The economy affects more than people’s income, employment, or purchasing power; it can also penetrate the deepest layers of social and ethical life. When economic pressures drive people toward choices they would never have accepted under normal circumstances, economics and ethics can no longer be treated as separate domains.
Economists such as Alvin Roth have, in recent years, sought to explain the concept of “repugnant transactions”—transactions that both parties voluntarily accept but that society views with moral disgust or ethical concern. Markets for human organs, prostitution, and certain forms of assisted death fall into this category. Iran’s experience has become one of the frequently discussed cases in the global literature on the ethics of markets.
Inflation in Iran and the Limits of What an Agreement with the United States Can Achieve
The expansion of unconventional markets, the sale of human organs, the growth of transactions driven by economic desperation, and the decline in social capital demonstrate that the economic crisis is not merely a financial issue but one that has also affected the ethical foundations of society.
The Political Economy of Iran’s Ethical Crisis
The relationship between economics and ethics in Iran cannot be analyzed separately from the country’s ruling political structure. Widespread poverty, chronic inflation, and declining economic opportunities are not the result of temporary policy decisions. Rather, they are the outcome of decades of concentrated political power, lack of accountability, and prioritizing political interests over public welfare.
In democratic systems, civil society organizations and independent media can debate the ethical boundaries of markets and establish shared norms. In authoritarian systems, however, decisions about public ethics also become political tools. As a result, the government claims to defend moral values while simultaneously creating the economic conditions that undermine those very values.
Iran’s kidney market is a clear example of this contradiction. A large proportion of sellers are individuals who have made this decision under severe financial hardship and economic pressure. Under such circumstances, speaking of “free choice” without considering the underlying economic conditions presents an incomplete picture of reality.
Michael Sandel and Debra Satz also emphasize this point. They argue that poverty can severely restrict freedom of choice and transform certain transactions into forms of economic exploitation. Therefore, the ethics of markets cannot be judged solely by the consent of the two parties involved; the broader structure of power and the distribution of opportunities must also be considered.
Unusual Markets; A Product of a Dysfunctional Economy
In recent years, the relationship between economics and ethics in Iran has been marked by the emergence of markets that either do not exist or remain marginal in many other countries. From the sale of human organs to various unconventional contractual arrangements, these markets reflect society’s adaptation to severe economic pressures.
Such adaptation is not necessarily a sign of success. Societies under pressure develop survival strategies that often carry significant ethical costs. When people are forced to sell parts of their own bodies to pay for medical treatment, rent, or outstanding debts, the issue cannot be reduced to a simple economic transaction.
Economic authoritarianism has further intensified this trend. Widespread monopolies, institutionalized corruption, and the absence of equal opportunity have restricted social mobility. As a result, segments of society are pushed into markets that were once confined to the margins.
An important point is that outright prohibition does not necessarily eliminate these markets. Global experience shows that simple suppression often leads to the expansion of underground markets. This reality, however, does not imply acceptance of the status quo. The central issue remains the economic and political conditions that give rise to such markets.
Rebuilding Public Ethics Is Impossible Without Structural Change
The relationship between economics and ethics in Iran ultimately leads to a fundamental question: Can public ethics be rebuilt when the political structure itself produces poverty, corruption, and inequality?
Many political economy analysts answer this question in the negative. Social ethics do not develop in a vacuum. Public trust, social solidarity, and civic responsibility require accountable institutions and transparent governance. In the absence of these elements, society is forced to make painful compromises between survival and ethical values.
What is unfolding in Iran today is not merely an economic crisis but also a crisis of the moral legitimacy of the ruling power structure. A system that cannot provide economic security and equal opportunity inadvertently pushes its citizens toward choices that they themselves do not view as ethically acceptable.
