درک تجربۀ ذی‎‍نفعان از فرایند خصوصی سازی در ایران

در پژوهش‌های سیاست‌گذاری اقتصادی، خصوصی ‎‍سازی‌ راه‎‍حلی در جهت افزایش بهره ‎‍وری بنگاه‎‍ های اقتصادی دولتی، کاهش فشار مالی آنها بر بودجۀ کشور و توانمندسازی بخش خصوصی است که در طولانی مدت به بهبود فضای کسب و کار، رشد تولید ناخالص داخلی و ارتقای شاخص‎‍های اقتصادی-اجتماعی جامعه کمک می‌کند. ارزیابی نتایج پیاده‎‍سازی این سیاست در ایران و علل مترتب بر آن،‎‍ همواره مورد مناقشه بوده است. این پژوهش ‌ درک تجربۀ زیستۀ کنشگران جامعۀ کار و تولید ایران (فعالان بخش خصوصی، بوروکرات‎‍های بخش دولتی و فعالان جامعۀ کارگری) را از فرایند خصوصی ‎‍سازی بررسی کرده است. این پژوهش از نوع کیفی، با روش تحقیق نظریۀ زمینه ‎‍ای بوده است. روش نمونه ‎‍گیری نظری و تکنیک اشباع نظری مصاحبه با 31 نفر بوده است. نتایج به دست آمده نشان داد ارزیابی جامعۀ مخاطب از خصوصی‎‍سازی در سه دستۀ علی، زمینه‎‍ای و مداخله‎‍گر طبقه‎‍بندی شده است. شرایط علی عبارت‌اند از: فربگی دولت، نظارت ناکافی، قانون‎‍گریزی، نبود شفافیت و فضای نامناسب کسب و کار. شرایط زمینه‎‍ای شامل فقدان شایسته‎‍سالاری در مدیریت، بحران برنامه‎‍ریزی و استیلای بخش نامولد است. شرایط مداخله‎‍گر نیز بر مقوله هایی نظیر نگرش اشتباه به خصوصی سازی، فلاکت بخش خصوصی و پارادوکس منافع تاکید می‎‍کند. استراتژی‎‍های کلان شامل اصلاح ساختار بودجه ‎‍ریزی کشور، سیاست زدایی از فرآیند تخصیص سرمایه در اقتصاد، تسریع دموکراتیزاسیون و سیاست خارجی توسعه گراست و استراتژی های سطح خرد مولفه‎‍ هایی نظیر تزریق شایسته ‎‍سالاری، تامین اجتماعی موثر، اصلاح محیط کسب و کار و احیای اعتماد عمومی را در بر می‎‍گیرد. پیامدها هم بر‌ سه پیامد مهم سیاسی، اجتماعی و اقتصادی تمرکز می‎‍کند.

understanding beneficiaries’ experience of the privatization process in iran

introduction:in economic policy literature, privatization is often proposed as a solution to increase the productivity of state-owned enterprises, reduce their financial burden on the national budget, and empower the private sector. the rationale is that this would, in the long run, improve the business environment, drive gdp growth, and enhance socio-economic indicators for society. evaluation of the results from implementing this policy in iran and the underlying causes has long been contentious. this research aimed to provide a more realistic portrayal of the experiences and circumstances faced by those impacted by privatization in iran’s large state-owned companies in contrast to the dominant narrative promoted by those in power. additionally, it sought to use these narratives to critically evaluate social policies and power dynamics.  materials methods:this qualitative study employed a grounded theory research method to examine the lived experiences of iranian labor and production society activists, including private sector activists, public sector bureaucrats, and labor organization members, regarding the process of privatization. the data collection method was theoretical sampling through semi-structured interviews with 31 participants. theoretical saturation was achieved not only through the repetition of categories and concepts, but also via the enrichment of categories and strengthening of relationships between them. by conducting the interviews and extracting the key concepts, a richer and more comprehensive understanding of the relevant categories was developed. additionally, the relationships between categories were strengthened in a way that contributed to the theoretical saturation process.discussion of results conclusion:the findings of this study revealed that the participants’ evaluations of the privatization process could be categorized into 3 main themes: causal conditions, contextual conditions, and intervening conditions. the causal conditions identified included government bloat, insufficient oversight, lack of transparency, and an unfavorable business environment. the contextual conditions encompassed the lack of meritocracy in management, planning crises, and ascendancy of unproductive sectors. the intervening conditions emphasized issues, such as wrong attitudes towards privatization, distress of the private sector, and paradox of competing interests. in terms of strategies, the study suggested macro-level reforms, such as restructuring the country’s budgeting system, depoliticizing the capital allocation process, accelerating democratization, and pursuing a developmental foreign policy. at the micro level, the strategies included injecting meritocracy, strengthening the social safety net, reforming the business climate, and restoring public trust. the findings also highlighted the significant political, social, and economic consequences of the privatization process. consistent with zakari’s (2021) research, the results indicated that the privatization often empowered the minority elite, who wielded power in the economic and political structures. as owners of the privatized companies, this group sought to maintain their monopolies and resist progress towards greater democratization, transparency, and optimal taxation policies as these would threaten their class interests. in many cases, the pursuit of privatization based on a washington consensus-style understanding had benefited a few at the expense of the many, widening the gap between the affluent and the poor. furthermore, commercial interests and values had often overridden concerns related to the environment, democracy, human rights, and social justice.