Evaluating the concept of scientific authority in the fields of humanities and social sciences demonstrates that this concept is not merely limited to knowledge production, but rather oversees the status of "bibliometric authority and scholarly reference" at both national and global levels, the realization of which requires the synergy of individual, institutional, and structural factors. Challenge analysis indicates that the absence of a clear conceptual and operational definition of scientific authority is one of the fundamental obstacles in policy-making within this domain, leading to confusion in determining indicators and pathways to achievement. Furthermore, centralization and standardization of the higher education system, the dominance of a quantitative approach in research evaluation, methodological weaknesses among researchers, limited international interactions, and reduced capacity for presence in global academic networks are among the factors undermining scientific authority in the humanities and social sciences. At the institutional level, the inadequacy of the support and incentive system for faculty members, the lack of an environment for free scholarly dialogue, and weak critique culture also impede the production and reproduction of impactful knowledge. Proposed strategies emphasize decentralization and delegation of authority to universities, meritocratic selection in recruiting faculty members, strengthening a culture of academic critique, capacity building for international communication and collaboration, developing structural ties between universities and the government, industry, and seminaries, redefining authority indicators tailored to the humanities and social sciences, and reforming the admission mechanism for doctoral students.