Contested framings and policy evolution: evolution of the GM biosafety policy-making process in Iran, 2006-2009

摘要

Vigorous debates have taken place in many European countries, and between the EU andudthe USA, about regulatory policy regimes covering the assessment and approval of GMudcrops. In such countries the debates have, to a large extent, taken place in public arenasudand with the active participation of broadcast and print media. In Iran, a very vigorousudand hotly-contested policy debate concerning legislation covering GM crops took placeudbetween 2004 and 2009, but it was almost entirely confined within the Government withudno public debate and minimal media coverage. From early 2006 to late 2008 a protracteduddispute occurred between different parts of the Iranian regime, which was characterised byudan apparent stalemate. In 2008-2009, conspicuous policy shifts occurred, whichudculminated in the passage of a Biosafety Law by the Iranian Parliament (or Majlis). Thisudthesis describes, analyses and explains the policy-making process from 2006 to 2009. Itudexplains firstly how and why a stalemate arose in the disputes between ministries anduddepartments. It then explains how that impasse was overcome, and how a particular policyudregime came to be adopted. The chosen analytical framework draws mainly on two bodiesudof literature, namely the regulation of technological risk, and the analysis of public policymaking.udA task-specific analytical framework is developed which uses the concept of theud‘framing assumptions’, which underpin the particular positions taken by the diverseudprotagonists in the debate, to analyse the characteristics of the seemingly irresolvableuddispute. The differences between those framing assumptions are used to provide anudexplanation of why the stalemate arose and remained unresolved for several years. Theudexplanation of the eventual policy outcome takes account of those framing assumptions,udbut on their own they are not sufficient to explain the eventual policy decisions. Toudprovide that explanation, considerations of the unequal division of political powerudbetween parts of the Iranian regime are required. The Iranian case study, despite some ofudits unique characteristics, can support several general conclusions about the dynamics ofudrisk policy making, the conditions under which disputes can arise and those under whichudthey may be resolved.