People-Centered Economy (Part Nine)

January 3, 2026

182

Amirhossein Khodaei, Researcher

People-Centered Economy (13)

From Budget-Centered Governance to a People-Based Economy

How Can the Budget Bill Become an Opportunity for Public Participation?

With the publication of each annual budget bill, a wide range of criticisms emerges from economists, the media, and public opinion: from structural imbalances and chronic operational deficits to the rapid growth of current expenditures; direct and indirect dependence on oil revenues; increasing tax pressure without a clear linkage to improved public services; the persistence of hidden and inefficient energy subsidies; crude extraction of oil and mineral resources; the dominance of opaque state-owned enterprises over a large share of public resources; inefficient allocation of foreign currency to basic goods imports; weak linkage between the budget and domestic production; regional inequities in credit allocation; and the chronic dependence of cultural, educational, and service institutions on the public treasury.

Each of these critiques points to part of the reality, yet ultimately they converge on a fundamental issue: the concentration of financial decision-making within a state-centered structure that reduces citizens largely to taxpayers and service recipients, marginalizing their role in participation, investment, and value creation within the budgetary framework.

What Does a People-Based Economy Mean?

A people-based economy means:

Citizens are not merely consumers or taxpayers, but partners, shareholders, investors, and beneficiaries.
Public institutions move from being “budget spenders” to creators of value for the people.
Financial resources are mobilized through participation, voluntary purchasing, micro-investment, and the provision of real services.

A Supra-Governmental Approach to Planning and Budgeting: A Necessity, Not a Choice

One of the chronic weaknesses of the country’s budgeting system is its excessive statism. When planning and budgeting are confined solely to executive government bodies, non-governmental institutions, academic expertise, private-sector capacity, local knowledge, and community experience are neglected.

A supra-governmental approach means:

Policy-making through councils beyond the government, with the participation of universities and research institutions
Implementation in partnership with the private sector and cooperatives
Oversight with active involvement of civil society and popular institutions

Advantages of the Supra-Governmental Approach

Increased transparency and accountability
Reduction of costly decision-making errors
Higher efficiency in resource allocation
Simultaneous use of local knowledge and scientific expertise
Strengthening public trust

In many countries, participatory budgeting has enabled limited resources to be allocated more precisely and effectively.

A Budget That Empowers the People

Global experiences demonstrate that wherever citizens have moved from passive observers to active decision-makers, both economic efficiency and social justice have improved. The most prominent example is participatory budgeting, which began in the 1980s in Porto Alegre, Brazil. Through the direct involvement of citizens—from the poor to the wealthy—in setting local priorities, the allocation of resources to education, healthcare, and urban infrastructure improved significantly.

In the Brazilian city of Recife, more than 7.5 percent of the population participated directly in budgetary decision-making, resulting in tangible projects that enhanced quality of life. This model was later scaled up nationally in Portugal, where the government became legally bound to implement projects selected by citizens. In California—particularly in the city of Vallejo—the experience showed that even advanced economies can allocate portions of public funds through direct citizen voting while simultaneously increasing transparency, public trust, and spending effectiveness.

Comparative analysis of these cases makes it clear that people-centered budgeting is neither dependent on the level of economic development nor on a specific political system. Rather, it depends on institutional willingness to delegate financial decision-making power to citizens. If intelligently localized, this path can transform the budget from a bureaucratic document into a living, accountable social contract.

A Budget for the People or Just for the Government?

The country’s annual budget bill functions as an economic roadmap, yet a closer look reveals that the real share of citizens in decision-making and resource management is almost zero. Dependence on oil revenues, prioritization of current expenditures, and the marginal role of local investment indicate that the budget is designed more to preserve state power than to empower society. If the objective is to popularize the economy, the budget must be transparent, allocate part of resources to direct public decision-making, and operationalize mechanisms such as participatory budgeting or public consultation. In other words, people must become not merely observers, but genuine partners in shaping the national economy. Otherwise, the budget will remain a formal document on paper, without materially improving people’s daily lives.

From City to State: People-Centered Budgeting in Global Comparison

Comparative analysis of successful budgeting models worldwide shows that although Porto Alegre and Recife in Brazil, Portugal, and California emerged in different economic and political contexts, they share a common principle: transferring part of financial decision-making power from the state to citizens. In Brazil, a focus on social justice and local needs transformed the budget into a tool for reducing inequality. In Portugal, this experience was elevated to the national level, and by legally mandating the implementation of citizens’ choices, public trust in fiscal policy was strengthened. In California, efficiency and transparency were the main drivers, enabling citizens to clearly see how their taxes translated into improved security, infrastructure, and public services. This comparison makes it clear that differences in development levels or governance systems are not barriers to success; what matters is smart institutional design, information transparency, and genuine belief in the economic role of citizens—elements that transform the budget from a dry technical document into an engine of participation, trust, and sustainable development.

A Budget for the People: When the Economy Breaks Out of Monopoly

Popularizing the economy through the budget becomes meaningful when public resources are removed from closed, centralized decision-making circuits and turned into tools for empowering society. A people-centered budget is one that, instead of relying on unstable revenues and bloated current expenditures, allocates a defined share of resources to local initiatives, direct citizen participation, cooperatives, and small businesses, while fully transparent financial information formally recognizes the public’s right to oversight and accountability. In such an approach, citizens are no longer passive recipients of subsidies and services, but key actors in creating economic value, transforming the budget from a rigid administrative document into a social contract for growth, justice, and public trust—provided this path is institutionally and legally embedded in the budget bill.

Budget Ceiling, Public Budget, and Government Resources

In the budget bill, the overall budget ceiling and public resources determine whether the economy will remain state-centered or shift toward people-centered governance in the coming year. If these resources are merely distributed among government agencies, the budget grows in size while its impact remains limited. The popularization of the economy begins precisely here: projects defined in the budget must be designed in a way that enables public participation in implementation, financing, and even operation. International experience shows that whenever budgetary projects become participatory projects, pressure on public resources decreases while social trust increases.

Tax Revenues in the Budget Bill

Increasing the share of taxes in public revenues is a reality reflected in the budget bill, but this increase becomes sustainable only when citizens feel that taxation is part of a participatory cycle. A people-based economy requires the budget to establish a clear linkage between taxes and public services, so that part of tax revenues returns to the city, neighborhood, or sector from which they were collected. This mechanism transforms taxation from a mere figure in budget tables into a tool for citizen participation in development.

Asset Transfers and Financial Instruments in the Budget Bill

In every budget bill, asset transfers and the issuance of financial instruments are tools for resource mobilization. If these instruments are used solely to cover deficits, future generations will inherit debt. A people-centered approach requires that asset transfers be directed toward public participation, allowing citizens to become partners in national assets through investment funds, project-based bonds, and public share offerings. This perspective transforms state assets from sources of consumption into platforms for participation.

Current Expenditures and the Operational Deficit

One of the persistent challenges of the budget bill is the growth of current expenditures and the operational deficit. Popularizing the economy in this area means designing the budget so that part of current expenditures is financed through people-based revenues. Public use of facilities, provision of real services, and citizen participation in operating public assets should be formally recognized as budgetary solutions. Otherwise, the operational deficit will continue to recur year after year.

Energy and Hidden Subsidies: The Largest Share, the Least Transparency

The largest figure in the national economy does not appear in the visible budget, but in hidden energy subsidies—an amount several times larger than the total public budget, roughly ten times the education budget and nearly ten times the military budget. The largest indirect allocation of foreign exchange also occurs in this area. The experiences of countries such as Indonesia and Malaysia show that converting energy subsidies into direct citizen shares, energy funds, and public investment mechanisms both corrects consumption patterns and generates capital. When energy becomes people-centered, it ceases to be a source of waste and becomes a driver of development.

Subsidies are among the largest hidden and explicit items in the budget. Popularizing the economy in this sector means gradually transferring subsidies from goods and energy to citizens and involving them in consumption management and investment. The budget bill must reflect this strategic shift; otherwise, subsidies will continue to be a source of inefficiency.

Popularizing subsidies further requires redirecting them from imports of goods and energy toward citizens’ participation in domestic energy production, import substitution, and consumption management—such as through gradual hybridization and electrification of automobile production lines via public investment. The budget bill must clearly articulate this transition; otherwise, subsidies will remain a source of waste rather than development.

State-Owned Companies: The Largest Budgets, the Least Accountability

State-owned companies account for the largest share of the country’s nominal budget. They also hold a significant portion of foreign exchange allocations and imports. In many countries, state-owned enterprises have either been transformed into competitive firms or opened to public shareholding. Successful examples in South Korea—and even some domestic holding companies—demonstrate that transparency, public share offerings, and genuine competition can turn these budget-consuming giants into engines of wealth creation.

Essential Goods Imports: Abundant Foreign Currency, Limited Value Added

A large share of government and semi-official foreign exchange is spent on importing essential goods. While necessary in the short term, this approach creates long-term dependency if it is not tied to domestic production. Countries such as Brazil and Turkey have shown that imports can be conditioned on technology transfer, production partnerships, and procurement from local manufacturers. When managed intelligently, imports are not the enemy of production—they are its launchpad.

Oil, Gas, and Condensates: Champions of Raw Exports

The highest level of raw exports in Iran’s economy belongs to oil and gas. While they generate foreign currency, they are fragile and unsustainable. The experiences of Norway, Russia, and even some Arab countries show that downstream energy industries—refining, petrochemicals, and related sectors—create multiple times more value than raw exports. Popularizing this sector through energy investment funds and public participation in downstream projects is the path to overcoming the resource curse.

Mining: High Raw Exports, Low Local Development

After oil, mining has the highest share of raw exports. Stones, concentrates, and minerals are exported, while value is created elsewhere. In Australia and Canada, local communities and cooperatives are partners in the mining value chain. In Iran, completing the value chains of steel, copper, and other minerals can generate regional employment and sustainable public income, rather than short-term government revenue.

Mining and Natural Resources in the Budget Framework

In the annual budget bill, mining revenues represent a large figure. However, if these revenues come from raw exports, they do not generate development. Popularizing the mining economy means explicitly incorporating local community participation, mining cooperatives, and value-chain completion into budgetary policies. This shift transforms mining from a source of short-term revenue into a tool for sustainable development.

Education and Health: The Greatest Human Capital, the Least Public Economic Participation

Education and healthcare are among the largest budgetary items, yet most spending goes toward day-to-day administration rather than sustainable value creation. In many countries, schools and hospitals are not merely cost centers but hubs of public participation and social and economic value creation.

For example, in many European public schools, free basic education is preserved, while supplementary afternoon programs—skills training, languages, arts, technology, and life skills—are offered with family participation. Families voluntarily pay for these services, teachers earn supplementary income, and schools become active community centers. Similar examples exist domestically in board-managed and vocational schools that partially finance themselves without undermining educational equity.

In healthcare, public hospitals in countries such as Germany and Turkey guarantee basic services for all, while also offering optional services such as private rooms, non-emergency treatments, health tourism, and preventive education. These services reduce budget pressure and improve service quality. In Iran, some university hospitals have also generated supplementary income through specialized services and non-local patients without harming public care.

Universities play a similar role. In many countries, public universities fund part of their costs by offering professional short courses, in-service training, consulting, and technical knowledge transfer. Domestic universities that have entered skills training, specialized treatment, and industry cooperation have become more dynamic and less dependent on public budgets.

Even in prevention, a people-based economy is meaningful. Public participation in nutrition education, sports, mental health, and primary care—supported by municipalities and the private sector—reduces treatment costs while creating jobs and income. Many countries show that public investment in prevention yields returns far greater than treatment.

If education and health remain mere budget consumers, shortages will persist. But when people are empowered to participate in skills training, supplementary healthcare, and prevention, these sectors transform from costs into sustainable social and economic capital.

Cultural and Artistic Budgets: From Event-Based Spending to a People-Based Economy

There is no doubt about the necessity of cultural and artistic activities. Culture underpins identity, social cohesion, and national sustainability. The challenge is that many cultural activities remain event-based, short-term, and dependent on annual budgets—while culture inherently requires continuity and everyday engagement with people.

A people-based cultural economy begins here: culture becomes sustainable when people play a continuous role, not merely act as audiences for occasional events.

Popularizing the cultural economy means shifting from costly, occasional events to continuous, everyday cultural services. A museum active only during special occasions is a burden; a museum offering classes, workshops, guided tours, cultural products, and annual memberships becomes a living, self-sustaining institution. Global experience shows that people are willing to pay voluntarily for continuous cultural experiences, arts education, and quality content.

In a people-based cultural economy, people are not just spectators—they are learners, producers, supporters, and even economic partners. When cultural centers become hubs for arts education, creative skills, storytelling, illustration, music, and theater, talent flourishes and sustainable income emerges. These activities strengthen—not replace—the cultural mission.

The difference between continuous activity and occasional programs lies here: events create short-term excitement; continuous activity builds lasting relationships between people and cultural institutions. A people-based economy depends on this relationship. Annual memberships, ongoing courses, audience clubs, regular content production, and cultural product sales integrate culture into everyday life.

Importantly, popularizing the cultural economy does not mean shallow commercialization or eliminating cultural equity. Basic services can remain public and accessible, while specialized services, advanced training, and premium experiences are offered through public participation. This model has been successfully implemented in many countries and even domestically, improving quality while reducing budget dependency.

The conclusion is clear:
Culture does not survive on occasions; it thrives on continuous, meaningful, people-based activity. When people feel they are part of a cultural movement—not temporary audiences—they participate, contribute financially, and defend it. This is the point where culture transforms from a cost into sustainable social and economic capital.

Defense and Technology within the Budget Framework

In the annual budget bill, defense allocations account for a significant share. A people-based economy does not mean downsizing this sector; rather, it means linking part of these expenditures to value creation for the national economy. Technology commercialization, support for knowledge-based companies, and public participation in technology investment funds can be explicitly incorporated into budgetary policies, transforming defense spending into technological capital.

Regional Balance in the Budget Bill

Regional balance allocations become effective only when local communities play a role in decision-making and implementation. A people-based economy requires that regional development funds be directed toward cooperatives, local development funds, and participatory projects rather than solely centralized initiatives. This shift must be clearly reflected in budget provisions to ensure sustainable regional development.

Food Security and Biological Threats: The Missing Link in the Budget

Food security means ensuring people’s access to sufficient, healthy, and sustainable food. This issue is directly linked to national security, public health, and social stability. The agricultural sector faces major challenges, including heavy dependence on imported livestock feed, soil degradation, declining rangeland productivity, and growing biological threats.

Budgetary Solutions:

Allocating dedicated budget lines for domestic livestock feed production, rangeland restoration, and desertification control.
Prioritizing prevention and management of biological threats instead of costly, delayed responses.
Enabling public and cooperative participation in rangeland protection, restoration, desertification control, and sustainable use of natural resources.

These policies simultaneously strengthen food security and free national resources for long-term development and investment.

Budget-Funded Cultural Institutions and Sustainable Revenue Solutions

No one can deny the importance of cultural institutions. They are the cultural heart of society, shaping identity and transmitting education, art, and religion to future generations. Yet many remain fully dependent on government budgets. The lack of diversified financing models has not only increased pressure on public finances but also exposed these institutions to public criticism. In reality, cultural institutions can generate sustainable income—even budget surpluses—while preserving their cultural missions and achieving financial independence.

Public Broadcasting: From Public Expenditure to a People-Based Media

Public broadcasting receives substantial funding in the budget, yet it has the potential to become a major actor in the people-based economy. Public broadcasters in Japan, Italy, and South Korea demonstrate that content sales, paid educational programs, digital archives, co-production with citizens, and even small-scale public investment in content creation can enhance quality while reducing budget dependency. Domestically, the success of people-funded home streaming platforms shows that audiences are willing to pay for quality content. The key solution is public participation in content production and ownership.

Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance

The Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance and its affiliated institutions—such as the Farabi Cinema Foundation and the Book House—operate on public budgets but possess significant revenue-generation potential. International examples like the Pompidou Center in France or London’s art museums show that ticket sales, traveling exhibitions, and cultural products can cover a large share of costs. In Iran, experiences such as the Iranian Youth Cinema Society and independent festivals demonstrate that content sales and specialized training programs can generate sustainable income.

Institute for the Intellectual Development of Children and Young Adults

This institution, with its strong and well-known brand, has substantial income-generating capacity but remains dependent on public funding. International examples in Japan and Europe show that producing books, animations, educational toys, paid workshops, and exporting content can both expand education and generate significant revenue. By commercializing its content responsibly, the institute can move beyond budget dependency and achieve financial independence.

The Islamic Revolution Art Bureau

With its talented artists and cultural productions, the Art Bureau holds strong revenue potential. Successful models such as modern art museums in New York and London show that art sales, traveling exhibitions, and ticketed events can fund a significant portion of costs. In Iran, by protecting intellectual property, improving marketing, and partnering with the private sector, the Art Bureau can strengthen its artistic standing while generating sustainable income.

Similar models and solutions exist for other cultural and religious institutions, both domestically and internationally. Due to their scope and detail, they are not fully elaborated here. The core message is clear: for all cultural and religious institutions, diversified and sustainable revenue models are feasible, making financial independence and surplus generation achievable.

Common Solutions for All Cultural Institutions

Separating cultural missions from economic activities:
Establishing an independent economic arm with professional management.

Selling cultural content and products:
Including books, animations, software, artworks, and educational workshops.

Paid educational services and specialized training programs:
Both domestic and international.

Marketing and branding:
Leveraging institutional reputation and public trust to market services and products.

Transparent endowment and investment funds:
Designed to generate sustainable income and support institutional growth.

Partnerships with the private sector:
Creating joint ventures for co-production and revenue generation.

Cultural institutions can achieve sustainable—and even surplus—revenue without diminishing their cultural missions. This requires structural reform, the creation of independent economic units, market engagement, commercialization of cultural services and products, and full financial transparency. Progress along this path not only ensures financial independence but also enhances institutional credibility and public trust, leaving little ground for persistent criticism.

Strategic Conclusion

The annual budget bill should be viewed as more than a traditional financial document; it must become a tool for sustainable development, public participation, and the creation of economic and social value. The key strategy is to ensure that national resources are not merely spent, but transformed into long-term capital for Iran’s future.

Within this framework:

Food security and biological threats must be central to budgetary decisions to safeguard public health, ensure production sustainability, and reduce import dependency.
A people-based and participatory economy transforms citizens from passive consumers into partners and investors, enhancing public trust and resource efficiency.
Domestic production, human capital, culture, education, and healthcare should evolve—through participatory models and complementary services—into engines of value creation and employment.
Public assets, financial instruments, and state-owned enterprises, through public participation and transparent markets, must shift from mere consumption toward wealth generation.
Subsidies and energy resources, when managed through public participation and investment funds, can move from wasteful allocation to sustainable development and national wealth creation.

In essence, reforming the budget bill means transitioning from cost accounting to people-centered governance of capital and social participation. Today’s budgetary choices will shape a healthier, more resilient, and stronger future for the country. A people-oriented budget guarantees not only fiscal balance but also social equilibrium and national security, guiding Iran toward smart and sustainable development.