«دل و دلار»: روایت کیفی ابعاد حک‌شدگی کنش اقتصادی نسل زد در ایران

نویسندگان

1 گروه علوم اجتماعی، دانشکدۀ علوم اجتماعی و اقتصادی، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران

2 کارشناس ارشد پژوهشگری اجتماعی، گروه علوم اجتماعی، دانشکدۀ علوم اجتماعی و اقتصادی، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران

10.22059/jrd.2026.413109.668989

چکیده

نسل زد به‌عنوان نخستین نسل بومی دیجیتال، در فضای تلاقی بحران‌های مالی، سرمایه‌داری پلتفرمی و استیلای منطق مالی‌گرایی، الگوهای کنشی متمایزی را بروز داده است. هدف پژوهش حاضر، تبیین حک‌شدگی کنش‌های اقتصادی این نسل و نقد رویکردهای تقلیل‌گرایانه در تحلیل کنش‌های آنان است.
این مطالعه با رویکرد کیفی-اکتشافی و از طریق مصاحبه‌های نیمه‌ساختاریافته با ۲۰ دانش‌آموز دختر نسل زد در شهرستان بهارستان انجام شده است.
یافته‌های پژوهش براساس نظریۀ «حک‌شدگی» نشان می‌دهد کنش اقتصادی این نسل در سه بعد حک شده است: ۱. حک‌شدگی ساختاری که در آن، پیوند با «غریبه‌ها» به‌عنوان پل‌های اطلاعاتی، جایگزین مسیرهای سنتی می‌شود و امکان گریز از جغرافیای محدود حاشیه را فراهم می‌کند؛ ۲. حک‌شدگی فرهنگی که در آن، پول به‌مثابۀ «ارز مذاکره» برای تغییر موازنۀ قدرت در خانواده و خرید «حق متفاوت‌بودن» عمل می‌کند؛ و ۳. حک‌شدگی شناختی که در آن به‌دلیل اضطراب بقا، سوژه به‌سمت «استثمار داوطلبانۀ خویشتن» و تبدیل خود به یک پروژۀ سرمایه‌گذاری می‌رود.
یافتۀ نوآورانۀ پژوهش نشان می‌دهد حتی بی‌درآمدی در میان این نسل، نه نشانه‌ای از انفعال، بلکه صبر راهبردی برای انباشت سرمایۀ مهارتی و حفاظت از اعتبار هویتی در برابر ثروت‌های وابسته است. درنهایت، این پژوهش نشان داد کنش اقتصادی نسل زد، تلاشی مداوم برای آشتی‌دادن قطب‌های معناجویی و ضرورت بقا است؛ جایی که منفعت نه در انباشت مادی صرف، بلکه در پیوند میان سود اقتصادی و اعتبار هویتی بازتعریف می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

“Hearts and Dollars”: Exploring the Qualitative Dimensions of Economic Embeddedness among Iranian Gen Z

نویسندگان [English]

  • Zeinab Shafiei 1
  • Saba Najafi 2
1 Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences and Economics, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
2 MA in Social Research, Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences and Economics, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Generation Z (born 1997–2012), as the first generation of digital natives, has emerged within a global landscape defined by the intersection of financial crises, platform capitalism, and the hegemony of financialization. In Iran’s context, this digital entanglement carries a dual significance; for the Iranian adolescent, the virtual sphere is not merely a communication tool but a parallel public arena where physical and structural limitations are bypassed. Growing up in an “attention economy” where visibility serves as currency, Gen Z’s identity has become inextricably linked with market logic. Their economic actions are deeply embedded in late capitalism, where personal branding, lifestyle, and the ability to display consumption are as vital as consumption itself.
In Iran, this situation is exacerbated by structural blockages, chronic inflation, and institutional instability. While global discourse often frames Gen Z entrepreneurship as a luxury lifestyle choice, for Iranian youth, it represents a strategic defense and survival mechanism against the collapse of traditional employment models. Despite this complexity, existing literature often reduces Gen Z to either “under-socialized” profit-seekers (as seen in neoclassical economics) or “over-socialized” subjects following peer-group consumption norms (as seen in traditional sociology). This research seeks to move beyond these reductionist dualities by employing the concept of “embeddedness” (Granovetter, 1985; Zukin & DiMaggio, 1990) to explore how economic actions are articulated within the unique socio-economic lifeworld of Iranian Gen Z girls.
Methodology
This study adopts a qualitative-exploratory approach using directed qualitative content analysis. The field of study was purposefully selected: girls’ high schools in Baharestan, a transitional and peripheral urban area in Iran. Baharestan serves as a strategic site for studying the intersection of structure and action, as it reveals a sharp semantic shift from the importance of formal education to early employment.
The research utilized semi-structured interviews (individual and group) with 20 Gen Z female students (aged 15–17) engaged in various economic activities—ranging from online shops and beauty services to pharmacy assistance and teaching. Participants were selected through maximum variation sampling to ensure a breadth of experiences across diverse economic backgrounds. Data analysis followed a three-stage process: extracting meaning units, coding, and categorizing these codes into the three dimensions of embeddedness—structural, cultural, and cognitive—based on the theoretical framework of Zukin and DiMaggio (1990). To ensure trustworthiness (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), a range of strategies such as prolonged engagement, member checking, and expert peer debriefing were employed.
Findings
The findings indicate that Gen Z’s economic action is not an isolated, purely rational decision but is deeply embedded in three distinct dimensions: 1) Structural Embeddedness (Networks as Financial Shortcuts): Unlike traditional models that rely on family (strong ties), Gen Z economic action increasingly relies on “weak ties” and “links with strangers” in digital spaces. In the context of peripheral Baharestan, where family networks are often informationally redundant, weak ties act as vital bridges to non-redundant job opportunities. More importantly, the digital sphere connects these youth to global flows of information and wealth, allowing them to bypass traditional, stagnant economic hierarchies. Strangers in the digital world are viewed not as threats, but as economic opportunities that save the actor from normative rigidity; 2) Cultural Embeddedness (The Tool-kit of Capitalist Realism): Economic action is embedded in the values of late capitalism, where “capitalist realism” acts as a cognitive schema. Money is not just for material needs; it is “negotiation currency” used to shift the balance of power within the family and purchase the right to be different. A key finding is the emphasis on “self-made” wealth. In their logic, wealth derived from effort is “Smart Money” (prestigious), while wealth from connections or dependence is “Dependent Money” (stigmatized). This generation views the entrepreneurial self as a personal project where self-exploitation is embraced as a form of agency and self-actualization; 3) Cognitive Embeddedness (The Survival Schema and Strategic Patience): Due to chronic inflation and institutional mistrust, Gen Z has developed a “survival-based rationality.” The cognitive schema of “financial subjecthood” compels them to act as “portfolio managers” of their own lives. Interestingly, their individualism is not in conflict with family support; rather, they view the family as a “strategic partner” and a safety net. They invest in the family’s financial stability to ensure their own long-term survival. Furthermore, the research identified “strategic patience” as a significant finding: periods of “no income” (e.g., unpaid internships or skill-building) are not signs of passivity, but a conscious strategy to accumulate “identity capital” and protect their reputational brand from “low-status” or dependent wealth.
Conclusion
The research concludes that the economic action of Gen Z girls in Iran is an active articulation of agency within a landscape of structural insecurity. By shifting their embeddedness from physical geography to digital networks, they redefine the boundaries between the periphery and the center. Their economic behaviour is a continuous attempt to reconcile the two poles summarized in the title: “heart” (the search for meaning, identity, and digital self-expression) and “dollar” (the harsh necessity of survival in a volatile, financialized economy).
The study reveals that “selfhood” has become an ongoing investment project. The strict distinction they make between wealth from labour and wealth from dependent relationships indicates the emergence of a new value system where social prestige is tied to the narrative of autonomy. Ultimately, for Gen Z, profit is no longer defined by mere material accumulation; instead, it is found at the intersection of economic gain and identity credibility. This “status-based economic agency” serves as a proactive strategy to manage survival anxiety in a world where formal institutions have lost their protective function. Understanding this generation requires recognizing that their economic actions are not merely about “having” more, but about “being” someone—specifically, an autonomous subject in an unstable world.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Capitalism
  • Economic Action
  • Economic Sociology
  • Embeddedness
  • Generation Z
  • Iran
پورعسکری، محمدحسین، خدادادحسینی، سید حمید، کردناییج، اسدالله، و منصوری مؤید، فرشته (1403). شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی عوامل تعیین‌کننده در تصمیم‌های مالی و سرمایه‌گذاری (مورد مطالعه: سرمایه‌گذاران نسل زد). چشم‌انداز مدیریت بازرگانی، ۶۰(22)، 136-161. https://doi.org/10.48308/jbmp.2025.232989.1542
ذاکری، علیرضا و روشنفکر، پیام (1403). سنخ‌شناسی جامعه‌شناسی نسل زد: در نقد نسل گرایی. مطالعات فرهنگی و ارتباطات، 3(20)، 95-1. https://doi.org/10.22034/jcsc.2024.2032585.2752
ذکایی، محمدسعید (1404). تکنولوژی‌های دیجیتال و مناسبات نسلی در ایران: تحولات و سیاست‌ها. فصلنامۀ علوم اجتماعی، 32(111)، 1-35. https://doi.org/10.22054/qjss.2026.91448.2967
سکریه، میسون و تانک، استیوارت (۱۴۰۲). سن و سرمایه‌داری. ترجمۀ وحید طباطبایی. تهران: نیلوفر.
عنبری، موسی و ایار، علی (1403). تنیده در فرااقتصادها: تحلیل کنش اقتصادی در ایران. مطالعات جامعه‌شناختی (نامۀ علوم اجتماعی سابق)، 31(1)، 167-189. https://doi.org/10.22059/jsr.2024.372115.1945
فاضلی، نعمت‌الله، شریفی، سعید، و طلائی، مریم. (1400). فرهنگ مالیه؛ تحلیلی بر برداشت‌های فرهنگی از پول در نسل جوان. فصلنامۀ تحقیقات فرهنگی ایران، 3(14)، 1-58. https://doi.org/10.22035/jicr.2022.2714.3111
فرهمند، مهناز، صبوحی گلکار، زینب، و میرجلیلی، زهرا (1403). زیست‌جهان متحول: مطالعۀ کیفی بازاندیشی جنسیتی دختران نسل زد. جامعه‌شناسی اقتصادی و توسعه، 2(13)، 115-145. https://doi.org/10.22034/jeds.2025.64150.1830
فیشر، مارک (۱۴۰۲). واقع‌گرایی سرمایه‌دارانه. ترجمۀ ریحانه عبدی. تهران: گمان.
سوئدبرگ، ریچارد (۱۳۹۵). جامعه‌شناسی ساخت اجتماعی و کنش اقتصادی (ع. ا. سعیدی، مترجم). تهران: تیسا.
مؤمنی، فرشاد (1402). اقتصاد ایران در دوران تعدیل ساختاری. تهران: نقش و نگار.
 
Aalbers, M. B. (2023). Making sense of the financialization of households: State of the art. Socio-Economic Review, 21(4), 2233–2258. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwad029
Adams-Prassl, A., Boneva, T., Golin, M., & Rauh, C. (2020). Inequality in the impact of the coronavirus shock: Evidence from real time surveys. Journal of Public economics189, 104245. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.55553
Aldrich, H. E., & Waldinger, R. (1990). Ethnicity and entrepreneurship. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 111-135. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.16.080190.000551
Aldrich, H. E., & Zimmer, C. (1986). Entrepreneurship through social networks. In D. L. Sexton & R. W. Smilor (Eds.), The art and science of entrepreneurship (pp. 3–23). Ballinger Publishing Company.
Anbari, M., & Ayar, A. (2024). Intertwined in meta-economies: An analysis of economic action in Iran. Sociological Studies, 31(1), 167-189. https://doi.org/10.22059/jsr.2024.372115.1945 (In Persian)
Baudrillard, J. (1998). The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. Sage Publications.
Belk, R. W. (2013). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 477-500. https://doi.org/10.1086/671052
Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D., & Welch, I. (1992). A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of Political Economy, 100(5), 992-1026.
Boyd, d. (2014). It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens. Yale University Press
Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press.
Deloitte D. (2023). Gen Z and Millennial Survey.
DiMaggio, P. (1997). Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology23(1), 263-287.
Duffy, B. E., & Pruchniewska, U. (2017). The passion economy: How creators are making a living from their skills. Social Media & Society.
Edelman. (2021). Edelman Trust Barometer special report: The power of Gen Z. https://www.edelman.com/research/the-power-of-gen-z
Elmore, T., & McPeak, A. (2021). Generation Z Unfiltered: Facing Nine Hidden Challenges of the Most Anxious Population. Poet Gardner Publishing.
Epstein, G. A. (Ed.). (2005). Financialization and the world economy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Farahmand, M., Sabouhi Golkar, Z., & Mirjalili, Z. (2024). The evolving lifeworld: A qualitative study of gendered reflexivity among Gen Z girls. Economic Sociology and Development, 13(2), 115-145. https://doi.org/10.22034/jeds.2025.64150.1830 (In Persian)
Fazeli, N., Sharifi, S., & Talaei, M. (2021). Finance culture: An analysis of cultural perceptions of money among the youth generation. Journal of Iranian Cultural Research, 14(3), 1-58. https://doi.org/10.22035/jicr.2022.2714.3111 (In Persian)
Fisher, M. (2023). Capitalist realism (R. Abdi, Trans.). Tehran: Goman. (In Persian)
Francis, T., & Hoefel, F. (2018). True Gen: Generation Z and its implications for companies. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nursing & Health Sciences, 6(2), 70–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9787.2004.00020.x
Granovetter, M. (1974). Getting a Job: A Study of Contacts and Careers. University of Chicago Press.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3). https://doi.org/10.1086/228311
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology78(6), 1360-1380.
Han, B. C. (2015). The burnout society. Stanford Briefs.
Hein, E. (2015). Finance-dominated capitalism and re-distribution of income: a Kaleckian perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics39(3), 907-934. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bet038
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(3), 405–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/104584006286369
Illouz, E. (2007). Cold intimacies: The making of emotional capitalism. Polity Press.
IMF. (2021). World Economic Outlook: Managing Divergent Recoveries. International Monetary Fund.
Lapavitsas, C. (2013). The financialization of capitalism: Profiting without producing. City, 17(6), 792–805. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2013.853865
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE, Thousand Oaks, 289-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8
Martin, R. (2002). Financialization of daily life. Temple University Press
Marwick, A. E. (2013). Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity, and Branding in the Social Media Age. Yale University Press.
Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis forum. Qualitative Social Research,1(2),article20.
Momeni, F. (2023). Iran’s economy in the era of structural adjustment. Tehran: Naghsh-o-Negar. (In Persian)
Pew Research Center. (2019). On the Cusp of Adulthood and Facing an Uncertain Future: What We Know About Gen Z So Far. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org
Pourasgari, M. H., Khodadad-Hosseini, S. H., Kordnaeij, A., & Mansouri Moayyed, F. (2024). Identification and prioritization of determining factors in financial and investment decisions (Case study: Generation Z investors). Journal of Business Management Perspective, 22(60), 136-161. https://doi.org/10.48308/jbmp.2025.232989.1542 (In Persian)
Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Networked: The New Social Operating System. The MIT Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5vjq62
Rubin, J. D., Chen, K., & Tung, A. (2026). Generation Z’s challenges to financial independence: Adolescents’ and early emerging adults’ perspectives on their financial futures. Journal of Adolescent Research41(3), 639-672. https://doi.org/10.1177/07435584241256572
Sakriyeh, M., & Tank, A. (2023). Age and capitalism (M. Tabatabaei, Trans.). Tehran: Niloufar. (In Persian)
Smelser, N. J., & Swedberg, R. (Eds.). (2010). The handbook of economic sociology. Princeton university press.
Srnicek, N. (2016). Platform capitalism. Polity Press.
Standing, G. (2011). The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. Bloomsbury Academic.
Swedberg, R. (2016). The sociology of social structure and economic action (A. A. Saeidi, Trans.). Tehran: Tisa. (In Persian)
Swedberg, R., Himmelstrand, U., & Brulin, G. (1987). The Paradigm of Economic Sociology: Premises and Promises. Theory and Society, 16(2), 169–213. http://www.jstor.org/stable/657351
Twenge, J. M. (2017). IGen why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy and completely unprepared for adulthood (and what this means for the rest of us) (First Atria books hardcover edition.). Atria Books.
Williams, K. C., Page, R. A., Petrosky, A. R., & Hernandez, E. H. (2010). Multi-generational marketing: Descriptions, characteristics, lifestyles, and attitudes. The Journal of Applied Business and Economics11(2), 21.
Wrong, D. H. (1961). The oversocialized conception of man in modern sociology. American Sociological Review, 26(2), 183–193. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089854
Zakeri, A., & Rowshanfekr, P. (2024). Typology of the sociology of Generation Z: A critique of generationalism. Journal of Cultural Studies and Communication, 20(3), 1-95. https://doi.org/10.22034/jcsc.2024.2032585.2752 (In Persian)
Zelizer, V. A. (1994). The Social Meaning of Money: Pin Money, Paychecks, Poor Relief, and Other Currencies. Princeton University Press.
Zokaei, M. S. (2025). Digital technologies and generational relations in Iran: Transformations and policies. Social Sciences Quarterly, 32(111), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.22054/qjss.2026.91448.2967 (In Persian)
Zukin, S., & DiMaggio, P. (1990). Structures of Capital: The Social Organization of the Economy. Cambridge University Press.