Comparing Modernization Theory With Dependency Theory And World System Perspective

Topic 1

Compare and contrast Modernization Theory with either Dependency Theory or the World System perspective. What are the pros and cons associated with these perspectives and which best reflect the contemporary global situation? In addition to the articles you have found you should also utilise the required readings included in this course.

Topic 2

From a post-development perspective the concept of ‘development’ is fundamentally flawed and should be jettisoned. Outline and critically evaluate the post-development critique of development. In addition to the articles you have found you should also utilise the required readings included in this course.

Topic 3

Discuss and evaluate the view that neo-liberal globalisation a) facilitates the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, and b) increases inequality both within and between states. In addition to the articles you have found you should also utilise the required readings included in this course.

Topic 1

Identify, examine and critically evaluate a recent development project in a developing country from a modernisation, dependency, world system or post-development perspective. What are the implications of your findings? In addition to the articles you have found you should also utilise the required readings included in this course.

Topic 2

Identify a recent industrial or agricultural environmental disaster (eg, Bhopal disaster; Exxon Valdez oil spill; Ok Tedi mining in Papua New Guinea). What links can be made between the disaster and neoliberal policies and practices promoted through world institutions (eg, World Bank; International Monetary Fund; World Trade Organisation) and by influential Western governments (eg, USA; Canada; Britain; Australia)? In addition to the articles you have found you should also utilise the required readings included in this course.

Topic 3

Explain how the provision of Western aid potentially exposes Third World countries to First World political manipulation? Provide examples (eg, case-study/s) and relevant data to  support your analysis. In addition to the articles you have found you should also utilise the required readings included in this course. You may find theoretical insights in the readings from week twelve, especially Pearce (2000).

Pros and cons of Modernization Theory

Theories help define a situation in a much better perspective than vague contemplations and assumptions. The essay aims to provide elaborate discussion on the two theories that explain the economic environment of the contemporary world. The essay will first provide brief description of the two theories, then compare and contrast those. The theories chosen for the purpose include the Modernization Theory and Dependency Theory. Further, the essay will discuss the pros and cons of the two theories in explaining the modern global situation. Based on the analysis, the essay will then explain the reasons behind the selection of one theory as best for describing the contemporary situation. While Modernization theory is used to explain the modernization process, taking place in societies, Dependency theory explains the exploitation of the poor by the rich (Sevilla Guzmán and Woodgate 2013). In the contemporary world, businesses are rapidly integrating and the globalization phenomenon has contributed to it. Countries across the globe are indulged in international business and other exchanges thus blurring the boundaries that were present earlier. On one hand, globalization has allowed poor economies to come forth and establish their worth, on the other; it has also increased the power of the richer economies (Cvetkovich 2018). In fact, many scholars and experts believe that it has increased the gap between the developed and the developing nations. However, proponents of globalization argue that the phenomenon has empowered the developing nations to grow faster that were not possible in the past. Comparing and contrasting the two chosen theories would help in understanding this in a better perspective.

The theory has its origins in the work of max Weber, the German sociologist and dates back to the 19^th century. Talcott Parsons, a Harvard sociologist further developed this theory during the later part of the 19^th century that laid the foundation for other future theorists of Modernization (Wittrock 2017). The theory was at its peak during the 1950s and 60s but lost its effectiveness after that and then reemerged in the 1990s but its controversial status remained (Vanderstraeten 2013). According to the theory, development of traditional societies is possible only if they adopt modern practices on a larger scale. The theory emphasizes the need for traditional or developing societies to follow the pattern of development of developed nations. In the views of (Saat 2013), Modernization theory provides the developing nations a set framework of development following which they could increase the rate of development in their countries. The authors further point out that the theory presents a systematic approach for other theorists and researchers in this field to understand the process of modernization in traditional societies. (Midgley 2016) on the other hand, argue that the theory is biased as it gives importance to the rich and asks traditional societies to destroy their long-held culture and tradition to become modern. They further reject the theory stating that it views the West as the sole example of the modern society. Others criticized this theory on grounds of feasibility as they argued that social and economic development pattern in one country does not necessarily work in other countries.

Pros and cons of Dependency Theory

The Dependency Theory was proposed as a protest of the Modernization theory. It stated that rich resources “flow from the periphery of poor and underdeveloped states to a core of wealthy states enriching the latter at the expense of the former” (Emeh 2013). Dependency theory sees globalization as nothing but the expansion of market capitalism that exploited the resources and cheap labor of the poorer economies in return for the outdated Western technologies. The theory originated from the works of Hans Singer and Raul Prebisch in 1949 in their seminal work published in the same year (Aharoni 2014). The Prebisch-Singer Thesis was developed which established that the terms of trade between the developed and underdeveloped countries was extremely unequal. They found that the developed countries had to buy finished goods from the developed countries in rates that were higher than the raw materials exported to make those products. The Dependency theorists advocated for an “inward looking” approach towards development where they emphasized on the increased role of the state. According to them, the states must impose barriers to trade making it difficult for the development nations invest inwardly. This would ensure that industries in developing societies are nationalized thus prohibiting developed nations to exploit the resources. However, this theory also is not devoid of criticisms as many scholars have rejected it stating that such an approach would end competition, which is harmful for a country’s growth.

Modernization and Dependency theory both have certain similarities, which shall be discussed in this section. The first similarity is that both the theories pay attention to the existing gap between developed and developing nations. (Miralles 2015) while pointing out the similarities between the two theories state that both the theories have made the Western dominance over the Orient and African as the ground from which modernization and development can be observed. It needs mentioning that both the theories see the West as the world leader when it comes to development and that other nations should either follow them or prohibit them.

According to Andrews and Bawa (2014), “modernization and dependency both give valid and just explanations for development and underdevelopment”. Modernization theory based itself on four main assumptions. The first assumption is that the Western societies are the most advanced and developed when it comes to technology, society, economy and politics. The second assumption states the Western countries follow a systematic path to become advanced; third assumption is that developing nations especially of the East follow natural path of development, which is filled with obstructions. The fourth and last assumption is that the underdeveloped nations can develop without even disturbing the developed nations, which is not the same with developed worlds. The Dependency theory although does not make such assumptions, stresses on the dominance of the Western world. Apart from that, both the theories view that the relationship between developed and underdeveloped nations is highly unequal with the underdeveloped nations depended heavily on the developed nations. While the modernization theory suggests that the underdeveloped or developing nations follow the Western pattern of development, the Dependency theory does not provide any concrete solution. Jackson, Louw and Zhao (2013) notice that Modernization and Dependency theories both ignore any possible alternative development pattern and only project the developed countries as examples for the developing countries to follow.

Pros and cons of World System Perspective

It is therefore evident from the above comparison of the two theories that both have failed to provide any concrete way for developing countries to advance and develop. Nonetheless, the next section shall highlight the contrasts between the two theories.

The Dependency theory, as it has been mentioned in the above sections, was introduced as a reaction against the Modernization theory. On one hand where modernization theory included factors like economic growth, technological progress, increased urbanization and secularization as indicators of modernization; Dependency theory on the other, highlights the exploitation of the poor by the rich in the name of giving opportunities. Theorists and proponents of Dependency theory claim that the modernization format prescribed by the Modernization theorists to the underdeveloped and developing nations is flawed and biased. Modernization theory believes that societies in both the West and East face similar issues in the process of development and the developing nations will pass through those stages now that the developed nations had to pass through in the past. In contrast to this, Dependency theory argues that modernization of poor countries cannot be possible unless the infiltration of the developed nations is stopped. Further, Dependency theory is contrasted from the Modernization theory in the sense that Dependency theory provides reasons for the underdevelopment of countries due to their integration into the ‘world system’ (Farrugia 2015).

Furthermore, Modernization theory originated from the dominant notion of the Western sociologists and philosophers mostly belonging to American and European continents (Ewing 2017). These theorists made little attempt to conduct any thorough analysis of the conditions that prevailed in any developing and underdeveloped nations and simply devised solutions. The result was a flawed and weak theory of modernization. Within decades of its introduction, protests against it started to surface resulting in the formation of the Dependency theory. This theory came from those scholars who associated themselves with the Southern Hemisphere, mostly Africa and Latin America. The contrast in the origin of the theorists of both theories further reveals the contrasting features between the two. Nevertheless, it must be stated that the modern version of the Modernization theory focuses more on the innovations and technologies in a world that is becoming increasingly similar.

Analyzing both, the theories bring forth several advantages and disadvantages that shall be discussed in this section. At first, the pros associated with Modernization theory must be looked at and then the cons shall be discussed.

Comparison and contrast of the three theories

The first advantage of modernization theory is its emphasis on technology and innovation, which has proved beneficial for billions of people in the developing and underdeveloped nations (Landabaso 2014). With the technological advancement especially in the field of health and education, millions of people in the developing nations have benefitted from it.

Second, the theory of Modernization has allowed policy makers in the developing nations to implement advanced policies that have helped in reducing corruption and accelerating the rate f development.

Third advantage of the Modernization theory is that it brings to the fore, the strength and weaknesses, success and failures of the various policies applied by the developed nations. It thus helps the decision-makers of underdeveloped and developing nations to understand which policy would be good for them and which should be rejected.

Fourth and most important advantage of Modernization theory is that it mentions both the positives and negatives of modernization and the changes it brings. The theory does not blatantly state that modernization is best for all; rather it looks at all the possible outcomes and then suggests what is best for the developing nations.

As opposed to the advantages, the Modernization theory has several disadvantages, which are detrimental to the overall development and progress of the developing world.

First, Modernization theory suggests that developing and underdeveloped nations should only follow the development patterns of the Western countries to modernize. To assert this, is wrong because the theory does not consider the different conditions of the developing nations before prescribing this solution.

Second, the approach suggested by the Modernization theory is top-down that is the fruits of development shall be first enjoyed by the powerful and rich nations and the poor countries could only utilize whatever has been left by these nations.

Third, it creates exploitation of the poor and forces them to be dependent. It completely ignores the importance of including the poor in the decision-making process for the poor.

Fourth, Modernization theory over-simplifies social change. it does not take into consideration that any new transformation would be resisted by the people because its success is uncertain. When the New Partnership for Africa’s development (NEPAD) was drafted, packaged and transported to Africa but failed miserably because of its elitist nature (Niyonkuru 2016).

Fifth, Modernization theory forces the ideologies and norms of the West upon the developing nations rather than valuing the creative and innovative ideas of the natives. It creates an impression that the best model of development is the Western mode and other models proposed by the local citizens are weak and ineffective.

Analysis of the contemporary global situation

Similar to Modernization theory, the Dependency theory also has certain pros as well as cons. The pros or advantages of Dependency theory could be outlined first and then the cons shall be discussed.

First, researchers and students can use the Dependency theory to study the way resources and wealth is distributed at the macro level amongst state actors. It broadens the scope of study of the development patterns present in the developed and developing worlds.

Second, the ‘center-periphery’ diagram used by the Dependency theorists provides an interesting analysis of global politics that is helpful in understanding the nature and scope of relations between the developed and developing nations (Tickner 2013).

Third, the theory provides a solid ground from where researchers could analyze both the socio-economic politic-cultural factors and historical processes that contribute to development and underdevelopment.

Fourth, the theory has been monumental in terms of the biases and weaknesses of the continuum theory it has brought out (Spina et al. 2016). The theory is advantageous for the researchers as they could identify and explain the evil effects and symptoms of underdevelopment more clearly.

The theory has numerous disadvantages as well. These shall be discussed in this section.

At first, the theory advocates socialism and radicalism thus presenting a vague picture for the followers of the theory. While some theorists vouch for complete transformation through either revolution or radical movements, others support structural reforms and changed forms of cooperation between the periphery and the center (Mawire 2013).

Secondly, the Dependency theory does not clearly define what dependency means and its significance in the context of development and underdevelopment (Drees and Heugens 2013). In clearer terms, the dependency theorists fail to demarcate between the dependent and non-dependent nations.

Third, as McEwen (2013) observes, the theory does not encompass the varied factors of underdevelopment that differs from one country to other. To provide an example, the underdevelopment nature and factors in Latin America is different from those in Africa and Asia.

From the above analysis, it can be deduced that although both perspectives present a good picture of the global situation, the Modernization theory is slightly better in projecting the situation than Dependency theory. The reasons for this assumption are many but some could be discussed. The first reason is that the improved version of Modernization theory looks at the world as continuously integrating and allowing underdeveloped countries to explore the potentials of this integration (Malatesta and Smith 2014). Further, this theory examines both the negatives and positives of globalization and looks at the global immigration and transformation of the agricultural societies to industrial societies.

Conclusion

An in-depth analysis of the two theories helped in understanding the patterns of development in both developed and developing countries. The examination of these two theories has also brought forward the differences in the rate and pattern of social changes in the rich and poor countries. The essay provided a thorough explanation of the two theories, which were the Modernization and Dependency theories – the theories of development. In explaining the theories, the essay also pointed out the appreciation and criticisms the two theories have faced. Further, the essay compared and contrasted the two theories and found that both had similar foundations but differed in their ideologies regarding development. Moreover, both theories had emphasized the dominance of the West over the weaker countries of the East. In the later sections, the essay provided the advantages and disadvantages of both the theories. The analysis found that the two theories were on one hand limited in their perception about the development patterns of the underdeveloped nations and on the other, provided assistance for the researchers to understand how resources are distributed at the macro-level. This led to the selection of the theory of Modernization theory as best describing the global situation.

References:

Aharoni, Y., 2014. To understand EMNEs a dynamic IB contingency theory is called for. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 9(3), pp.377-385.

Andrews, N. and Bawa, S., 2014. A post-development hoax?(Re)-examining the past, present and future of development studies. Third World Quarterly, 35(6), pp.922-938.

Cvetkovich, A., 2018. Articulating the global and the local: Globalization and cultural studies. Routledge.

Emeh, I.E.J., 2013. Dependency Theory and Africa’s Underdevelopment: a Paradigm Shift from Pseudo-Intellectualism: the Nigerian Perspective. International Journal of African and Asian Studies. Vol, 1.

Ewing, J.A., 2017. Hollow ecology: ecological modernization theory and the death of nature. Journal of World-Systems Research, 23(1), pp.126-155.

Farrugia, D., 2015. Addressing the problem of reflexivity in theories of reflexive modernisation: Subjectivity and structural contradiction. Journal of Sociology, 51(4), pp.872-886.

Jackson, T., Louw, L. and Zhao, S., 2013. China in sub-Saharan Africa: implications for HRM policy and practice at organizational level. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(13), pp.2512-2533.

Landabaso, M., 2014. Guest editorial on research and innovation strategies for smart specialisation in Europe: Theory and practice of new innovation policy approaches. European Journal of Innovation Management, 17(4), pp.378-389.

Malatesta, D. and Smith, C.R., 2014. Lessons from resource dependence theory for contemporary public and nonprofit management. Public Administration Review, 74(1), pp.14-25.

Mawire, P.R., 2013. The missing link: Implications of the modernization theory and the dependency theory in Africa‘s quest for development. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 13(5), pp.41-44.

McEwen, T., 2013. Ecopreneurship as a solution to environmental problems: implications for college level entrepreneurship education. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(5), p.264.

Midgley, J., 2016. Promoting reciprocal international social work exchanges: Professional imperialism revisited. In Indigenous Social Work around the World (pp. 59-74). Routledge.

Miralles, C.S., 2015. Neglecting the 19th century: Democracy, the consensus trap and modernization theory in Spain. History of the Human Sciences, 28(3), pp.51-67.

Niyonkuru, F., 2016. Failure of foreign aid in developing countries: A quest for alternatives. Business and Economics Journal, 7(3).

Saat, S.A., 2013. Solid waste management in Malaysia and ecological modernization theory perspective. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management, 8(2), pp.268-275.

Sevilla Guzmán, E. and Woodgate, G., 2013. Agroecology: Foundations in agrarian social thought and sociological theory. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 37(1), pp.32-44.

Spina, G., Caniato, F., Luzzini, D. and Ronchi, S., 2016. Assessing the use of external grand theories in purchasing and supply management research. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 22(1), pp.18-30.

Tickner, A.B., 2013. Core, periphery and (neo) imperialist International Relations. European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), pp.627-646.

Vanderstraeten, R., 2013. Talcott Parsons and the enigma of secularization. European Journal of Social Theory, 16(1), pp.69-84.

Wittrock, B., 2017. Modernity: One, none, or many? European origins and modernity as a global condition. In Multiple modernities (pp. 31-60). Routledge.