure justice is crucial, as an unjust global system, even if realized, would lack stability and sustainability. Conversely, if a just system proves unfeasible, it remains merely a theoretical abstraction. The ultimate objective of proposing a world state should therefore be to strike a balance between political realism and moral ideals, preventing both the collapse of this global system and its degeneration into an instrument of domination among states. Nevertheless, implementing global justice confronts profound practical and ethical challenges. These challenges stem from cultural, political, economic, and historical divergences among diverse societies, as well as the inherently complex and multifaceted nature of the concept of justice itself. Discussion The findings indicate that, despite claims to normative universalism, theories of the world state encounter significant theoretical inconsistencies and structural deficiencies when confronted with the requirements of global justice—particularly with respect to cultural pluralism, political autonomy, mechanisms of accountability, and distributive justice. These inconsistencies render the world state not only difficult to defend as a just solution to global order, but also potentially conducive to new forms of power concentration and inequality. The article concludes that, rather than a centralized and unified world state, multilayered models of global governance grounded in multilateralism offer greater normative and theoretical defensibility within the framework of global justice.

Abstract Introduction Understanding the state as the primary actor in the political arena holds significant importance from a political sociology perspective. A precise comprehension of the structure, characteristics, and functions of the state is essential for an accurate analysis of its interactions with society. Over time, numerous scholars across political philosophy and sociology have theorized about the state. In Iran, the transition from traditional authoritarian models to a semi-modern state following the Constitutional Revolution prompted intellectuals to propose new paradigms of political authority. Scholars have examined the nature, origins, and functions of the state during the Pahlavi era, presenting concepts such as the “Dependent State,” “Authoritarian Modernizing State,” “Educated State,” “Neo-patrimonial Model,” “Absolute State,” and “Theocratic State.” Previous analyses of the Iranian state have largely emphasized structuralist perspectives, focusing on tangible factors such as social class, military capacity, geopolitical positioning, economic conditions, and cultural influences. Consequently, studies on state-society relations have predominantly adopted this objective lens. However, a critical dimension has often been overlooked: the role of cognitive or constructed factors—specifically, collective mentalities and social representations. Investigating these subjective constructs alongside objective factors may yield a more comprehensive understanding of the state as a powerful social actor. This study aims to explore the role of social representations in shaping state-civil society relations during the second Pahlavi era. This period is particularly significant for several reasons. First, it followed Reza Shah’s abdication in 1941, a moment that introduced a pluralistic political environment after decades of authoritarianism. This period, culminating in the 1953 coup, saw unprecedented growth in political parties, social movements, and public participation, fostering a collective mindset receptive to diverse intellectual, political, and social currents. Second, the nationalization of the oil industry bolstered public and elite confidence, reinforcing nationalistic sentiments and anti-colonial attitudes, while simultaneously promoting the idea that strengthening a national state was essential for overcoming domestic authoritarianism. Third, the post-coup period, including the Consortium Agreement and rising oil revenues, allowed the state to pursue social and economic reforms, such as land redistribution, women’s suffrage, worker participation in industrial shares, and educational initiatives under the White Revolution, which transformed both material and mental structures within Iranian society. Fourth, the expansion of education and communication intensified the gap between traditional and modern perceptions of the state. Whereas under Reza Shah the public primarily expected order and security, the second Pahlavi period raised expectations regarding welfare, employment, and economic management, thereby reshaping collective perceptions of the state. Overall, these events induced profound transformations in both the objective and cognitive structures of society, facilitating the transition from traditional to modern social forms. While prior studies of the second Pahlavi state have focused predominantly on objective factors, this article emphasizes the cognitive, subjective dimensions that collectively shaped the social representations of the state. Specifically, it examines how collective mentalities acted as active agents in social transformations, influencing revolutionary developments that culminated in the Islamic Revolution of 1979. The central research question is: to what extent can the conceptual framework of social representations or collective mentalities illuminate state-society relations during the second Pahlavi era?  Materials and Methods This study adopts a qualitative research design, recognizing that social representations are not tangible phenomena measurable through conventional sampling or material metrics. Rather, they are intersubjective constructs derived from discourse and textual analysis. To investigate these representations, primary sources such as memoirs, speeches, and other firsthand accounts were examined, complemented by secondary sources including newspapers, novels, and social narratives. Historical context was necessarily considered, but the study’s purpose was not to recount events, battles, or biographical details of rulers. Instead, history was analyzed from a sociological perspective to understand how collective mentalities evolved. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis in six steps. First, extensive reading of sources was conducted to become familiar with the data and extract meaning. Second, key expressions related to the state and social representations were highlighted and coded. Third, related codes were categorized into basic, main, and organizing themes. Fourth, networks of themes such as freedom-seeking, anti-authoritarianism, anti-colonialism, justice-orientation, opposition to superficial modernization, enforcement of Islamic law, and revival of Aryan civilization were mapped and reviewed for validity. Fifth, the nature of each theme was defined based on the discussions within the data, considering the extent of influence. Finally, once a reliable set of themes was established, data analysis and report preparation were completed. Results and Discussion Transformation of Social Representations of the State The Constitutional Revolution marked a significant rupture in traditional perceptions of the state in Iran. This shift can be observed in Muzaffar al-Din Shah’s inaugural speech at the first parliamentary session, emphasizing the union of state and society. In the post-constitutional period, formal and informal associations, social gatherings, and publications rapidly expanded, fostering a new social representation of the state that valued modernization, national integrity, and engagement with Western ideas. This period gradually institutionalized a collective representation of a capable, developmental, and modern state, embodied by the first Pahlavi era. However, the authoritarian nature of Reza Shah’s modernization alienated segments of society and early supporters, despite the perception of efficiency in certain quarters. Following Reza Shah’s fall, the political environment encouraged the growth of civil associations and political parties, revitalizing demands for democracy, especially among urban populations, the middle class, and educated groups. This period witnessed the emergence of a collective social representation advocating a national state capable of defending national interests, ensuring civil liberties, and pursuing independence from foreign powers. Unlike previous eras, this representation emerged from dynamic social movements rather than intellectual salons or media alone. The post-1953 coup era introduced a period of disillusionment and trauma, producing societal disengagement and elite alienation due to the failure of the nationalist government. Concurrently, the dramatic increase in oil revenues during the 1960s facilitated a novel representation of the state as wealthy, capable of rapid socio-economic transformation without relying on taxation or direct public contribution. This “oil-based” state imagery promised modernization, equitable development, and welfare distribution. However, the state’s inability to meet rising public expectations, particularly among lower-income groups and the burgeoning middle class, led to widespread frustration. Intellectuals, writers, and religious leaders developed alternative representations of the state, emphasizing justice, local cultural values, anti-imperialism, freedom, and resistance to superficial modernization. These representations became catalysts for collective mobilization against state inadequacies. Nationalist intellectuals emphasized positive nationalism, leftist thinkers focused on anti-colonial struggles, and Islamic scholars promoted governance rooted in constitutional Islam. The intersection of these perspectives laid the foundation for the emergence of Mohammad Mosaddegh’s nationalistic government. In the post-coup Pahlavi period, Shah-led modernization, informed by neo-Aryan revivalism and oil wealth, clashed with social representations of governance emphasizing participation, justice, and cultural authenticity, ultimately contributing to societal unrest and revolutionary momentum. Conclusion This study demonstrates that social representations played a crucial role in shaping the cognitive dimension of social reality during the second Pahlavi era, functioning not only to interpret reality but also as active agents in societal change. Social groups such as intellectuals, writers, religious scholars, and political elites influenced collective imagination and societal action, particularly through movements like the nationalization of the oil industry. Collective representations evolved in response to historical events, reflecting aspirations for nationalism, independence, anti-colonialism, justice, and Islamic governance. The research highlights that the second Pahlavi state’s failure to reconcile modernization, economic development, and public participation with societal expectations intensified public discontent, facilitating the rise of revolutionary social representations. These evolving representations ultimately converged in the collective imagination, providing ideological and motivational frameworks for mass mobilization and the eventual collapse of the Pahlavi regime. The study underscores the importance of integrating cognitive, constructed factors into analyses of state-society relations, illustrating how mentalities and social representations actively shape political and social outcomes.

Abstract Introduction
Affected by the decrease in political trust as an evident fact in recent years, Iran is facing many problems in the field of political governance. despite this, although the issue of political trust has been taken into consideration in sociological research in Iran, so far no comprehensive research has been conducted on ways to restore or recreate political trust in Iran. therefore, in the current research, with the perspective of political sociology, an attempt is made to analyze the ways of re-creating this important issue in today's Iran, referring to the state of political trust in today's Iran. therefore, the purpose of this research is to analyze how to recreate political trust in in today's Iran with the approach of political sociology, in order to present the necessary solutions to manage the challenge of reducing the level of political trust, as a very important challenge and at the same time affecting the quality of governance and the future of Iran's developments, while representing this macro issue. therefore, the current research has the nature of research policy.
Materials and Methods
By combining the cultural approach with the acute focus of Jean Baudrillard's hyper reality and the institutional approach in the form of systemic theory as a theoretical framework, as well as using the meta-analysis method with the approach, these results obtained that political trust in today's Iran is a variable whose level depends on the efficiency of the political system in providing valid answers to the demands of the citizens as well as their preferences and subjective perceptions. the latter case is especially affected by the acuteness of the hyper reality formed by the media's pretensions. In today's Iran, Political trust is declining due to the weakness in both mentioned fields.
Results and Discussion
Based on mentioned theoretical framework and method, in order to recreate the political trust in today's Iran, in order to strengthen the five capabilities of the political system in order to respond authentically to the demands of the citizens, the state should define a balancing nature for itself in the administration of the society and not be a part of the political conflict between the elites and political currents. become In this case, the state can make maximum use of the multiple capacities of the society. it is certain that paying attention to this matter is necessary to strengthen the efficiency of the government.
In addition, strengthening efficiency, especially in the field of distributive justice and related to the basic needs of citizens, along with revising some governance methods or turning to some new procedures in the administration of the country, such as giving the field to the border characters who have a foothold in government and a foothold in society, making governance more visible, strengthening intermediary institutions, strengthening Communicative rationality, employing public symbols to represent the whole society not just a specific section or sections, regulating the competition of political elites, accuracy in promises by officials, providing the first narrative of the country's events and strengthening the authority of the official media, in order to take media tools from the hands of foreigners, Strengthening the capacities of internal reform, accelerating the circulation of elites, the rule of law  and etc can be effective in recreating political trust in today's Iran.
Conclusion
Most of the solutions in this field have a functional nature rather than a media nature; Because the hyper reality that has been formed today in connection with Iran and its ruling political system, finds its driving force from the unfavorable objective realities existing in the Iranian society. Therefore, it is with the practical unraveling and resolution of the mentioned facts that the current reality is overturned.
Finally, it is suggested that other researchers study other dimensions and angles of this issue, such as the futures studies of the state of political trust in Iran, the impact of socio-cultural changes on the state of political trust in today's Iran, the impact of the state of the country's foreign relations on the level of political trust, and also the impact of political elite conflicts on to analyze the level of political trust in today's Iran and etc.