Abstract
This study aims to provide a comparative analysis of macro-level gender justice policies within the development plans of Iran and South Korea from the 1980s to the present. The central research problem concerns how the concept of gender justice is formulated, its position within national development policy documents, and the manner in which it is integrated into the macro-level planning processes of these countries. This issue is particularly significant given that gender justice is understood not only as a social and ethical construct but also as a key factor in achieving sustainable development. Methodologically, the research adopts a qualitative approach based on Comparative Policy Analysis. Data have been collected through content analysis of development plans, legal documents, and quantitative indicators derived from international datasets, including the Gender Gap Index, Gender Inequality Index, and Gender Development Index. The findings indicate that in Iran, gender justice is predominantly framed as a normative concept embedded within cultural and familial values, lacking structural institutionalization and a coherent policy trajectory. In contrast, in South Korea, gender justice has gradually evolved into a rights-based and institutionalized framework aimed at addressing structural inequalities. Ultimately, the study concludes that differences in gender policy frameworks between the two countries stem from variations in theoretical foundations, levels of institutional development, and the extent of linkage between development policies and implementation mechanisms. South Korea’s relative success in reducing gender gaps can be attributed to the gradual integration of gender policies into the national development planning system and the strengthening of supportive institutions. Conversely, in Iran, conceptual and institutional discontinuities have constrained the effectiveness of gender-related policies.
Keywords: Gender Justice, Development Plans, Gender Gap, Gender Inequality, Gender Development.

1. Introduction
Gender justice has become one of the most significant issues in contemporary development studies and public policy. During recent decades, many governments have attempted to integrate gender-related concerns into national development strategies, legal frameworks, and welfare systems. However, the meaning of gender justice and the methods adopted to achieve it differ considerably across political and cultural contexts. In some societies, gender justice is primarily associated with equality of opportunities and institutional reforms, whereas in others it is framed through normative, cultural, and family-centered interpretations.
Iran and South Korea provide two important comparative cases for understanding these divergent trajectories. Both countries experienced rapid social transformation, state-led modernization, demographic change, and developmental planning during the late twentieth century. Nevertheless, their approaches toward women’s issues and gender policies evolved in substantially different directions. In Iran, gender-related policies after the Islamic Revolution were increasingly shaped by ideological and cultural interpretations emphasizing differentiated gender roles, family cohesion, and demographic objectives. Although women’s access to education and healthcare expanded considerably, institutional reforms concerning labor participation, political representation, and legal equality remained limited.
South Korea, by contrast, gradually institutionalized gender equality policies through administrative reforms, labor-market interventions, and gender-sensitive policy evaluation systems. Since the 1990s, women’s movements, democratic transition, and international development pressures contributed to embedding gender equality within the structure of governance and public administration.
The importance of this study lies in its attempt to move beyond purely descriptive comparisons and to analyze the structural and institutional causes behind divergent policy outcomes. This research seeks to answer the following questions: How has gender justice been conceptualized in the development plans of Iran and South Korea? What institutional mechanisms have been adopted to implement these policies? Why have the two countries achieved different outcomes despite comparable modernization experiences?
The study argues that the effectiveness of gender justice policies depends not only on discourse and ideological commitment but also on the degree of institutionalization, policy continuity, and executive capacity. Consequently, the comparison between Iran and South Korea provides broader insights into the relationship between development planning, governance structures, and gender policy outcomes.

2. Materials and Methods
This research employs a qualitative comparative approach based on directed content analysis. The study focuses on macro-development policies and examines how gender justice has been represented and operationalized within the national development plans of Iran and South Korea from 1980 onward.
The statistical population of the study includes all official national development plans and major policy documents related to development and gender policy in the two countries. In Iran, the First through Seventh National Development Plans were analyzed. In South Korea, the Fourth through Seventh Development Plans and subsequent institutional gender policy frameworks were examined. Sampling was purposive and comprehensive rather than selective; therefore, all major development plans during the period under study were included as units of analysis.
Alongside qualitative analysis, several international indices were used to evaluate policy outcomes, including the Global Gender Gap Index (World Economic Forum), the Gender Inequality Index (UNDP), and World Bank gender-related indicators. These indices were not treated as absolute representations of gender justice but rather as analytical tools for comparing the practical outcomes of development policies.

3. Data
The comparative analysis of international gender indicators reveals substantial differences between Iran and South Korea in the outcomes of gender-related development policies.
According to the Global Gender Gap Report 2024 published by the World Economic Forum, Iran ranked among the lowest countries globally in terms of gender-gap reduction, while South Korea demonstrated considerably better performance. Although Iran experienced major improvements in women’s literacy, healthcare access, and higher education participation after the Islamic Revolution, these achievements were not translated into proportional gains in labor-market participation, political representation, or institutional empowerment.
The historical trajectory of development planning in Iran demonstrates three major phases. During the early post-revolutionary period, development policies largely focused on ideological reconstruction and welfare expansion. From the Third Development Plan onward, concepts such as women’s empowerment, participation, and gender justice gradually entered policy discourse. The Fourth and Fifth Development Plans represented the peak of this discourse-oriented approach, where limited attempts were made to formulate gender-sensitive indicators and institutional mechanisms. However, from the Sixth Development Plan onward, a significant paradigm shift occurred: policy orientation increasingly moved from development-centered empowerment toward traditional family-centered governance. Women were mainly defined through maternal, familial, and demographic functions rather than as independent socio-economic actors.
South Korea followed a markedly different trajectory. During the earlier stages of industrialization, gender issues were not central to development planning. Nevertheless, democratization, economic restructuring, and the strengthening of civil society gradually transformed gender policy into an institutionalized governmental agenda. Since the 1990s, South Korea introduced gender-responsive budgeting, gender impact assessment systems, and reforms aimed at improving women’s labor participation and political representation.
Comparative analysis of the Gender Inequality Index demonstrates that South Korea achieved a relatively continuous reduction in gender inequality during the past three decades, while Iran’s progress remained limited and unstable. The persistence of institutional barriers, inconsistent policy implementation, and ideological tensions within development planning contributed to this divergence.

4. Discussion
The findings indicate that the divergence between Iran and South Korea in the field of gender justice is rooted less in cultural differences and more in the level of institutionalization and policy continuity within their development systems. In Iran, gender justice has largely remained a normative and ideological discourse rather than a stable institutional framework. Although concepts such as women’s empowerment and gender justice entered development plans, they were not consistently supported by executive mechanisms, measurable indicators, or long-term institutional guarantees. Moreover, a persistent contradiction exists between modernization goals and traditional gender-role expectations, where women’s educational and social advancement has been encouraged while labor-market, legal, and demographic policies continue to prioritize family-centered roles.
By contrast, South Korea demonstrates how institutional reforms can transform gender discourse into practical governance mechanisms. Democratic reforms, women’s movements, and integration into the global economy encouraged the establishment of gender-responsive budgeting, gender impact assessment, and institutional accountability systems. As a result, gender equality became embedded within state governance and public policy implementation. From a theoretical perspective, the findings support institutional and empowerment approaches, showing that gender justice policies are more effective when they move beyond symbolic discourse and become integrated into administrative structures, budgeting systems, and measurable policy frameworks.

5. Conclusion
This study compared gender justice policies in the development plans of Iran and South Korea from 1980 to 2024 and demonstrated that the two countries followed fundamentally different developmental trajectories. In Iran, gender justice has largely remained within a normative and discourse-oriented framework shaped by cultural and family-centered interpretations of women’s roles. Although concepts such as women’s empowerment and gender justice appeared increasingly in development plans, these policies often lacked institutional continuity, measurable indicators, and stable executive mechanisms. As a result, gender justice in Iran has remained highly dependent on changing political orientations and governmental priorities.
In contrast, South Korea gradually institutionalized gender-related policies through administrative reforms, gender-responsive budgeting, labor-market restructuring, and policy evaluation mechanisms. Democratic transition, women’s movements, and integration into the global economy enabled gender equality to move beyond discourse and become embedded within governance structures. The Korean experience shows that gender justice policies become more effective when supported by institutional stability, long-term planning, and measurable implementation frameworks.
The findings suggest that successful gender justice policies require the interaction of three interconnected dimensions: conceptual clarity, institutionalization, and executive implementation. While Iran has largely remained at the discursive level, South Korea has advanced toward institutional and operational implementation. Therefore, the study concludes that sustainable progress in gender justice depends not only on ideological commitment but also on governance capacity, policy continuity, and the integration of gender-sensitive mechanisms into broader development planning systems.