Advocacy coalitions and social policy making in Iran: the Education 2030 Agenda

Purpose This article employs the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to examine the policy process surrounding the Education 2030 Agenda in Iran. Between 2016 and 2022, the Agenda became a site of political contestation within Iran’s authoritarian Islamic regime, where rival coalitions – comprised exclusively of state institutions and affiliated actors – competed to shape the policy’s trajectory. Design/methodology/approach The study identifies key actors, belief structures and coalition strategies based on a qualitative content analysis of 874 documents. Findings The research findings showed that, despite sharing deep-core ideological commitments, the conflict was driven by differences in policy-core beliefs. Contrary to conventional ACF assumptions, civil society actors were absent from the process and power dynamics, rather than technical expertise or deliberative engagement, played a decisive role in shaping policy outcomes. The Leader of the Islamic Republic functioned as the ultimate political authority and veto player, reinforcing the dominant coalition and determining the direction of the policy. Social implications By revealing how state-affiliated coalitions legitimize and enforce the Education 2030 policy from the top down, this study informs domestic and international stakeholders about the broader societal impact of authoritarian policy processes. Also, it provides insights to global policymakers on how domestic coalitions can act as drivers or barriers in advancing global social policies, including the Education 2030 Agenda. Originality/value The findings demonstrate that ACF retains analytical value in nondemocratic settings and can be extended to better account for how policy is legitimized, contested and implemented within authoritarian political systems.