Email this article 
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THEORIES AS SUPPORTING STRUCTURE OF GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES: A REVIEW
Abstract
Economic development theories are the supporting structure of growth literature. In view of this, this paper attempts to review selected economic development theories with the aim of highlighting their relevance to the growing empirical debate on growth and development. From the front of classical theories of economic development came the modernisation theory which focuses on effecting transformation among institutional structures in less developed countries of the world through cultural changes while buttressing that political development is indispensable in ensuring progress and conducive environment for a nation’s economic status. The theory, therefore, acknowledges the important role of politics in formulation and implementations of policies. As a response to criticisms of the dependency school and the theory of modernization, the world-systems and globalization theory emerged as direct outgrowth of the modernity and the dependency. The world-systems and globalization theories argue for a systemic level or unit of analyses order than a state-centric approach to social and economic progress while proposing a knowledge economy where cutting-edge technology plays major role in global industrialisation, capital accumulation. Furthermore, the theory of neoliberalism argue that free global trade can drive economic growth and large businesses can benefit more without government intervention.
JEL: F63; F02; O11
Article visualizations:
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Almeida, P. (2015). Unintended consequences of state-led development: A theory of collective opposition to neoliberalism. Sociology of Development, 1(2), 51–68. http://doi.org/DOI:10.1525/sod.2015.1.2.51
Birch, K., & Mykhnenko, V. (2008). Varieties of neoliberalism? Restructuring in large industrially-dependent regions across Western and Eastern Europe. Center for Public Policy for Regions (CPPR) Working Paper, (14), 1–45.
Bresser-Pereira, L. C. (2009). Assault on the State and on the market: Neoliberalism and economic theory. Estudos Avançados, 23(66), 7–23.
Chilcote, R. H. (1974). Dependency: A critical synthesis of the literature. Latin American Perspectives, 1(1), 4-29
Cooper, F. (2004). Development, modernization, and the social sciences in the era of decolonization: The examples of British and French Africa. Revue d'Histoire des Sciences Humaines, 1(10), 9-38. DOI: 10.3917/rhsh.010.0009
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, 1, 116–128.
Gabrielyan, A. (2014). Development, globalization and dependency theory in the south Caucasian narrative. 21st Century, 2(16), 65–78.
Gunaratne, S. A. (2001). Prospects and limitations of world system theory for media analysis: The case of the Middle East and North Africa. GAZETTE, 63(2-3), 121–148.
Hein, S. (1992). Trade strategy and the dependency hypothesis: a comparison of policy, foreign investment, and economic growth in Latin America and East Asia. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 40(3), 495–521.
Kay, C., & Gwynne, R. N. (1998). Relevance of structuralist and dependency theories in the neoliberal period: A Latin American Perspective. Institute of Social Studies, Working Paper series, (281), 1-30
Kvangraven, I. H. (2017). On dependency. A Project Conducted under the Aegis of the Economic Development Working Group of the Young Scholars Initiative (YSI) of the Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET), 1, 1–122.
Mączynska, E., & Pysz, P. (2014). Classical liberalism, neoliberalism and ordoliberalism, 17–39. Retrieved from www.pte.pl/pliki/2/12/2.17-39.pdf.
Matunhu, J. (2011). A critique of modernization and dependency theories in Africa: Critical assessment. African Journal of History and Culture, 3(5), 65–72.
Mawire, P. R. (2013). The missing link: Implications of the modernisation theory and the dependency theory in Africa’s quest for development. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 13(5), 41–44.
Nhema, A. G., & Zinyama, T. (2016). Modernization, dependency and structural adjustment development theories and Africa: A critical appraisal. International Journal of Social Science Research, 4(1), 151–166. http://doi.org/10.5296/ijssr.v4i1.9040.
Ohnesorge, J. K. M. (2007). Developing development theory: Law and development orthodoxies and the Northeast Asian experience. U. Pa. J. Int’l Econ. L., 28(2), 219–308.
Olesen, K. (2012). The neoliberalisation of strategic spatial planning. AESOP 26th Annual Congress, METU, Ankara, (July), 1–15.
Ostry, J. D., Loungani, P., & Furceri, D. (2016). Neoliberalism: oversold? Finance & Development, (June), 38–41.
Patomaki, H. (2009). Neoliberalism and the global financial crisis. New Political Science, 31(4), 432–442. http://doi.org/10.1080/07393140903322497.
Reece, E. Alla. (1983). Development and underdevelopment in the third world: Theoretical approaches (Doctoral thesis). A Thesis, School of Graduate Studies McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario, 1–234.
Reyes, G. E. (2001). Four main theories of development: Modernization, dependency, word-system, and globalization. Nómadas. Revista Crítica de Ciencias Sociales Y Jurídicas, 04(1), 1–16.
Robinson, W. I. (2007). Theories of globalization. RIT06.indd, 125–143.
Sánchez, O. (2003). The rise and fall of the dependency movement: Does it inform underdevelopment today? E.I.A.L., 14(2), 31–50.
Siddiqui, K. (2012). Developing countries’ experience with neoliberalism and globalisation. research in Applied Economics, 4(4), 12–37. http://doi.org/10.5296/rae.v4i4.2878
Smith, T. (1981). The logic of dependency theory revisited. International Organisation, 35(4), 755-761
So, A. Y. (n.d.). The dependency and World-Systems perspectives on development. Historical Developments and Theoretical Approaches in Sociology, II, 1–8.
Strikwerda, C. (2000). From World-Systems to globalization: Theories of transnational change and the place of the United States. American Studies, 41(2/3 (Summer/Fall 2000)), 333–348.
Tagarirofa, J. (2017). Modernization theory and “Third World” development: An exegesis of theoretical sarcasm. International Journal of Politics and Good Governance, VIII(8), 1–8.
Uche, L. U. (1994). Some reflections on the dependency theory. Africa Media Review, 8(2), 39–55.
Valenzuela, J. S., & Valenzuela, A. (1978). Modernization and dependency: Alternative perspectives in the study of Latin American underdevelopment. Comparative Politics, 10(4), 535–557.
Venugopal, R. (2015). Neoliberalism as concept. Economy and Society, 44(2), 1–22.
Wallerstein. (2002). the itinerary of world-systems analysis; or, how to resist becoming a theory. New Dimensions in contemporary sociology theory, 1-19.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejhrms.v0i0.851
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2020 European Journal of Human Resource Management Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The research works published in this journal are free to be accessed. They can be shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format) and\or adapted (remixed, transformed, and built upon the material for any purpose, commercially and\or not commercially) under the following terms: attribution (appropriate credit must be given indicating original authors, research work name and publication name mentioning if changes were made) and without adding additional restrictions (without restricting others from doing anything the actual license permits). Authors retain the full copyright of their published research works and cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.
Copyright © 2017-2023. European Journal Of Human Resource Management Studies (ISSN 2601-1972) is a registered trademark. All rights reserved.
This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library. All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and standards formulated by Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights of the published research works are retained by authors.
