Theories of Development Flashcards
modernisation theory - context
•related to and overlaps w functionalism
•arose in early 1960s, assumes that develop. meant capitalist develop. and offered the newly independent nations a route out of poverty provided they adopted western,
capitalist ways with the aim to spread a specifically industrialised, capitalist model of development through promotion of western democratic values
•pro capitalist basis w commitment to free markets and desire to modernise
•success of the marshall plan by the us was seen as a precedent for developing countries - the generosity of usa and allies, providing technological and other assistance and by adopting western cultural values and social ins., would lift rest of world out of poverty
what does mt explain
•that underdeveloped countries in asia, africa and latin america are primarily in terms of cultural ‘barriers of development’ - underdeveloped bcs trad. values held them back - other modernisation theorist argue that economic barriers are more important
•sets out to explain how, following the example of western nations, poorer countries could achieve develop. via economic growth and also how communism was not the way to achieve develop.
what does mt believe
•that capitalism (free market) encouraged efficient production through industrialisation - favours a capitalist, industrial methods of development
what is mt closely associated with
•american policies w its best known exponent, rostow, working in the us state department
mt - cold war
•developed during cold war period
•needs to be understood in cold war context w usa offering reasons to newly independent countries to encourage them to ally w themselves and west and it w soviets
how is mt an ethnocentric approach
•argues that only route to develop. is to follow the example of the usa
•success is measured by whether the economy is based on mass consumption, as in the usa.
•usa and other developed countries are seen as having reached destination of being modern - rest of world behind and in need of following the steps of the west
what did rostow argue
•societies need to pass through 5 stages of economic growth - saw develop. as an evolutionary process
•suggests that there is a period of abt 60 years from take off to maturity - therefore possible to foresee whole world having achieved american standards by mid 21st century
•saw the role of the usa as providing assistance to poorer countries, supplying them w what they need to modernise
•generating ecom. growth would mean ppl being paid higher wages and income generated would eventually ‘trickle down’ to whole pop.
rostows 5 stages of economic growth
•stage one - trad. societies based on subsistence farming, limited wealth and trad. values hold back social change
•stage two - preconditions for take off - western values and practices begin to take hold, establishing conditions necessary for develop. - may be new tech to modernise agriculture, improvements to infrastructure, provide fuel for stage 3
•stage 3 - take off - society’s econ. grows as modern values and practices pay off, changes become self-reinforcing. new class emerges that is willing to take risks in investing in business - sign of trad. values being eroded, soc. begins to produce on mass scale
•stage 4 - drive to maturity - econ. benefits produced in stage 3 continues me investment in ed. health services and mass media lead to rising living standards - soc now becoming modern
•stage 5 - age of high mass consumption - soc. achieves kinds if levels usa had reached by 1960s, high mass consumption, high standards of living for most w access to education and health, most ppl living in cities
what is an issue with rostows approach
•even after huge injections of foreign aid, developing countries still remain desperately poor
•leads to other mod. theorists arguing that other factors (e.g. non economic) were more important for develop.
what does parsons argue
•structural functionalist
•argued that cultural factors acted as a barrier to develop. w underdeveloped societies being too attached to trad. customs and practices and were unwilling to change
•most sig diff between trad. and mod. socs is that trad. we’re collective and based on ascribed status, mod. individualised and based on achieved status
•argued that socs passed through evolutionary stages marked by ‘evolutionary universals’ such as decline of trad. kinship patterns and emergence of sys. of stratification
what did parsons state prevents develop.
•religious values that stress patriarchy - more in less developed countries so women less likely to gain positions of political/economic power and remain in trad. housewife roles
•ascription and particularism - ppl born in part. role and have little motivation to innovate change, allocates into roles based on their affective/familiar rel. to those already in pos. of power
•fatalism - ascribed status can result in this, feeling that there is nothing one can do to change one’s position
•collectivism - where and in. is expected to put the group before self interest
what did hoselitz argue
•functionalist, 1952 - applied functionalist model of change to developing countries and argued developing countries need to modernise socially and culturally as well as economically, rapid urbanisation to help spread western ideas
•obstacles to modernisation - social systems that impeded social mobility and getting ppl to accept new patterns of work
•saw main assets of modern assets of modern soc as being ed. opportunity, in. freedom and the rule of law w other methods including -
•cities could act as centres of western values and spread them to rural areas
•education - bringing future rulers to develop. countries to schools and universities in west so they would absorb western values
•mass media - spread west ideas
what does lerner argue
•children if economic and political elite should be educated in elite western schools so they could disseminate western values quicker as future leaders
what does inkeles argue
•mass media was crucial agent in bringing about modernity bcs it rapidly diffused ideas amongst population
strengths of modernisation theory
•indonesia partly followed mt in 1960s by encouraging western companies to invest and by accepting loans from world bank but even tho pres. suharto still maintained a brutal regime even the work bank praised the economic transformation - ev if it partially working so if it continues it could fully work
•eradication of small pox 1950s - 59 mil cases occurred each year but early 70s, had been eradicated due to vaccines donation by russia and usa
criticisms of mt
•no examples of countries that have fully followed mt approach to develop. - cannot say that it works fully
•ethnocentric - assumes all countries aspire to be like the west, part. usa
•trad. cultural values may not be such a barrier - asian economies show that non-christian beliefs can exist successfully alongside the modern
•mt ignores ‘crisis of modernism’ - social and economic problems high in mass consumption societies
•creates false needs e.g. smoking, alcohol and drugs
modernisation theory today
•tends to be dismissed as no longer being of great relevance but has laid foundations that prove durable -
•communism not a way to achieve development - chinas econ. growth under comm. gov still achieved by cap.
•rich countries continues to use develop. aid to try to help poor countries develop
•rostow saw india and china as being same stage at take-off in late 1950s w estimate of 60 yrs to maturity seems prescient given recto growth rates in both countries
dependency theory - context
•developed in 1970s as a response to mt, essentially the opposite to mt but they do agree on the importance of economic growth and of state led industrialisation
•originated from cold war period
•alt and revolutionary movements strong in many parts of third world as well as west, developed at a time when marxist and radical theories were strong and at a time when protest movements were widespread
•takes the perspective of developing countries w much of it based on analysis of latin american economies
what did frank argue
•1969
•development and underdevelopment are two sides of same coin - underdevelopment of third world made develop. of west possible
•dependancy and underdevelop. est. via slavery and slave trade (external rather than internal)
what prevents development
•dt sees obstacles to develop. as imposed from outside rather than being internal - third world countries have been forced into position of dependency on developed world.
•end of colonialism didn’t end exploitation, only brought in neo-colonialism (continuation of past economic domination by former colonial powers over ex colonies) where exploitation continues but is less direct and obvious
•political ind. not enough to allow poor countries to escape from their dependency
•third world countries have to break away from system in order to develop, rel. w ticket countries are the problem, not solution
nature of dependant theory
•rejects modernisation theory - problems are not internal to third world countries but imposed upon them from outside e.g exploitation and neo-colonialism
•anti-capitalist - cap. spread all over the world but is a system based on exploitation
•sit. today seen as direct result of history w capitalism, world trade and colonialism - contrast w mt which assumes that his. experience of third world countries unimportant
•develop. of cap. countries benefit by cheap access to raw materials and markets for manufactured goods
•led to an emphasis in third world countries on nationalism, national unity and self reliance rather than reliance on aid
how is underdevelopment seen by dependency theorists
•developed countries have made poorer countries poor and is in the interests to keep them poor - happens through chain of rel. between metropolis or core nations in rich world and the satellite/periphery countries of third world - called ‘chain of dependancy’
•develop. of metropolis causes underdevelop. of satellite, metropolis ‘buys off’ elites of poorer countries by allowing small share of profits, ensures that most countries are ruled by groups (comprador bourgeoisie) - involved w exploiting own ppl and who’s interests involve preventing changes which would benefit maj. of ppls
how is underdevelopment seen differently by mt
•groups that would exploit their ppl (dt) would be the ones expected to lead their countries development (mt)
how did this allow for dependancy theory to develop
•dt see history as essential to understanding situation we are in today - point out that rich countries were never underdeveloped in sense of never being dominated and exploited and are better described as being undeveloped (frank 1966)
•historical experiences of develop. countries means that they’re in v diff situations and cannot follow in footsteps of west as suggested by mt
•spread of cap. will lead to more underdev. than dev.
