The Modernization and Dependency Theories of Development - Essay Example

A Comparative Analysis of The Modernization and Dependency Theories of Development It is the case that modernization theory and dependency theory has been the prevalent perspectives regarding socio-economic development. Although the latter encompasses several issues, one of the main problems it wishes to interpret and resolve is the disparity between developed states (i.e. the United States and the United Kingdom) and the less developed countries found in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. This paper aims to present a comparative analysis between the modernization theory and the dependency theory; as such our aim is to highlight the differences in assumption and arguments of both theories that renders them to be of two opposing poles. We shall also attempt to investigate the points in which these frameworks meet and the issues they can find agreement on. It is imperative to first give a brief overview of the contents of both theories in order for as to clearly see the borders in which they work. Modernization as used in social sciences and in this case is defined as the transformation from a traditional, bucolic, and agrarian society into an urbanized and industrialized one (Johnson, 2005a). The social changes that constitute and results from such shift affects the society in which it is occurring entirely, a forward looking development in the lives of its constituents, and also deemed to be irreversible by modernist theorists. Modernization theory placed this concept as an overriding notion for its framework, initially putting emphasis and being born out of the rapid advancement of technology and the mass media during the 1950's and 60's (Johnson, 2005a). It can be recognized as having adapted features from the classic evolutionary theory as well as the functionalist theory. In terms of its evolutionary aspects, modernization theory is a process, literally a social and economic evolution, whereby it claims that all states go through various phases of development in a unidirectional/linear way. The most adopted formulation of such a view, is that of Walter Rostow's Stages of modernization: a.) the traditional (non-modern society that is still agriculturally based, and whose social structure is values and kinship oriented); b.) the takeoff stage can be triggered by natural, rapid climb to modernity because of the set of ideas of individualism, democracy and economic opportunity or pressure to adapt in the rise of other developing countries (this phase may be further characterized by a rise in investment and entrepreneurship, transportation and communications, economic shifts being technological shifts); c.) Drive to technological maturity (marked by the flourishing of national economy and dependence on foreign trade links is dictated by economic calculations and political priorities, not by technical and institutional necessities etc.); and the last stage would be the d.) mass-consumption marked by increase income thus rendering mas consumption possible, consumer goods and services centered production, and an investment in the welfare state (Julkunen, 2006). The modernization theory asserts that the well developed countries have reached the advance stages if not the epitome of development and are at a position that could provide aide and role-modelling for the less developed states. One of the controversial claims of modernization is its appeal to homogenize society, by proposing that third world countries mimic/emulate the example of those in the western world. Dependency in itself refers to the over reliance of one nation on another. Dependency theory arised as a response to the modernization theory; it's core principles and assumptions can be considered to be opposite to those upheld by the latter mentioned. The central claim of this theory is that there exist a highly unequal distribution of Power and resources in the world economic system, and places less developed countries (LCDs) in a dependent position in relation to the industrial powers (Johnson, 2005b). Being one of the many theories influenced by neo-marxist thought, dependency theory sees international trade relations and links between states as highly exploitative of the lesser developed participant's resources (2006). It takes into its wing a critque of the imperialistic as well is skeptic of the concept of industrialized nations extending economic aid and investment among the peripheral ones (LCDs). It directly attacks the prevalent capitalist economic structure of the international community in the sense that it deems it to be profit oriented thus fails to actually aide in alleviating global inequality but instead reinforces it. Further in such a system of power, lesser developed countries are vulnerable to the self-vested interest of MNC's and international agencies and firms. One of the manifestations of this can be seen in the foreign policies being promoted on the advent of globalization in the form of the free market. Dependency theorists would argue that the above mentioned in its supposed desire to create an equal playing field actually places underdeveloped states at a losing end; opening up these nations instead to abuse by corporations and superpowers rather than aiding them to establish an independent, individualized, and developed socio-economic structure. Dependency theory holds a contrary negative view to the positive outlook of the modernization theory with regards to the relationship of less developed countries from the developed ones. It is the case modernization theorists sees a vital role for the US and European countries to be played out in resolving the problems of progress in the third world and the like, dependency theorist purport that it is in fact the enemy to be reckoned with. The very foundations of which the two stemmed from clashes, modernization acts to defend and give stability to capitalism, while dependency theory formulates itself from a marxist perspective which roots the ills of society on the capitalist per se. The dependency theory criticizes modernization theory for its failure to take into consideration the reality of the the world economy and instead assumes that it has indeed calculated all the parameters and factors that would govern the development of the state. While it is the case that modernization theorist purports that the ideal modernized state can be seen as emanating from the superpowers, of which the underdeveloped countries have to mimic; the dependency theorists argue that aid and investment as it is, is already imperialism. Much more, if modernization is to be understood as following such phases of progress that would lead to the mass consumption ending; this would simply be westernization/americanization and actual development. Modernization theory is criticized for its assumption that indeed the western structure, the urban, the secular is indeed the most ideal goal for any society. Dependency theory suggests that in order for development truly accessible to the poor nations, the world economy has to be restructured, nations should be able to invert back to their own resources without intrusion from the outside. Radical dependency theorist aim to liberate countries from their economic dependence on other states by holistically oppossing internationalization as a whole (something which would not coincide with a lot of marxist thinking), instead they propose homegrown and sustained industries controlled by the state. This is in every way running against the current of modernization theory which assumes that resolving the problems of inequalities would occur when global linkage is fully established and regulations are at a minimum. While modernization theorist may view the exchange of technology among nations as a positive manifestation, dependency theory would think otherwise, in the sense that it questions the quantitative and qualitative fairness of such transactions. DT (dependency theory) claims that all agreements with regards to trade would be working for the advantage of a dependent state; even if the case would be that MNCs are to invest in a particular less developed region, the countries in the latter would still not reach the level of progress necessary for them to break the dependency; the G8 would simply not allow it. Secondly in the case wherein modern day barter is employed, the asian and african nations are left second rate technology and machineries which if we think about it would more likely be mere junk a decade from now; while first world states run off with resources and cheaper labor. If similarities are to be pointed out, I think that it would be difficult to do so in terms of methodology nor at the scale of axiomatic assumptions. Being as it is that both theories diverge at the very core of their frameworks. Both sides have been critical with regards to the goals they have set as well as the factors they have considered to be crucial in development. However if we come to look at it, there is one thing that both shares in common and it is that both perspectives no matter how different from one another are in fact desiring for a way to resolve global inequalities and desire the development of all states. Delving further we shall also see that both sides even if they do take a pro and con stance, factors in their analysis of development similar factors. Take for example the concept of nation-to-nation relation; either way there is a recognition that such concept influences the advancement of LCDs. Both theories accepts to a certain extent that in resolving the issues of development; nations would have to address the issue of distribution. Both recognizes that economic progress results also in resolving issues of equal importance like world hunger, health issues, and education... they simply analyze it all with economics at the heart of it all. Lastly, in the advent of globalization, there is a great need for balance to see both sides of the coin. It is in this case that modernization and dependency theories could perhaps be utilized in understanding our world affairs today. Both systems have their flaws, of which their practioners are keen to point out about each other. While modernization for example misses the point of how global forces can impede development; dependency theory risks progress for the sustenance of tradition that may reinforce inequalities in itself. BIBLIOGRAPHY (2006) dependency theory: 1957. Arts and Sciences Network: economyprofessor.com. JOHNSON, A. G. (2005a) the Blackwell Dictionary of Sociology: A User's Guide to Sociological Language. 2nd ed. Malden, Blackwell Publishers Inc. JOHNSON, A. G. (2005b) The Blackwell Dictionary of Sociology: A User's Guide to Sociological Language. 2nd ed. Malden Blackwell Publishers Inc. . JULKUNEN, J. (2006) Introduction to developmental studies. Read More