Public policy evaluation is a key mechanism for enhancing transparency, accountability, and policy learning in governance systems. This study aims to provide a comparative analysis of public policy evaluation systems in Iran and Norway and to examine how institutional differences, information transparency, and policy learning capacity affect governance quality and the effectiveness of policy evaluation. The main research problem concerns the weakness of independent evaluation institutions, limited access to public data, and the weak connection between evaluation findings and policy reform in Iran. This study is applied in terms of purpose and qualitative-comparative in terms of approach. The data were collected through documentary analysis and comparative examination of laws, official reports, policy documents, institutional reports, and credible domestic and international scholarly sources. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis with a thematic analysis approach and were coded and interpreted based on concepts such as institutional independence, information transparency, policy feedback, and institutional efficiency. The findings show that in Norway, independent evaluation institutions, data transparency, public dissemination of results, and policy feedback loops have created an accountable, learning-oriented, and evidence-based evaluation system. In contrast, in Iran, institutional fragmentation, the dependence of evaluators on executive bodies, limited access to open information, and the absence of binding mechanisms for using evaluation findings have hindered transparent and learning-oriented governance. Accordingly, strengthening institutional independence, expanding public access to data, using digital technologies, and establishing binding feedback mechanisms can help improve Iran’s public policy evaluation system.