HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT THEORIES

Development theory is a conglomeration of theories about how desirable change in

society is best to be achieved. Such theories draw on a variety of social scientific
disciplines and approaches.

MODERNIZATION THEORY

Modernization Theory is a theory of development which states that the development

can be achieved through following the processes of development that were used by the
currently developed countries. Scholars such as Walt Rostow and A.F.K. Organski
developed stages of development through which every country develops. Samuel
Huntington determined development to be a linear process which every country must go
through. Modernization Theory, in contrast to Classical Liberalism, viewed the state as a
central actor in modernizing "backward" or "underdeveloped" societies. Talcott Parsons'
functional sociology defined the qualities that distinguished "modern" and "traditional"
societies. Education was viewed as key to creating modern individuals. Technology
played a key role in this development theory because it was believed that as technology
was developed and introduced to lesser developed countries it would spur growth. Mass
media was to diffuse different nations in this regard. One key factor in Modernization
Theory is the belief that development requires the assistance of developed countries to
aid developing countries to learn from their development. In addition, it was believed that
the lesser developed countries would develop and grow faster than developed countries.
Thus, this theory is built upon the theory that it is possible for equal development to be
reached between the developed and lesser developed countries.

DEPENDENCY THEORY

In response, came the rise of Dependency Theory which was critical of Modernization
Theory. Dependency Theory is founded on the concept that the effects of colonialism on
lesser developed countries must be considered when creating future development.
Dependency Theory grew out of Latin America and scholars such as Raul Prebisch, due
to observation that Modernization Theory was failing to address the consequences of
colonialism such as trade inequities in which the colonial trade patterns of exporting raw
materials and agriculture and importing the processed and manufactured goods continued
to persist. Scholars such as Andre Gunder Frank and Fernando Henrique Cardoso have
furthered the theory attributing the Modernization Theory to be a development process
through which the developing countries only became further entrenched and dependent
upon the developed countries. In addition, Dependency Theory divided countries into two
different categories of development, periphery and center. The center was determined
to be the developed and colonizing countries and the periphery consists of the
developing and colonized countries. The relationship is outlined as one of exploitation in
which the center exploits the periphery and it is through this colonial and post-colonial
exploitation that the center countries were able to develop. Wallerstein argued that the
'periphery' localities are, in fact, exploited and kept in a state of backwardness by the
developed core (center); a core which profits from the peripheries' cheap, unskilled
labour and raw materials (i.e. from those nations' lack of a skilled workforce and
industries that can process raw materials locally).

This approach aims to discredit Modernization Theory's development process by stating

that since exploitation allowed the center to develop, it is impossible for the same process
to lead to the development of the previously exploited countries.

Some criticisms of Dependency Theory are that it provides no feasible development

solution, it does not acknowledge distinctions within the periphery or vulnerability in the
center and does not outline any means of observing change within development.

WORLD SYSTEMS THEORY

World Systems Theory was initiated by Immanuel Wallerstein in 1974. As a basis for
comparison, Wallerstein proposes four different categories, core, semi-periphery,
periphery, and external, into which all regions of the world can be placed. The
categories describe each region's relative position within the world economy as well as
certain internal political and economic characteristics. The core regions benefited the
most from the capitalist world economy. For the period under discussion, much of
northwestern Europe (England, France, Holland) developed as the first core region.
Politically, the states within this part of Europe developed strong central governments,
extensive bureaucracies, and large mercenary armies. This permitted the local
bourgeoisie to obtain control over international commerce and extract capital surpluses
from this trade for their own benefit. On the other end of the scale lay the peripheral
zones. These areas lacked strong central governments or were controlled by other states,
exported raw materials to the core, and relied on coercive labor practices. The core
expropriated much of the capital surplus generated by the periphery through unequal
trade relations. Two areas, Eastern Europe (especially Poland) and Latin America,
exhibited characteristics of peripheral regions. Between the two extremes lie the semi-
peripheries. These areas represented either core regions in decline or peripheries
attempting to improve their relative position in the world economic system. They often
also served as buffers between the core and the peripheries. As such, semi-peripheries
exhibited tensions between the central government and a strong local landed class. Good
examples of declining cores that became semi-peripheries during the period under study
are Portugal and Spain. Other semi-peripheries at this time were Italy, southern Germany,
and southern France. Economically, these regions retained limited but declining access to
international banking and the production of high-cost high-quality manufactured goods.
According to Wallerstein, the semi-peripheries were exploited by the core but, as in the
case of the American empires of Spain and Portugal, often were exploiters of peripheries
themselves. Spain, for example, imported silver and gold from its American colonies,
obtained largely through coercive labor practices, but most of this specie went to paying
for manufactured goods from core countries such as England and France rather than
encouraging the formation of a domestic manufacturing sector.
External areas maintained their own economic systems and, for the most part, managed
to remain outside the modern world economy. Russia fits this case well. Unlike Poland,
Russia's wheat served primarily to supply its internal market. It traded with Asia as well
as Europe; internal commerce remained more important than trade with outside regions.
Also, the considerable power of the Russian state helped regulate the economy and
limited foreign commercial influence.

STATE THEORY

In response to the distrust of the state in World Systems Theory, is State Theory. State
Theory is based upon the view that the economy is intertwined with politics and therefore
the take-off period in development is unique to each country. State Theory emphasized
the effects of class relations and the strength and autonomy of the state on historical
outcomes. Thus, development involves interactions between the state and social relations
because class relations and the nature of the state impact the ability of the state to
function. Development is dependent upon state stability and influence externally as well
as internally. State Theorists believe that a developmentalist state is required for
development by taking control of the development process within one state.