Research and Innovation Policy Design in Iran: Policies, Institutions, and Interest Mediation

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Technology Studies Institute, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Secretariat of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Prof., Mechanical Engineering, Technology Studies Institute, Tehran, Iran

10.22034/jstp.2026.12354.2063

Abstract

 
The governance of research and innovation represents a complex network of government, universities, firms and RTOs that has undergone significant conceptual and practical transformations during recent decade. Drawing upon Acciai’s framework, which comprises political orientation, institutional coordination, and interest intermediation, this article examines Iran’s research and innovation policy design. Subsequently, it analyzes key policy instruments based on authority, instrument shapes, and delivery. Findings indicate that Iran’s research and innovation governance has evolved into a central driver of development. Nevertheless, a diffusion-oriented pattern, focusing on resource distribution, infrastructure development, and horizontal support, prevails over the mission-oriented pattern. This pattern is manifested in the interactions of the Ministries of Science, Research and Technology and Health and Medical Education with universities, alongside the Vice-Presidency of Science, Technology and Knowledge-based Ecnomoy support for knowledge-based companies. Despite acknowledging the necessity of transitioning toward a mission-oriented approach at discursive and structural levels, implementation efforts have largely yielded limited results, except priority technologies and leading firms. This failure primarily stems from path dependency of institutions, a lack of requisite capacity to implement the mission-oriented model, and challenges within the institutional coordination framework under the external specialization pattern governing Iran. Ultimately, Iran’s experience demonstrates that in developing countries, the imperative of a mission-oriented approach juxtaposed with the institutional feasibility of its realization manifests as a paradox within the research and innovation policy environment.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1] Acciai, C. (2023). Policy Design for Research and Innovation: Politics, Institutions and Interest Intermediation Practices. Springer Nature. Doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-36628-4
[2] Fatemi, M. (2026). Research and Innovation Policy Design: Policies, Institutions, and Interest Mediation. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 19(1), 89-108. doi: 10.22034/jstp.2026.12301.2048
[3] Fatemi Khorasgani,S A , Zahedi Khoozani,K , Shojaei,M H , Narimani, M. & Sahebkar Khorasani ,S M. (2026). Evaluation of Change Management in the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution: A Case Study of the Resolution on the Transformation of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution. Strategy, 34(4), 845-886. doi: 10.22034/rahbord.2025.535623.1834
[4] Narimani, M & Mohammadi, M. (2021). A Historical Analysis on the Experience of Forming Institutions in Nanotechnology Management in Iran. Journal of Improvement Management, 15(3), 37-61. doi: 10.22034/jmi.2021.285497.2565
[5] Narimani, M. , Shojaei, M. H. and Sahebkar Khorasani, M. (2023).   The Actor-oriented Model of Conflict Analysis: A Case Study of The Ministry of Science, Research and Technology. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 16(1), 35-50. doi: 10.22034/jstp.2023.11246.1625
 
 
 
 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics