فصلنامه مطالعات راهبردی سیاستگذاری عمومی
پیاپی 53 (زمستان 1403)

In this special issue two approaches have been considered simultaneously. The first approach is to analyze the processes of disruption in the collective decision-making system within the government, and the second approach includes and study of the processes of cooperation and interaction of external policy advisory institutions to promote the internal decision-making system of the government. In the first approach on the one hand, parallel work and division of labor between the government and other supreme councils under the executive branch have been considered. On the other hand, the structural weakness of the government in its passive approach to sectoral issues and the lack of evaluation of the impact and monitoring of the results of the decisions of the Council of Ministers also deserve special attention. Another important issue in collective decision-making processes in the executive branch is paying attention to the role of regulation along with the roles of tenure, support, and facilitation. In the second approach, attention has been paid to the capacity of external institutions to provide policy advice and help to improve decision-making processes in the executive branch. Strengthening both sides of the interaction, i.e., both the institutions providing the consultant and the governmental institutions receiving the consultation, have been considered in the articles.

Policy systems use different mechanisms to deal with cross-sectoral issues that require coordination between different actors. One of these solutions is the creation of specialized trans-sectoral institutions consisting of ministries and public organizations. The main function of these institutions; Creating coordination, coherence and integration is a policy. In the policy system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, trans-sectoral institutions have been established, including at the executive levels within government organizations - administrative councils - whose purpose was to establish coordination and planning in the relevant specialized field. Examining the current situation has shown that the duties of these councils overlap and work in parallel with the Board of Ministers and various ministries, which has caused other problems. This research seeks to explain the reasons for this problem and provide a comprehensive framework for promoting coordination between administrative councils and the cabinet in Iran. For this purpose, by using the exploratory qualitative research strategy and by interviewing the relevant stakeholders, central categories and 7 unifying categories were extracted and based on this, the proposed research framework was developed.. At the first level, the competences and policies related to the duties of the Board of Ministers are emphasized, and at the second level, the relationship between administrative councils and the government is emphasized. The third level is related to the relationship between administrative councils and executive bodies, especially ministries, and the fourth level explains the administrative infrastructure and support for the implementation of the policy model.

Non-implementation of regulations or at least their incomplete implementation is one of the main challenges of the country's regulatory system. In this context, although regulation is considered a necessary condition to comply with legal obligations What completes this process and brings about the enforcement of regulations and increasing the efficiency of the regulatory system is the "evaluation of the implementation of regulations" process. In this context, the main question of the current research is dedicated to determining the requirements for evaluating the implementation of regulations and how to apply them in the approvals of the Council of Ministers. The findings of this research by adopting the descriptive-analytical method and using library sources and elite interviews show that among the branches of the executive branch, while the "Government Board Office" is the most suitable authority that can optimally handle this matter and all the institutions and bring together the government ministries and examine and evaluate the issues from its various aspects, the implementation of this process requires compliance with the components and requirements such as determining the target institutions for the implementation of the regulations, converting the provisions of the regulations into indicators and criteria, interacting with the stakeholders and audiences Implementing orders and assignments, receiving performance reports and documentation, publishing evaluation reports on the implementation of regulations, and finally providing various corrective solutions in order to improve the quality of regulations and at the same time find their objectivity in the real world.

The energy sector is considered one of the most important network industries due to having a network of transmission and distribution in the field of electricity, gas and oil. Since the characteristic of the network leads to natural monopoly, therefore, in most countries, these industries were exclusively managed by the government. After 1980, there was a fundamental change in the management of these industries that they are not monolithically monopolized and are composed of different components, and this led to the change of their governance structure, centered on regulatory institutions in separating policy-making from service provision layers. It provided the purpose of unifying the decision-making system. Through analytical-descriptive method, this article has focused on deriving a theoretical framework in line with the position of regulatory institutions in the structure of energy governance, as well as examining empirical study in China. Also, another part of the article is dedicated to the analysis of Iran's energy governance structure, focusing on regulatory institutions, through the case study method. The results of this article show that the existence of a gradual approach in China, has been able to make the path of separation of policy making, regulation and service provision duties, and such a separation has occurred gradually, and this has led to the improvement of the governance system in the field of energy in this country. It seems that using such an approach in Iran's energy sector through advisory regulator is an inevitable necessity.

In recent years, governments have increasingly collaborated with independent policy consulting organizations to enhance efficiency, achieve cost savings, reduce bureaucratic resistance, and leverage external expertise. However, certain legal, financial, and operational constraints have hindered the optimal utilization of these organizations within Iran's decision-making system. Considering the pivotal role of the Cabinet Office (Heiat-e-Dowlat) in national policy formulation, this research aims to provide practical solutions for maximizing its use of consulting capacities to improve policy decisions. Data was collected through in-depth expert interviews and expert panel sessions conducted between July and December 2023. Employing a structural-functional analysis, the study evaluates the current state of the Cabinet Office's relationship with consulting entities. Following an analysis of strengths and weaknesses in key structural and functional components, three alternative propositions are proposed and elaborated to enhance the Cabinet Office's engagement with policy consulting organizations: (1) maintaining the status quo, (2) implementing moderate reforms, and (3) undertaking fundamental transformation. Each proposition outlines the role of the Cabinet Office, the communication approach, necessary structural and functional changes, associated advantages and challenges, and relevant policy implications. These propositions assist decision-makers in analyzing various situations and policy options, enabling policymakers to select a suitable path based on strategic priorities and available resources.

Technological advancements and innovations in business models have transformed the delivery of insurance services, leading to the emergence of insurtech companies. Insurtechs increse attraction of insurance offerings and contribute to a higher penetration rate of insurance services, garnering increased attention from policymakers in recent years. However, the growth of insurtechs in the country often encounters regulatory challenges.This study aims to explore the regulation of insurtechs and identify existing regulatory gaps to foster the application of technology and innovation in the insurance industry. Utilizing a qualitative case study approach and interviewing with 17 experts at the beginning of 2024, The regulation of insurtechs have been examined from the perspectives of environment , supervision, and service delivery. So, the infrastructural weaknesses, existing barriers posed by legislators and policymakers, as well as the challenges faced by service providers in the development of insurtechs have been identified. Based on these findings, the study offers several recommendations for effective regulation, including: establishing a legal and operational framework to expand the insurance market, empowering micro-level decision-making in the insurance industry, leveraging insurtech capabilities through government procurement, creating a sandbox testing environment, clarifying the role of the central insurance authority with a focus on evaluating service provider performance, ensuring the independence of insurtech procedures, and implementing incentive programs to encourage the utilization of insurtech

As social issues grow increasingly intricate, governments often find themselves lacking in the ability to provide comprehensive solutions. Effective policymaking transcends the confines of government bureaucracy. External consultants, known for their independence, utilization of professional researchers, stakeholder proximity, and advanced research methods, possess notable capabilities in problem identification and policy formulation. However, limited access to decision-makers and the rigid governmental structure restrict their effectiveness. Consequently, employing innovative methods and blending technical recommendations with political activism becomes imperative for these institutions. One such approach is advocacy, employing communication and informational tactics to influence decision-makers throughout the policy cycle. This article aims to explore advocacy tools, recommending their strategic application at each stage of the policy cycle for political advisory bodies. It begins by elucidating the literature surrounding policy advisory systems, emphasizing recent studies highlighting the significance of media attention. Following this, the article employs a case study approach to delve into how a political advisory institution in Iran conducts advocacy activities related to migration. The research findings shed light on the types of advocacy activities deemed beneficial at various stages of the policy cycle, enhancing the efficacy of advisory bodies' recommendations for decision-makers.

Among the challenges of the governance system in Iran, we can point to the dysfunctions of decision-making and the lack of an integrated Policy Advisory System. Although groups in the country are sporadically engaged in Policy Advisory but what is necessary is to know the Capacity of the Policy Advisory system in the country in a cooperative and interactive environment. Based on this, the aim of this study is: "Identifying the ecosystem of policy advisory in Iran includes typology, types of actors and providing suggestions for collaborative governance among actors with the aim of improving the functions of the policy advisory system in Iran". the research question is: "What are the institutional Capacity of the Policy Advisory Ecosystem in Iran and what suggestions can be made for the formation of collaborative governance in this ecosystem?". The research method is based on a case study and in the findings section: types of Policy Advisory actors in Iran in the form of "government actors", "institutional actors", "defense and security actors", "social actors", "private sector actors", "Howzeh actors", "academic actors" and "innovative governance centers " have been identified. Also, the main processes of this centers including "policy agenda setting and decision-making", "policy socialization and acceleration", "policy ideation", "policy knowledge creation", "policy innovation" and "policy effectiveness" have been identified.