scholarly journals How much the Iranian government spent on disasters in the last 100 years? A critical policy analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamed Seddighi ◽  
Sadegh Seddighi

Abstract Background During the past 20 years, Iran has been experiencing a significant increase in the occurrence of disasters mainly due to the emergence of anthropogenic climate change. This paper aims at analyzing the trend of national budget allocation in Iran over the last 100 years to evaluate the focus of the Iranian state on the four phases of Preparedness, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery and propose modifications. Methods It is used a critical policy analysis with what’s the problem represented approach. In this approach is focused on problematization and policy gaps. The most important policy statement in any government is the budget. During the first screening, 1028 regulations and laws were found from 1910 to 2020. After full text screening, 494 regulations and laws related to budget allocation to disasters were analyzed. Results The Iranian government has spent around 29 billion USD on disasters during the last 100 years. Droughts, earthquake and flood have costs the government more than other disasters, accounting for more than 14, 6.9, and 6.1 billion USD, respectively, in the allocated budget. Most of the Iranian government expenditure during the last 100 years on various disasters such as drought, flood, earthquake, and COVID-19 has been spent on involuntary costs including Response and Recovery. Mitigation and Preparedness are the two critical disaster management phases with very small shares of national budgeting. Conclusions From policy audit and policy gaps it is concluded that Iranian governments during last 100 years, problematized the issue of “disasters strike” and not “disasters’ risks”. In time of disasters, governments tried to solve the issues or impacts of disasters with budgeting to response and recovery. Nevertheless, disasters’ prevention or mitigation or preparedness was not a problem for Iranian governments from 1920 to 2020.

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Winton ◽  
Michelle Milani

Fundraising and collecting fees are ubiquitous in Ontario, Canada’s public schools. Critics assert that these practices perpetuate and exacerbate inequities between schools and communities. In this article we present findings from a critical policy analysis of an advocacy group’s efforts to change Ontario’s fees and fundraising policies over the past two decades. Rhetorical analyses of 110 texts finds that the group constructed the problem of each policy similarly, targeted the same audiences, and utilized many of the same strategies to appeal to logos, ethos, and pathos in their struggle over the policies’ meanings. However, only one out of four of the group’s policy meanings became dominant. The discursive and critical policy perspectives grounding the study directed us to examine how neoliberalism and the policies’ shared broader social, political, and economic contexts can help explain this outcome. Specifically, the group’s efforts to change Ontario’s school fees and fundraising policies confronted dominant discourses that construct parents as consumers of education and responsible for their children’s success in a competitive world, promote the meritocratic notion that successful people deserve their success and the benefits it brings, view the government as responsible only for providing the basic requirements of education, and support privatization and marketization of public schools.


2016 ◽  
Vol 118 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Muhammad Khalifa ◽  
Ty-Ron M. O. Douglas ◽  
Terah Venzant Chambers

Background/Context This article employs critical policy analysis as it examines the historical underpinnings of racialized policy discrimination in Detroit. It considers histories, discourses, and oppressive structures as it seeks to understand how policies have been and currently are implemented by Whites in predominantly Black urban areas. Focus of Study As we seek to understand how policy is constructed in relationship to predominantly Black communities, we argue that White actions toward Detroit are based on deep-rooted and historical biases, stereotypes, and fears of Blacks. Research Design We used critical policy analysis around the famed Milliken v. Bradley (1974) Supreme Court case to explore 20th century White American behaviors and policy regarding Black urban spaces, specifically in Detroit. Data Collection and Analysis We pull from political, educational, and legal literature surrounding Milliken I and critically examine prior research and policies related to the case. Conclusions/Recommendations Our analysis suggests that Milliken had a long-term deleterious impact on Black students (and families) in the city of Detroit, including the resegregation of separate and inequitable schools and the (re)entrenchment of White fears and stereotypes about Black Detroiters.


Author(s):  
Çağla E. Aykaç

Çaǧla E. Aykaç’s ‘What Space for Migrant Voices in European Anti-Racism?’ investigates the development of a critical policy analysis of the European Union.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document