World Systems Theory

Introduction:
Immanuel Wallerstein 1979
World systems theory is a response to the criticisms of Dependency Theory. World
Systems Theory was developed by Immanuel Wallerstein (1979).
World systems theory is a multidisciplinary, macro-scale approach to world history
and social change that emphasizes the world-system (and not nation-states) as the
primary (but not exclusive) unit of social analysis.

World-systems theory is a macro-scale approach to analyzing the world history of

mankind and social changes in different countries. The definition of the theory refers to
the division of labor, be it inter-regionally or transnationally. Currently, the theory divides
the world into the core, semi-periphery, and periphery countries.

World-systems theory is a response to the criticisms of Dependency Theory (and for

the purposes of the exam can still be treated as part of Dependency Theory). World
Systems Theory was developed by Immanuel Wallerstein (1979). Wallerstein accepts
the fact ex-colonies are not doomed to be forever trapped in a state of dependency; it is
possible for them to climb the economic ladder of development, as many of them have
done. However, he also believes that the global capitalist system still requires some
countries, or at least regions within countries to be poor so they can be exploited by the
wealthy at the top. Wallerstein’s theory has four underlying principles

The world-systems theory, developed by sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein, is an

approach to world history and social change that suggests there is a world economic
system in which some countries benefit while others are exploited. Just like we cannot
understand an individual’s behavior without reference to their surroundings,
experiences, and culture, a nation’s economic system cannot be understood without
reference to the world system of which they are apart.

 This theory emphasizes the social structure of global inequality.

 It was only with the emergence of the modern world economy in sixteenth-
century Europe that we saw the full development and economic predominance of
market trade. This was the system called capitalism. Capitalism and world
economy (that is, a single division of labour, but multiple polities and cultures) are
opposite sides of the same coin. One does not cause the other. (Wallerstein
1974b: 391)
World Systems’ Four Principles:
Wallerstein’s theory has four underlying principles:

1. One must look at the world system as a whole, rather than just at individual
countries.
2. Modern World System is characterised by an international division of labour
3. Countries can be upwardly or downwardly mobile in the world system.
4. The Modern World System is dynamic

1.       One must look at the world system as a whole, rather than

just at individual countries. Dependency Theory tended to argue that
countries are poor because they used to be exploited by other countries.
However focusing on countries (or governments/nation states) is the wrong
level of analysis – governments today have declined in power, whereas
Corporations are more powerful than ever. Global Corporations, and global
capital, transcend national boundaries, and nation states (even wealthy
ones) are relatively powerless to control them, thus in order to understand
why countries are rich or poor, we should be looking at global economic
institutions and corporations rather than countries. Global Economic
Institutions form what Wallerstein calls a Modern World System, and all
countries, rich and poor alike are caught up in it.
World systems theory is a multidisciplinary, macro-scale approach to world history and
social change that emphasizes the world-system (and not nation-states) as the primary
(but not exclusive) unit of social analysis.

 
2.      Wallerstein believes that the Modern World System is characterised
by an international division of labour consisting of a structured set of
relations between three types of capitalist zone:
World-system refers to the inter-regional and transnational division of labor, which
divides the world into core countries, semi-periphery countries, and the periphery
countries.

The world-systems theory is established on a three-level hierarchy consisting of core,

periphery, and semi-periphery areas.

Core-Periphery and Semi Periphery Countries

A. The Core
 The core, or developed countries control world wages and monopolise the
production of manufactured goods.
 Core countries (e.g., U.S., Japan, Germany) are dominant, capitalist
countries characterized by high levels of industrialization and urbanization.
Core countries are capital intensive, have high wages and high technology
production patterns and lower amounts of labor exploitation and coercion.
 Core countries focus on higher skill, capital-intensive production, and the
rest of the world focuses on low-skill, labor-intensive production, and
extraction of raw materials. This constantly reinforces the dominance of
the core countries. 
 Core countries own most of the world’s capital and technology and have
great control over world trade and economic agreements. They are also
the cultural centers which attract artists and intellectuals.
 Core countries extract raw materials with little cost. They can also set the
prices for the agricultural products that peripheral countries export
regardless of market prices, forcing small farmers to abandon their fields
because they can’t afford to pay for labor and fertilizer. 
 Core nations appear to be powerful, wealthy and highly independent of
outside control. They are able to deal with bureaucracies effectively; they
have powerful militaries and can boast with strong economies. Due to
resources that are available to them (mainly intellectual), they are able to
be at the forefront of technological progress and have a significant
influence on less developed non-core nations.
 The core countries dominate and exploit the peripheral countries for labor
and raw materials.
 Are the most economically diversified, wealthy, and powerful both
economically and militarily [2][6]

 Have strong central governments controlling extensive bureaucracies and

powerful militaries[2][6]

 Have stronger and more complex state institutions that help manage
economic affairs internally and externally
 Have a sufficiently large tax base, such that state institutions can provide
the infrastructure for a strong economy
 Are highly industrialised and produce manufactured goods for export
instead of raw materials [2]

 Increasingly tend to specialise in the information, finance, and service

industries
 Are more regularly at the forefront of new technologies and new
industries. Contemporary examples include the electronics and
biotechnology industries. The use of the assembly line is a historic
example of this trend.
 Have strong bourgeois and working classes [2]

 Have significant means of influence over non-core states [2]

 Are relatively independent of outside control

B. Semi-Periphery
 The semi-peripheral zone includes countries like South Africa or Brazil
which resemble the core in terms of their urban centres but also have areas
of rural poverty which resemble the peripheral countries. The core
contracts work out for these countries.
 Semi-peripheral countries (e.g., South Korea, Taiwan, Mexico, Brazil,
India, Nigeria, South Africa) are less developed than core nations but
more developed than peripheral nations. They are the buffer between core
and peripheral countries.
 Semi-peripheral countries exploit peripheral countries, just as core
countries exploit both semiperipheral and peripheral countries. 
 These regions have a less developed economy and are not dominant in
international trade. In terms of their influence on the world economies,
they end up midway between the core and periphery countries. However,
they strive to get into a dominant position in the core nation, and it was
proved historically that it is possible to gain major influence in the world
and become a core country.
 The semi-peripheral countries share characteristics of both core and
peripheral countries.
 Semi-peripheral states are those that are midway between the core and
periphery. Thus, they have to keep themselves from falling into the
category of peripheral states and at the same time, they strive to join the
category of core states. 
 These regions often have relatively developed and diversified economies
but are not dominant in international trade.
 While in the sphere of influence of some cores, semi-peripheries also tend
to exert their own control over some peripheries.

C. Periphery
 Finally, there are the peripheral countries at the bottom, mainly in Africa,
which provide the raw materials such as cash crops to the core and semi
periphery. These are also the emerging markets in which the core attempts
to market their manufactured goods.
  Peripheral countries (e.g., most African countries and low income
countries in South America) are dependent on core countries for capital
and are less industrialized and urbanized. Peripheral countries are usually
agrarian, have low literacy rates and lack consistent Internet access.
 Peripheral countries generally provide labor and materials to core
countries.
 These are the nations that are the least economically developed. One of
the main reasons for their peripheral status is the high percentage of
 uneducated people who can mainly provide cheap unskilled labor to the
core nations. There is a very high level of social inequality, together with a
relatively weak government that is unable to control the country’s
economic activity and the extensive influence of the core nations.
 The peripheral countries are dependent on core countries for capital.
 Are the least economically diversified
 Have relatively weak governments
 Have relatively weak institutions, with tax bases too small to support
infrastructural development
 Tend to depend on one type of economic activity, often by extracting and
exporting raw materials to core states
 Tend to be the least industrialized
 Are often targets for investments from multinational (or transnational)
corporations from core states that come into the country to exploit cheap
unskilled labor in order to export back to core states
 Have a small bourgeois and a large peasant classes [2]

 Tend to have populations with high percentages of poor and uneducated

people
 Tend to have very high social inequality because of small upper classes
that own most of the land and have profitable ties to multinational
corporations
 Tend to be extensively influenced by core states and their multinational
corporations and often forced to follow economic policies that help core
states and harm the long-term economic prospects of peripheral states. [2]
·        
Note: ‘countries’ are used to illustrate the three different zones above, but technically
you could have all three zones within one country – China and India contain regions
which fit the descriptors for each of the three zones.
 
3.      Countries can be upwardly or downwardly mobile in the
world system. 

 This is one of the key differences between World System’s Theory and Frank’s
Dependency Theory. Many countries, such as the BRIC nations have moved up
from being peripheral countries to semi-peripheral countries. However, most
countries do not move up and stay peripheral, and the ex-colonial powers (the
wealthy European countries) are very unlikely to slip down the global order.
 and individual states can gain or lose their core (semi-periphery, periphery)
status over time. This structure is unified by the division of labor. It is a world-
 economy rooted in a capitalist economy. For a time, certain countries became
the world hegemon; during the last few centuries, as the world-system has
extended geographically and intensified economically, this status has passed
from the Netherlands to the United Kingdom and (most recently) to the United
States.
 Wallerstein accepts the fact ex-colonies are not doomed to be forever trapped in
a state of dependency; it is possible for them to climb the economic ladder of
development, as many of them have done. However, he also believes that the
global capitalism system still requires some countries, or at least regions within
countries to be poor so they can be exploited by the wealthy at the top. 

4.     The Modern World System is dynamic

 Nonetheless, the system has dynamic characteristics, in part as a result of
revolutions in transport technology, and individual states can gain or lose their
core (semi-periphery, periphery) status over time.
 core countries are constantly evolving new ways of extracting profit from poorer
countries and regions. Three examples of new ways of extracting profit from poor
countries include:

·         Unfair Trade Rules – World trade is not a level playing field – The best example
of this is in Agriculture – Agriculture is Africa’s biggest economic sector. It has the
capacity to produce a lot more food and export to Europe and America but it can’t
because the EU and America spend billions every year subsidising their farmers so
imported African products seem more expensive
·         Western Corporations sometimes use their economic power to negotiate
favourable tax deals in the developing world. A good case in point here is the mining
Company Glencore in Zambia – The company recently arranged a long term contract to
mine copper with the Zambian government – it exports $6 billion a year in copper from
Zambia, but pays only $50m in tax, while as part of the deal the Zambian government is
contractually obliged to pay for all the electricity costs of mining – a total of $150m a
year.
         Land Grabs – These are currently happening all over Africa – Where a western
government or company buys up thousands of hectares of land in Africa with the
intention of planting it with food or biofuel crops for export back to western markets. In
such cases the western companies take advantage of the cheap land and gain much
more than the African nations selling the land in the long term. In some case studies of
land grabs thousands of indigenous peoples are displaced.
 
 
 
Evaluating World Systems Theory (Criticism):

1. There are more causes of underdevelopment than just Capitalism

  Wallerstein can also be criticized in the same way Dependency Theorists can be
criticized – there are more causes of underdevelopment than just Capitalism –
Such as cultural factors, corruption and ethnic conflict. Wallerstein puts too much
emphasis of economics and the dominance of Capitalism – There are other ways
people can be exploited and oppressed – such as tyrannical religious regimes for
example.
2. There are some areas that are still not included in the World System
 Also, there are some areas that are still not included in the World System – some
tribal peoples in South America and Bhutan for example remain relatively
unaffected by global capitalism.
3. Wallerstein’s concepts of Core, Semi-Periphery and Periphery are
vague
 Finally, Wallerstein’s concepts of Core, Semi-Periphery and Periphery are vague
and this means his theory is difficult to test in practise.
4. The theory does not explain, nor is it interested in, human subjectivity, the politics of
colonization, the continued dominance of certain discursive forms of imperial rhetoric,
nor the particular and abiding material consequences of colonialism in individual
societies. It offers no place for individual political agency, nor is it concerned with the
local dynamics of cultural change, nor even with the operation of ‘societies’, all these
things being subsidiary to the broad structural forces of the world system.
5. World-systems theory has attracted criticisms from its rivals; notably for being
too focused on economy and not enough on culture and for being too core-
centric and state-centric.
6.  William I. Robinson has criticized world-systems theory for its nation-state
centrism, state-structuralist approach, and its inability to conceptualize the rise
of globalization. 
7. Why is the World System theory important? The process of humankind
evolvement is usually dynamic and due to many economic, political and social
factors, the dominance of certain countries may shift rapidly over time, which in
turn, regularly changes the whole picture of world economics.