Despite being a historic pioneer in water management through the qanat system and having a Department of Environment since 1956, Iran suffers from a myriad of environmental issues. They include desertification and deforestation, soil erosion and air pollution, extreme events and natural disasters (droughts, dust storms, and earthquakes), hazardous waste and wastewater runoff, and, most urgently, water scarcity. Structurally, these issues are partially the byproduct of endogenous and exogenous pressures, such as population growth and uneven distribution, rapid urbanization and modernization, climate change and global warming, and sociopolitical instability and economic sanctions. Based on an extensive analysis of Persian and English sources and building on the work of Madani (2014) and others, this paper argues that these issues are partly, if not largely, rooted in the Iranian state’s shortsighted and unsustainable development model that existed before and after the 1979 Iranian Revolution. This model prioritized immediate economic benefits and populist politics at the expense of long-term environmental impact and ecosystem preservation. This paper contributes to the extant literature on Iranian history and politics by showing not simply the changes between the Pahlavi monarchy and Islamic Republic, but also their continuities in development policy that has contributed to Iran’s environmental challenges. This policy was predicated on people- versus state-centric approaches to development that was conceived by Global South economists Amartya Sen (1933-) and Mahbub ul-Haq (1934-98) and formed the framework of the UN Human Development Index (HDI). The latter concentrates on education, healthcare, and income, as evidenced by the activities of the Pahlavi monarchy’s Literacy, Health, and Extension Corps (1963-78) and the Islamic Republic’s Construction Jihad (1979-83). While the policy improved national standards of living in absolute terms, it created and exacerbated catalysts of Iran’s environmental problems, including inefficient agriculture, rural-to-urban migration, and infrastructure overinvestment. It also contained a top-down and urban-based orientation that disempowered recipients or beneficiaries and neglected traditional, centuries-old systems like the qanat.