dependency theory in africa essay

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Language Acquisition
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music and Religion
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Society
• Law and Politics
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Games
• Computer Security
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business Strategy
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Systems
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Politics and Law
• Politics of Development
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

2 Dependency Theory

James Mahoney is Gordon Fulcher Professor in Decision-Making, Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology, and Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA.

Department of Sociology, Northwestern University

• Published: 02 November 2016
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This article focuses on dependency theory and its influence on scholarly work in the field of international development. After tracing the roots of dependency theory, the article considers its relationship to the international economy, multinational capital, the local bourgeoisie, and the state. It then discusses dependency theory as a set of general concepts and orientations for formulating theories and explanations, as well as a set of directly testable and falsifiable hypotheses. It also emphasizes the utility of dependency theory for explaining the historical trajectories of development in Latin America, sustained robust economic growth in South Korea and Taiwan, globalization, and recent strong growth in China and some of its raw material suppliers. The article shows that dependency theory has mixed results as a testable theory but has been quite successful when used as a theoretical framework.

Writing in 1985, Peter Evans declared, “Dependency ‘theory,’ if such a thing ever existed, may well have had its day. But the rich tradition of work that has been associated with the concept of dependency continues to thrive and expand its horizons, both substantively and theoretically” (1985: 159). In this chapter, we explore the dependency theory tradition of work as it has evolved over the more than twenty-five years since Evans made this assessment. We consider the extent to which and how this tradition continues to influence scholarly work in the field of international development.

We begin by proposing two ways of viewing the substance of dependency theory: (1) as a set of general concepts and orientations for formulating theories and explanations; and (2) as a set of directly testable and falsifiable hypotheses. We then consider the utility of dependency theory for explaining outcomes across diverse empirical domains: (1) historical trajectories of development in Latin America; (2) sustained high economic growth in South Korea and Taiwan; (3) contemporary processes of globalization; and (4) recent high growth in China and some of its raw material suppliers.

We find that the utility of dependency theory rests partly on how one understands this tradition. As a testable theory, the record for dependency theory is mixed. Many simplistic and predictive hypotheses associated with dependency are clearly false (e.g., the impossibility of capitalist development in the periphery). Other more sophisticated hypotheses have done a better job of withstanding empirical scrutiny, though even here the results are not unambiguously positive. As a theoretical frame, by contrast, dependency theory has been quite successful. Several dependency theory concepts are now built into the way in which mainstream scholars study development, even if they do not call themselves dependencistas. In addition, many recent theoretical innovations at the cutting edge of the field of development can be seen as evolving directly from the dependency theory tradition.

What Is Dependency Theory?

The term “dependency theory” is associated with a heterogeneous set of ideas, ranging from causal propositions about the possibilities for development in general to concepts for analyzing historical processes of development in specific cases. One’s understanding of the meaning of dependency theory shapes one’s evaluation of its past and present contributions.

The Rise of Dependency Theory

Dependency theory has roots in longstanding intellectual traditions, most notably the Marxist tradition and writings on imperialism (e.g., Baran 1957 ; Hobson 1902 ; Lenin 1916 ). But the emergence of dependency theory as a modern approach to development in the 1960s was due mostly to analysts of Latin America who were attempting to make sense of the inability of this region to experience the kind of industrial development that marked the advanced capitalist nations. Early formulations came from economists working at the United Nations’ Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA), including director Raúl Prebisch (1949) , who rejected the optimism that the neoclassical model assigned to growth via trade and comparative advantage. In the 1960s, social scientists and historians in Latin America looking at the structural roots of underdevelopment reached similar conclusions and elaborated these ideas into what is now known as dependency theory. Important founding scholarly works include Cardoso and Faletto (1969) ; dos Santos ( 1968 , 1970a , 1970b ); Furtado ( 1965 , 1971 ); and Sunkel ( 1967 , 1970 ). Many of the original dependencistas were in close communication with one another, with several working together in Santiago after the military seized power in Brazil in 1964. Variants of dependency theory (perhaps not under this label) were simultaneously being developed and applied in English language works by scholars such as Amin (1972) , Emmanuel (1972) , and Frank ( 1966 , 1967 ). 1 Key dependency theory ideas such as unequal exchange and the notion of a core-periphery structure were also brought into studies designed to explain the evolution of the capitalist world economy and the politics of the state system since 1450 ( Wallerstein 1974 ). The resulting tradition of world systems theory was, in this sense, an extension or offshoot of dependency theory.

Dependency theorists reacted to and rejected core tenets of modernization theory, as it existed in the post–World War II period. Whereas modernization theory seemed to suggest that there was a single path to modernity that most or all underdeveloped states would eventually follow, dependency theorists believed that the countries of the Third World could not follow a pattern of development at all similar to the rich western countries. And whereas modernization theorists often explained underdevelopment in terms of causes internal to the societies of the poor countries, especially traditional cultural orientations and values, dependency theorists stressed the hierarchical and enduring structure of the international economy and its relationship to internal class dynamics. Indeed, an important feature of any version of dependency theory is the idea that the development of poor countries is strongly conditioned by their relationship to wealthy countries and their positioning within the global capitalist economy. From this idea comes the dependency theory’s conceptualization of a world economy divided asymmetrically into a core and a periphery.

Already by the late 1970s, however, tensions existed within the dependency theory tradition about the specific content and purposes of the “theory.” Notably, Cardoso (1977) criticized the way in which dependency was being “consumed” in the United States. He denounced a “vulgar” current that overemphasized external conditioning and failed to attend fully to the interrelationship between domestic processes and external relationships and to the internal evolution of the peripheral countries themselves. Cardoso also expressed skepticism about mechanical tests of dependency hypotheses, arguing that the theory is designed to inform historical inquiries and critical analysis, not to serve as a “corpus of formal and testable propositions” (1977: 15). Around the same time, Palma’s (1978) influential essay titled “Dependency: A Formal Theory of Underdevelopment or a Methodology for the Analysis of Concrete Situations of Underdevelopment?” raised directly the question of whether dependency theory was a set of testable hypotheses or a metatheory for directing historical inquiry. Like Cardoso, Palma argued that it was the latter, but the existence of his essay was a clear acknowledgment that different scholars understood the content and purpose of dependency theory in quite varied ways.

Dependency Theory as a Theory Frame

Most of the original formulators of dependency theory viewed it as an approach to analysis or what Rueschemeyer (2009 : 12–17) calls a “theory frame.” Theory frames suggest orienting concepts, point toward some variables as being important and others not, and raise general questions for analysis. However, they do not offer fully specified and testable hypotheses. Instead, theory frames need to be “filled in” with more specific hypotheses derived in the analysis of concrete historical cases and problems. As such, a given theory frame cannot be evaluated as right or wrong, but rather must be judged in terms of its usefulness for structuring explanatory investigations.

Latin American scholars generally treated the concept of dependencia as referring to a context, or background setting, within which processes of development take place ( Duvall 1978 : 57–59). The core feature of this context is the external conditioning of internal processes. As dos Santos (1970b : 236) put it, a dependent country is one whose economic development is “conditioned by the development and expansion of another economy.” The word “conditioned” of course leaves open the exact nature and extent of influence. But the central question for analysis was not how much dependence exists across times and places. Latin American countries were not understood to be poorer or richer because they had more or less dependence. Instead, dependencistas treated dependence as a common background feature and sought to analyze its different situations, forms, or historical manifestations ( Cardoso and Faletto 1969 ). In turn, starting with the original versions, this kind of specification required looking at the historically evolving relationship between external forces and internal processes.

As a theory frame, the dependency theory approach calls attention to several different variables as potentially important for understanding specific manifestations of dependence. These variables include transnational actors and processes as well as domestic classes and the state ( Evans 1979 ). To elucidate specific situations of dependency, scholars asked questions about the structural interrelationships among economic groups and states.

The International Economy : What is the relationship between a peripheral economy and core economies? How reliant on international trade is the peripheral economy? What kinds of products are being exchanged via trade (e.g., primary goods for manufactured products)? What is the overtime trend in terms of trade? Multinational Capital : What is the relationship between local entrepreneurs and multinational corporations? What is the relationship between the state and multinational corporations? How much and which parts of the productive apparatus of a country are foreign-owned? The Local Bourgeoisie : What is the nature of the local bourgeoisie? How much economic power does it command? What relationship does it have with classes and interest groups in the advanced industrial nations? The State: To what extent and in what ways does the state promote local industrialization and development? How much and what forms of leverage do dominant classes have within the state? What is the relationship between the state and transnational capital?

Dependency theory—as a theory frame—calls on scholars to pay attention to these kinds of questions. The frame is useful insofar as answering these questions helps one to understand and explain concrete development outcomes in specific cases. However, these questions themselves are descriptive and do not contain specific explanatory hypotheses. They provide orienting concepts and point toward issues to be addressed, but they are not directly testable themselves.

Dependency Theory as Testable Hypotheses

While most of the Latin American scholars who helped create dependency theory understood it as a theory frame, the approach was soon also evaluated as a set of directly testable hypotheses about development and underdevelopment. North American scholars were especially eager to assess dependency theory based on the empirical validity of its propositions. The task was never straightforward, however, because the specific testable propositions associated with dependency theory were not readily apparent.

In the most simplistic treatments, dependency theory was understood to embrace the hypothesis that capitalist development within the periphery is simply impossible, given the reliance of these countries on a single primary export, the negative terms of trade, technological dependence, and foreign ownership of the local productive apparatus. The association of dependency theory with this hypothesis is also rooted in some dependency theorists’ exploration of socialism and withdrawal from the international economy as a plausible alternative to capitalist development (see Packenham 1992 ). In addition, certain early works—such as Frank ( 1966 ; 1967 )—suggested that the development of the core requires the underdevelopment of the periphery. From this came the conviction among some that dependency theorists must believe that capitalist development cannot take place in the periphery, a claim that was already obviously not true in the 1960s. Even today, superficial dismissals of dependency theory continue to follow this line of argumentation.

More rigorous efforts to scientifically test dependency theory have explored the effects of external factors on varying development outcomes among peripheral economies. This research essentially tests Frank’s hypothesis proposing that “the satellites experience their greatest economic development . . . if and when their ties to their metropolis are weakest” (1966: 9). In particular, scholars explore statistically whether the level of dependence is nonspuriously associated with outcomes such as economic growth (e.g., Boswell and Dixon 1990 ; Dixon and Boswell 1996 ; Firebaugh 1992 , 1996 ); inequality ( Chase-Dunn 1975 ; Evans and Timberlake 1980 ); and rebellion ( Boswell and Dixon 1990 ). In these works, the extent of dependency is usually measured with data on the level of foreign investment and/or the level of trade with core nations. Cross-national statistical tests are then conducted in which relevant controls are used in the effort to assess the net effect of the level of dependency.

Unfortunately, the findings of this literature are subject to considerable debate. The source of the debate is linked to the fact that the statistical tests used in this literature are sensitive and specific measures, control variables, and regression methods (e.g., Jackman 1982 ). Different and even opposite conclusions can be generated by alternative models and methods. Dependency theory is not unique in facing this kind of methodological challenge. In this case, however, the problem has meant that findings often mirror political divisions: scholars more sympathetic to neo-Marxist approaches find that the level of dependency is negatively related to important development outcomes, whereas scholars not predisposed to neo-Marxism reach opposite conclusions. Since the late 1990s, this stream of statistical research has turned more to issues concerning global inequality. But once again, findings are sensitive to statistical measurement and modeling issues, and scholars with alternative ideological predispositions disagree among themselves (e.g., Firebaugh 2003 ; Korzeniewicz and Moran 2009 ). Thus, while dependency theory has been highly successful at stimulating exercises in empirical hypothesis testing among statistically inclined researchers, the validity of its hypotheses remains quite contested.

This mixed or inclusive record of dependency theory as a set of testable propositions would not trouble most of the formulators of this theory, given that they never intended it to be used or evaluated in this way. They would surely argue that dependency theory as a theory frame has had clear successes in teaching us about the sources of development and underdevelopment in concrete cases in the past and present. The next section considers this line of research across diverse substantive domains.

Dependency Theory and the Study of Development

To explore the validity of Evans’s assertion that dependency theory “continues to thrive and expand its horizons, both substantively and theoretically,” we examine works related to this tradition in four areas: (1) historical trajectories of development in Latin America; (2) sustained high economic growth in South Korea and Taiwan; (3) contemporary processes of globalization; and (4) contemporary high growth in China and some of its raw material suppliers. In doing so, we treat the dependency theory tradition as a theory frame to be used in the analysis of concrete historical processes of development.

Historical Trajectories of Development in Latin America

Many of the original dependency theory studies were aimed at identifying the sources of development problems in Latin America. These studies used dependency theory as a frame to structure explanations of the long-run development trajectories for specific cases. Perhaps the most famous study in this vein is Cardoso and Faletto’s Dependencia y desarrollo en América Latina (1969). 2

Cardoso and Faletto explored how different dependency theory situations shaped the evolution of political and economic development in the region. Above all, they called attention to two kinds of dependence: enclave economies and nationally controlled economies. Enclave economies originated beginning in the late nineteenth century, when foreign capital investment came to dominate the most profitable sectors of the local economy. At the extreme, foreign enclaves stunted industrial development, leaving economies rural and backward, as in many parts of Central America. In less extreme situations, enclaves were established without completely undermining urban growth, as in Chile, Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela. Even here, however, industrial development was distorted and dependent on the core for technology, especially when the middle classes could not wrest control from rural oligarchs ( Cardoso and Faletto 1969 , 101–124).

Cardoso and Faletto’s explanation thus used general theoretical principles while still looking closely at concrete historical cases. These authors emphasized the complex interplay of external and internal factors, calling attention to the distinctive structural situations of individual cases. Their explanation of outcomes took as its starting point the degree and type of linkages between domestic elites and external actors. But they also focused centrally on internal class dynamics, including the historically evolving relationship between class actors and the extent to which these actors controlled the state.

In truth, nearly all of the original empirical studies in the dependency theory tradition gave central attention to domestic structures and dynamics. For instance, while the work of Andre Gunder Frank is now sometimes understood to represent a simplistic version of dependency theory, its empirical analysis paid much attention to local class structure and internal processes of change. In Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America (1967) , which focused on Chile and Brazil, Frank argued that the original sources of underdevelopment were rooted in the colonial period and its aftermath. He especially stressed domestic dynamics linked to land ownership, agrarian production, and class conflict within the rural sector. While various criticisms can be raised about his explanation, Frank’s empirical narrative is not a good example of a simplistic dependency theory that focuses almost exclusively on external relationships.

The early work on Latin America had a substantial influence across various domains, four of which we discuss here. First, the theory strongly influenced many scholars who did not explicitly or fully identify themselves as dependency theorists. For instance, Guillermo O’Donnell’s (1973) work on bureaucratic-authoritarian regimes in South America, Nora Hamilton’s (1982) study on state autonomy in Mexico, and Gary Gereffi’s (1983) analysis of the pharmaceutical industry were all steeped in the dependency theory tradition. As Evans (1985) points out, even some studies that explicitly rejected dependency theory (e.g., Becker 1983 ) could be seen as largely consistent with this approach when it is understood as a theory frame.

Second, dependency theory was closely linked to economic policy within Latin America, specifically the policy of import substitution industrialization (ISI) that began after the Great Depression and took off in the 1950s and 1960s. Advocates of ISI suggested that the position of the Latin American economies in the world economy as food and raw material exporters was disadvantageous, industrialization was necessary for development, and the achievement of industrialization required protecting local industries by replacing imports from the advanced countries with the domestic production of manufactured products. The remedy involved a package of policies that included protective tariffs, preferential import exchange rates for industrial raw materials, public financial support for favored industries, and direct state participation in certain (often “heavier”) industries. Although these ISI policies arose from various sources (e.g., wars, balance-of-payments problems, and growing domestic markets), they grew up along with and were likely influenced by (and also influenced) dependency theory. For instance, Prebisch’s (1949) original ECLA statement urged the adoption of industrialization via the domestic market, as did other key dependency works, such as Furtado’s (1960) influential analysis of development policy in Brazil (see Hirschman 1968 ). 3 In turn, it is probably no accident that the replacement of ISI policies with market-oriented approaches in the 1980s went hand in hand with the decline of dependency theory as an explicit mode of analysis.

Third, scholars drew upon the work of Latin Americanists to make sense of historical development trajectories in other regions. For example, scholars working on sub-Saharan Africa—such as Samir Amin (1972) and Walter Rodney (1972) —were strongly influenced by dependency theory and used this frame to structure their comparative-historical explanations of underdevelopment in the region. Postcolonial African leaders themselves may also have been influenced by versions of dependency theory when pursuing macroeconomic policy ( Ahiakpor 1985 ). As explored in greater depth below, dependency theory was also employed and assessed in light of successful development cases in East Asia.

Finally, it is worth noting the tight connection between the original dependency theory work and the rise of comparative-historical studies of Latin America. When used as a theory frame in substantive analysis, dependency theory studies typically fall within the tradition of comparative-historical analysis associated with scholars such as Moore (1966) , Skocpol (1979) , and Tilly (1992) . The emphases of dependency theory on the role of colonialism, class coalitions, and foreign investment and intervention are all featured in contemporary comparative-historical work on Latin America (e.g., Collier and Collier 1991 ; Mahoney 2010 ; Paige 1997 ; Yashar 1997 ). Leading comparative-historical scholars of Latin America (e.g., Collier and Collier 1991 ) explicitly see themselves as part of a larger effort to explain the different paths of national development in the region—an effort that originated with dependency theory in the 1960s.

The East Asian Newly Industrializing Countries

Sustained high economic growth with equity in the Newly Industrializing Countries (NICs) of East Asia has attracted a great deal of attention among scholars of development over the last three decades. Many analysts suggest that the developmental successes of South Korea and Taiwan (and perhaps also Hong Kong and Singapore) pose serious challenges for dependency theory. Among other things, they point out that, by the 1970s, the East Asian NICs featured a model of export-led industrialization in which foreign investment was often encouraged ( Barrett and Chin 1987 ; Barrett and Whyte 1982 ). In addition, Taiwan and Korea had experienced extensive colonial interference from Japan before World War II, followed by heavy dependence on the United States in the decades after the war ( Amsden 1979 ; Hein 1992 ).

Yet other scholars have argued that the East Asian miracles vindicate more than contradict the dependency theory approach (e.g., Evans 1987 ; Gereffi 1989 ; Gold 1986 ; Koo 1987 ). They insist that the best explanations of the East Asian success stories and even the crisis of 1997 draw on ideas that are firmly rooted in the dependency theory approach. This argument is often developed by contrasting the East Asian NICs with their less successful counterparts in Latin America (e.g., Gereffi and Wyman 1987 ).

One of the most contentious issues in this debate is the role of the state and the contribution of government policy to the high growth. For some scholars who are skeptical of the dependency theory approach, the export-led model of East Asia represents the triumph of neoclassical economics ( Balassa 1981 ; Little 1979 ; Westphal 1978 ). From this perspective, “the first wave of successful industrialization in East Asia emerged with the rapid dismantling of government restrictions in the immediate post-war period, allowing the private sector to operate freely under world market prices” ( Akyüz et al. 1998 : 5). For others, however, the East Asian model of development always had a strong state as its agent of accumulation and thus is quite inconsistent with neoclassical tenets (e.g., Amsden 1979 , 1989 ; Aoki, Kim, and Okuno-Fujiwara 2006 ; Haggard 1990 ; Haggard and Moon 1983 ; Kohli 2004 ; McGuire 1994 ; Wade 2003 ). State-centric scholars nevertheless disagree among themselves about the extent to which East Asia’s state-led development supports dependency theory. At issue is one’s interpretation of dependency theory and whether this theory permits state-led development.

By the 1990s, leading development theorists in political science and sociology—and even international organizations such as the World Bank—tended to agree that the East Asian states were “strong” not only in their ability to actively intervene in economic development but also in the sense that they had considerable autonomy from elite classes, especially when compared to their Latin American counterparts (Evans 1987 , 1995 ; Johnson 1982 ; Koo 1987 ; McGuire 1994 : 229). 4 Vigorous government intervention in specific industries, especially in labor-intensive industries like manufactures for export, lay behind the rapid growth. Likewise, public investment in education, the use of targeted credit programs for promoting exports and research and development, and the implementation of extensive technological policies helped to drive economic development without exacerbating inequality ( Amsden 1989 ; Aoaki, Kim, and Okuno-Fujiwara 2006 ; Koo 1987 ; McGuire 1994 ; Rodrik 1997 ; World Bank 1993 ). In fact, scholars hold that the dismantling of previously effective developmental states during the 1990s as well as financial deregulation were critical causes of the 1997 East Asian financial crisis (e.g., Wade 2003 ).

Some prominent dependency theorists, including notably Evans ( 1987 ; 1995 ), find that the East Asian success also was rooted in the relative autonomy of the state from dominant economic classes. As in Latin America, the East Asian NICs were marked by a triple alliance between the local industrial bourgeoisie, transnational capital, and the state. However, whereas foreign capital was the dominant partner of this alliance in Latin America, the state was the leading actor in the East Asian triple alliance. In East Asia, unlike Latin America, strong states were in place before multinational corporations entered the picture, allowing these states to dictate better the terms on which MNCs would participate in the economy. In fact, while Latin American countries sought to deepen their industrialization in the mid-1950s by welcoming foreign direct investment, the latter was absent in East Asia during the crucial transition to industrialization and remained limited before the 1980s ( Gereffi 1989 : 515). More generally, state autonomy enabled the East Asian NICs to pursue public policies conducive to export-oriented industrialization. Whereas the Latin American states were often “captured” by ISI coalitions, the autonomous states of East Asia were able to more easily move out of ISI policies when external conditions were conducive to export-oriented growth models. The success of these export-oriented models was facilitated by the growing markets available to the East Asian NICs—markets that could not be easily reached by countries in the western hemisphere ( Evans 1987 ; Koo 1987 ).

Moreover, the East Asian states were stronger in relation to a third actor sometimes neglected by scholars working in the dependency theory tradition: local rural elites. In Korea and Taiwan, the state was decoupled from the landlord class during the extended period of Japanese colonization prior to 1945 ( Kohli 1994 ). Once independent, these states engaged in extensive land reform, which not only aided in reducing the gap between rich and poor but also spurred economic growth inasmuch as the resulting small, owner-operated farms were more productive ( Evans 1987 ; Koo 1987 ; McGuire 1994 ). By contrast, in Latin America, the persistence of traditional rural class relations forced the state to negotiate with the powerful landlord class, a process that has hindered and distorted development in that region.

A basic conclusion that some dependency theorists draw from the East Asian NICs is that there are different types and consequences of “dependency.” While the Latin American NICs were highly dependent on investment from transnational corporations and banks, their East Asian counterparts were dependent on American aid and trade for their outward-oriented industrialization. The role of the United States was thus important in both regions, but in quite different ways. In the case of Korea and Japan, the United States sought to protect distant and fledging allies against threats of communism emanating from the outside. It did so by providing massive economic and military aid and promoting capitalist development. But in Latin America, the United States saw the communist threat as emanating from within these nearby countries, and it worked to quash that threat by building up the military and extending high-interest loans to governments willing to support U.S. security interests in the region.

The differential influence of the United States in these two regions is consistent with a second core tenet of dependency theory: the role of external conditioning in shaping internal growth processes. The United States’ aid in South Korea and Taiwan was directed toward the growth of the private sector, infrastructural development (especially education), and laying the foundations of a free-market economy. It was accompanied by pressure for these governments to liberalize their economies and reduce military expenditures. These reorientations set the stage for an export-oriented strategy for industrialization in the 1960s and early 1970s when the world economy was growing. As clearly put by Koo, “It was only after this predominantly political integration into the world system, and after relatively unsuccessful experimentation with import-substitutions industrialization in the 1950s, that South Korea and Taiwan made a dynamic entry into the capitalist world economy in the early 1960s through their adoption of the outward-looking industrialization strategy” (1987: 168).

Overall, one’s view of the utility of dependency theory for explaining the East Asian cases thus depends on one’s understanding of that theory and of the role of the state in East Asian development. Dependency theory fares best if one treats it as a theory frame (rather than a set of directly testable hypotheses) and also if one recognizes the leading role of the state in driving economic growth in East Asia.

Globalization

It is no accident that several leading dependency theorists, such as Peter Evans and Gary Gereffi, are today influential scholars of globalization. The emphasis dependency theory places on the international context and transnational connections makes the analysis of globalization a natural extension. The term “globalization” itself suggests an understanding of international relations consistent with dependency theory: not merely a collection of atomistic states, but an interconnected system in which events occurring at the global level can powerfully shape internal processes of development ( Clayton 2004 : 279). Just as dependency theorists believed that “dependency” was an unavoidable background setting that “conditioned” domestic processes, globalization scholars now emphasize that, “Even if globalization does not ‘determine’ local events, there is no escaping it” ( Lechner and Boli 2000 : 3).

Globalization is a contested concept, much like dependency. Indeed, both dependency and globalization have been conceptualized in so many different ways that their myriad definitions sometimes stand in the way of scholarly communication. Nevertheless, nearly all definitions suggest that globalization encompasses a wider range of interdependencies than the asymmetrical economic relationships that were the focus of dependency theory ( Reyes 2001 ; Sklair 1999 ). 5 For example, scholars often include under the globalization label increased cultural, social, and political connections among states. The economic relationships of interest concern not only traditional dependency emphases, such as trade flows and foreign investment, but also contemporary financial investments, such as currency speculation and hedge funds. In addition, probably to a greater extent than dependency theorists, globalization scholars explore interrelationships among not only states but also localities within states, like cities (e.g., Sassen 2001 ).

When one looks broadly at empirical work on globalization, it is easy to see many imprints of dependency theory beyond the concern with external conditioning. Like dependency theorists, scholars of globalization are centrally concerned with the effects of external connections on the local state. One of the most important recent questions in the field of development is precisely whether globalization implies the withering or retreat of the state as we have traditionally known it ( Evans 1997 ; Guillén 2001 ; O’Riain 2000 ; Rodrik 1997 ; Sassen 1996 , 2008 ; Strange 1996 ). Despite the pressures and impingements of globalization, it is common for scholars in this tradition to argue that the state remains centrally important in the current global economy. This conclusion may well contradict the idea that greater dependence weakens the local state—a hypothesis that some scholars associate with dependency theory. However, the conclusion is quite consistent with dependency theory works that emphasize the developmental state as the late-twentieth century engine of growth in the world system (e.g., Evans 1995 ; Kohli 2004 ).

In addition to the state, multinational corporations (now almost always conceptualized as transnational corporations or TNCs) continue to be analyzed as prime movers in the contemporary global system (Evans 1998 , 2005 ; Sklair 2000 ; Stiglitz 2006 ). To highlight the prominent role of TNCs, Marxist scholars of globalization have referred to the current phase of the global economy as “neoliberal globalization,” “corporate globalization,” and “neoliberal globalization dominated by corporations” ( McMichael 2000 ). Likewise, dependency theory’s concern with understanding the local bourgeoisie has been extended to the global level. Thus, the current literature often focuses on a new transnational capitalist class composed of TNC executives, a global state bureaucracy, and consumer elites (e.g., Carroll and Caron 2003 ; Carroll and Fennema 2002 ; Robinson and Harris 2000 ; Sklair 2001 ). As Robinson (2005 : 5) explains, “world ruling class formation in the age of globalization is seen as the international collusion of these national bourgeoisies and their resultant international coalitions.”

Yet, despite its clear dependency theory lineages, globalization analysis is a distinctive theory frame. Perhaps most basically, globalization theorists broaden the scope of developmental outcomes beyond the traditional concern with economic development. Whereas dependency theorists viewed development mostly in terms of industrialization and the growth of the urban sector, globalization scholars are more apt to be skeptical that these outcomes necessarily generate human “progress.” Indeed, some globalization theorists celebrate and seek to protect the very traditional agrarian societies that dependency theorists associated with underdevelopment. Moreover, it is now a mainstream position to stress the value of preserving the “local” and eschew the imposition of western norms of modernity on nonwestern societies. In this sense, many globalization theorists draw theoretical inspiration from Foucault as well as Marx.

Other dependency theory emphases have been superseded by contemporary developments. For example, dependency theorists understood the international division of labor as fundamentally structured by the core–periphery binary. But globalization scholars envision a less mechanical and more complicated global structure, featuring many transnational actors and institutions that are associated with no specific national state and can occupy multiple and changing positions in the international arena. In addition, whereas dependency theory had relatively little to say about civil society, even within the boundaries of nation-states, the globalization literature is centrally concerned with new expressions of civil society, both nationally and globally. For example, the globalization literature calls attention to new social movements that are grounded in identity politics as well as traditional social movements such as labor organizations. Expressions of civil society that transcend national boundaries are of special interest, such as transnational advocacy networks (e.g., Keck and Sikkink 1998 ; Silver 2003 ) and other progressive movements that represent “counter-hegemonic globalization” or “globalization from below” ( De Sousa Santos and Rodriguez-Garavito 2005 ; Evans 2005 , 2008 ; Klug 2008 ; Silver 2003 ).

In sum, globalization studies depart from some dependency theory orientations even as they grow out of that tradition, adopting many of its major theoretical concerns and applying them to the contemporary global economy. In this way, the literature on globalization, especially its more materialist and neo-Marxist currents, is both an application of and an extension of dependency theory to the current era.

China and the New Global Division of Labor

In this final section, we range broadly and somewhat speculatively to consider the challenges and opportunities that major recent developments in the world economy offer for work in the dependency theory tradition. Let us begin by asking whether dependency as a theory frame can inform explanations of the recent rapid growth, increased openness, and industrialization via manufactured exports in China, which have positioned this country as the second largest economy in the world in terms of gross domestic product (GDP). Given that a definitive work on Chinese economic development has yet to be written, we see at least two possibilities for dependency theory to help make sense of the Chinese experience.

First, just as original works on dependency theory often traced developmental outcomes in Latin America back to a distant colonial period, today’s scholars might explain Chinese growth in terms of its ancient imperial past. In fact, several analysts broadly within the dependency theory tradition have called attention to the ways in which the Chinese economy was the largest and most sophisticated in the world before the nineteenth century ( Anderson 2010 : 91–92; Frank 1998 ; Hobson 2004 ; Pomeranz 2000 ). For centuries, China experienced dynamic progress via intensive agriculture, repeated innovation, long-distance trade, population growth, and vibrant urban commercial centers. One might therefore argue that the last 150 years of poverty and underdevelopment were simply a temporary aberration brought on by Europe’s sudden rise on the back of colonial mineral wealth from the Americas—wealth that China was in many ways originally best positioned to seize. On this path-dependent view, the explanatory task would be to identify the underlying structural continuities that persisted into the current period and that allowed China to revert to its “natural” leading position in the world economy. Such an explanation would likely have a historical-structural form similar to many of the early works of dependency theory.

Second, an alternative mode of explanation rooted in the dependency theory tradition might begin by comparing the Chinese model of growth to Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. A key commonality is readily apparent: a rapidly growing economy built on manufactured exports in which the state plays a leading role in sponsoring locally based private capital accumulation and industrialization. As Rodrik argues, “Much more than comparative advantage and free markets have been at play in shaping China’s export success. Government policies have helped nurture domestic capabilities in consumer electronics and other advanced areas that would most likely not have developed in their absence” (2006: 1). In addition, important elements of “embedded autonomy” are present in China; arguably more autonomy and less embeddedness. Thus, social ties between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and overseas Chinese businesses have been a key to recent growth. At the same time, the CCP exhibits substantial autonomy from these business groups, and it has controlled the pace of deregulation and privatization. Moreover, China has benefited from foreign capital investment; yet, parallel to Korea and Taiwan, it has done so “on terms and at conditions that served the Chinese ‘national interest,’ rather than the interests of the US Treasury and Western capital” ( Arrighi 2007 : 355). Furthermore, development in China is consistent with the type of dependent development described by Evans ( 1979 , 1985 ), where the need for repression is big and the need for democracy is small. All of this suggests that work using the frame of dependency theory could help make sense of China’s recent explosion of growth.

Nevertheless, the Chinese model contrasts in significant ways from the prototypical cases of developmental states. When compared to the classic East Asian NICs, China features greater dependence on exports, lower rates of domestic consumption, a larger public sector, higher levels of foreign investment, lower urban wages, and higher levels of urban-rural inequality ( Hung 2009 ). Many of these distinctive features of the Chinese economy are linked together, reinforcing one another. Explaining their operation offers a challenging though exciting possibility for scholars in the dependency theory tradition. Adequate explanation would require understanding how China’s external role in the global economy as the new “workshop of the world” is linked to an unequal internal structure in which an urban elite is privileged by a politically hegemonic party-state at the expense of vast rural grassroots interests. In fact, scholars associated with the dependency theory tradition who have started to examine China invariably have called attention to the relationship between its specific growth model and its rising inequality (e.g., Arrighi 2007 ; Evans and Staveteig 2008 ; Hung 2009 ).

Turning now to Latin America, the recent sustained economic growth in certain countries, notably Chile and Brazil, poses its own intriguing questions from the perspective of dependency theory. The growth in Chile has been built substantially around the export of raw materials (e.g., copper, timber, iron) and food products (e.g., fish, fruit), mainly to China ( Barton 2009 ). In the case of Brazil, the export economy is more diversified and includes heavy manufactures (e.g., automobile and airplane parts). Yet, with the rise of the Chinese economy, Brazil has increasingly depended on primary product exports (e.g., iron ore, crude petroleum, soybeans, and chemical wood pulp) ( Saslavsky and Rozemberg 2009 ). If China is the workshop of the world, Brazil and Chile—along with Argentina, Colombia, and Peru—are now among its key raw-material suppliers ( Arnson and Davidow 2011 : 4–5; Jenkins 2009 : Table 2).

On the one hand, the economic successes of the handful of Latin American countries that have profited from the export boom to China seem problematic when viewed from within the frame of dependency theory. The parallel between their contemporary situation and the situation that originally caught the attention of dependency theory scholars is apparent: these sustained high-growth cases are increasingly dependent on exporting a small number of primary products. Exports are also concentrated in terms of the companies involved ( Jenkins 2009 : 32). Moreover, much as the United States was doing during the 1970s in Latin America, the majority of Chinese foreign direct investment in Latin America is “resource-seeking” in commodity sectors that serve Chinese demand ( Arnson and Davidow 2011 ; Ellis 2009 ). As a result, China has become the most competitive exporter of manufactured goods within Latin America itself, leaving local producers vulnerable to displacement by their Chinese counterparts ( Gallagher and Porzecanski 2010 : 20–39). This situation of economic exposure and vulnerability of the local manufacturing sector closely resembles the one faced by Latin America at the time ISI was implemented.

On the other hand, a dependency theory frame could be used to explain the patterns of economic growth of Chile and Brazil. Dependencistas would be quick to point out that Chile and Brazil remain two of the most unequal countries in all of Latin America ( United Nations Development Program 2010 : 26). Growth via primary-product exporting in these countries has gone hand in hand with extremely high levels of inequality. These scholars might also draw attention to foreign actors for understanding contemporary social struggles in Latin America. Today, many conflicts between the state, landed elites, TNCs, and indigenous peoples are over environmental issues in areas where oil, iron, gold, copper, and coal are extracted as part of the new commodities development model ( Bebbington 2012 ).

In addition, dependency theory scholars might note that, as Latin American countries increasingly link themselves to Europe and China, they are simultaneously becoming decoupled from the United States. Unlike dependence in the past, the new economic connections to China may not entail the same kind of asymmetrical political relationship that existed historically between the United States and Latin America, given that China, as a prospective hegemon, is different from the United States. In fact, some scholars suggest the emergence of a “triangular relationship” among China, the United States, and Latin America, with potential opportunities for alliances and cooperation between China and Latin America ( Arnson and Davidow 2011 ; Ellis 2012 ; Ratliff 2009 ; Stallings 2008 ). In turn, severing the bonds of extreme political dependence on the United States might permit more autonomy in the formulation of national priorities and development policy within the region, eventually constituting a potential threat to U.S. political and economic interests ( Ellis 2012 : 5–8). Yet the larger question remains: Can China be a sustained source of demand for Latin American commodities, and, if so, can this exporting undergird broad-based development? The answer may dictate whether Latin America carves out a new, dynamic role in the world economy or simply follows an older pattern of dependence under a new guise.

Finally, we can consider what China’s rise and the associated reshuffling of roles in the world economy might mean for one of the least industrialized zones, specifically sub-Saharan Africa. Dependency theory work on Africa has focused centrally on the negative consequences of the slave trade and European colonialism for postcolonial development ( Amin 1972 ; Rodney 1972 ). 6 Today, one major issue is whether China’s increasing investment in Africa represents a new form of neocolonialism ( Rotberg 2008 ). Some scholars have raised explicitly the question of whether Africa’s rich natural resources are triggering a “second scramble,” as the wealthier nations seek to carve out new spheres of influence on the continent ( Carmody 2011 ). Minimally, the work of dependency theorists, such as Cardoso and Faletto on enclave economies and Frank on colonialism in Latin America, offers a starting point for assessing the current situation in Africa.

In addition, dependency theory suggests a historical lens for thinking about the form of dependence that exists between Africa and China. From this historical standpoint, important parallels can be seen between contemporary China and Africa, on the one hand, and England and its raw material suppliers during the late nineteenth century, on the other hand. Countries that were key suppliers to England’s manufacturing economy experienced huge influxes of new revenue. That mode of “dependence” proved highly advantageous while the manufacturing boom lasted. Today, those countries in Africa that have been able to export raw materials to China are likewise seeing huge revenue booms. Reliance on markets in a rising manufacturing hegemon is a distinctive mode of dependence that allows for substantial growth, at least in the short run.

Any assessment of the contributions and prospects of work in the tradition of dependency theory will depend heavily on one’s understanding of the content and purposes of that theory. On the one hand, the theory is associated—rightly or wrongly—with a series of simple but readily testable hypotheses, such as the proposition that higher levels of foreign direct investment generate lower rates of economic growth. When viewed in this way, the validity of the theory can be assessed and debated according to the results of empirical tests. Likewise, to the extent that dependency theory is associated with certain policy prescriptions, such as ISI and statist economic models, one can question its practical utility in the real world, either in the past or in the present. The belief among some that dependency theory is a failed approach stems from the conviction that its testable hypotheses are wrong and its policy implications are misguided.

On the other hand, however, most scholars who originally formulated the dependency theory approach viewed it as a frame to help guide the empirical investigation of concrete situations of development and underdevelopment. They suggested that the utility of the approach should be judged according to whether the structural relationships emphasized in the dependency theory tradition—such as trade linkages across countries; connections between foreign investors and local capitalists; forms of dominant class leverage within the state; and types of alliances between multinationals, local capital, and the state—prove useful for explaining particular development outcomes in specific cases. On this view, one can make a strong case that dependency theory has been and continues to be an extremely useful approach. The utility of this approach applies not only to the historical patterns of development in Latin America, for which it was first employed, but also to cases that might seem to challenge the tradition, such as East Asian NICs. In fact, many of the emphases of the dependency theory tradition have been used, consciously or unconsciously, to make sense of contemporary processes of development ranging from globalization to the rise of China.

Already in 1985, Peter Evans projected that the dependency theory label would disappear from scholarly work but that the orientations, concepts, and questions of this theory frame would continue to implicitly influence substantive work. More than twenty-five years later, one cannot help but be impressed by Evans’s prescience. Although virtually no dependency theorists remain, work associated with this theory frame is alive and well in the field of development.

Acknowledgments

For helpful comments, we thank Peter Evans, Kenneth Roberts, and Nicolas van de Walle.

For reviews of early dependency theory works, see Chilcote (1974) , Girvan (1973) , and Valenzuela and Valenzuela (1978) .

The English edition of this book was published in 1979 ( Cardoso and Faletto 1979 ), and it includes an important preface with a theoretical statement about historical-structuralism. Citations in the text are to this 1979 edition.

For an analysis on how Prebisch’s and ECLA’s ideas spread among policy and government circles in Latin American countries, see Sikkink (1991) .

By 1993, the World Bank, which had been known for its free-market policy prescriptions, suggested that a combination of market-oriented and state-led policies were behind rapid growth in East Asia ( World Bank 1993 : 10).

Even leading dependency theorists define globalization more broadly than economic relationships. For example, Boswell and Chase-Dunn (2000 : 33–34) define it as “transnational sourcing and a single interdependent global economy,” facilitated by “foreign investment, information exchange . . . world culture commercialization [and] the integration of trade and production.”

Dependency theory’s impact on the study of Africa was less extensive and shorter-lived than for Latin America. It is possible that the greater importance of ethnic cleavages and more limited utility of traditional economic class categories in Africa explain this puzzle.

Ahiakpor, James C. W.   1985 . “ The Success and Failure of Dependency Theory: The Experience of Ghana. ” International Organization 39: 535–552.

Google Scholar

Akyüz, Yilmaz , Ha-Joon Chang , and Richard Kozul-Wright . 1998 . “ New perspectives on East Asian development. ” Journal of Development Studies 34(6): 4–36.

Amin, Samir . 1972 . “ Underdevelopment and Dependence in Black Africa: Origins and Contemporary Forms. ” Journal of Modern African Studies 10(4): 503–524.

Amsden, Alice . 1979 . “ Taiwan’s Economic History: A Case of Etatisme and a Challenge to Dependency Theory. ” Modern China 5(3): 341–379.

Amsden, Alice . 1989 . Asia’s Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Google Preview

Anderson, Perry . 2010. “ Two Revolutions: Rough Notes. ” New Left Review (January–February): 59–96.

Aoki, Maahiki , Kim Hyung-ki and Masahiro Okuno-Fujiwara . 2006 [1996]. The Role of Government in East Asian Economic Development: Comparative Institutional Analysis . New York: Oxford University Press.

Arnson, Cynthia , and Jeffrey Davidow . 2011 . “ China, Latin America, and the United States: The New Triangle. ” Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Institute of the Americas, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

Arrighi, Giovanni . 2007 . Adam Smith in Beijing: Lineages of the Twenty-First Century . London: Verso.

Balassa, Bela . 1981 . The Newly Industrializing Countries in the World Economy . New York: Pergamon.

Baran, Paul A.   1957 . The Political Economy of Growth . New York: Monthly Review Press.

Barrett, Richard E. , and Soomi Chin . 1987 . “Export-Oriented Industrializing States in the Capitalist World System: Similarities and Differences.” In The Political Economy of the New Asian Industrialism , ed. Frederic C. Deyo . 23–43. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Barrett, Richard E. , and Martin King Whyte . 1982 . “ Dependency Theory and Taiwan: Analysis of a Deviant Case. ” American Journal of Sociology 87(5): 1064–1089.

Barton, Jonathan . 2009 . “The Chilean Case.” In China and Latin America: Economic Relations in the Twenty-First Century , ed. Rhyn Jenkins and Enrique Dussel . 227–277. Bonn and Mexico City: Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik with Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.

Bebbington, Anthony (ed). 2012 . Social Conflict, Economic Development and Extractive Industry: Evidence from South America . London: Routledge.

Becker, David G.   1983 . The New Bourgeoisie and the Limits of Dependency: Mining, Class, and Power in “Revolutionary” Peru . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Boswell, Terry , and William J. Dixon . 1990. “ Dependency and Rebellion: A Cross-National Analysis. ” American Sociological Review 55(4) (August): 540–559.

Boswell, Terry , and Christopher Chase-Dunn . 2000 . The Spiral of Capitalism and Socialism: Toward Global Democracy . Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

Cardoso, Fernando Henrique . 1977 . “ The Consumption of Dependency Theory in the United States. ” Latin American Research Review 12(3): 7–24.

Cardoso, Fernando Henrique , and Enzo Faletto . 1969. Dependencia y desarrollo en América Latina . Mexico: Siglo XXI.

Cardoso, Fernando Henrique , and Enzo Faletto . 1979 . Dependency and Development in Latin America . Translated by Marjory Mattingly Urquidi . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Carmody, Pádraig . 2011 . The New Scramble for Africa . Cambridge: Polity.

Carroll, William , and Colin Caron . 2003 . “ The Network of Global Corporations and Elite Policy Groups: A Structure for Transnational Capitalist Class Formation? ” Global Networks 3(1): 29–57.

Carroll, William , and Meindert Fennema . 2002 . “ Is There a Transnational Business Community? ” International Sociology 17(3): 393–419.

Chase-Dunn, Christopher . 1975 . “ The Effects of International Economic Dependence and Inequality: A Cross-National Study. ” American Sociological Review 40: 720–738.

Chilcote, Ronald H.   1974 . “ Dependency: A Critical Synthesis of the Literature. ” Latin American Perspectives 1(1) (Spring): 4–29.

Clayton, Thomas . 2004 . “ ‘ Competing Conceptions of Globalization’ Revisited: Relocating the Tensions between World Systems Analysis and Globalization Analysis. ” Comparative Education Review 48(3): 274–294.

Collier, Ruth Berins , and David Collier . 1991 . Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

De Sousa Santos, Boaventura , and Cesar Rodríguez-Garavito (eds). 2005 . Law and Globalization from Below: Towards a Cosmopolitan Legality . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dixon, William J. , and Terry Boswell . 1996. “ Dependency, Disarticulation, and Denominator Effects: Another Look at Foreign Capital Penetration. ” American Journal of Sociology 102(2) (September): 543–562.

dos Santos, Theotonio . 1968 . El nuevo carácter de la dependencia . Santiago: Centro de Estudios Socio-Económicos, Universidad de Chile.

dos Santos, Theotonio . 1970 a. Dependencia y cambio social . Santiago: Centro de Estudios Socio-Económicos, Universidad de Chile.

dos Santos, Theotonio . 1970 b. “ The Structure of Dependence. ” American Economic Review 60(2): 231–236.

Duvall, Raymond . 1978 . “ Dependence and Dependencia Theory. ” International Organization 32(1): 51–78.

Ellis, Evan . 2009 . China in Latin America: The Whats and Wherefores . Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

Ellis, Evan . 2012. “The United States, Latin America and China: A ‘Triangular Relationship?’ ” Working paper. Washington, DC: Inter-American Dialogue.

Emmanuel, Arghiri . 1972 . Unequal Exchange: A Study of the Imperialism of Trade . New York: Monthly Review Press.

Evans, Peter . 1979 . Dependent Development . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Evans, Peter . 1985 . “ Review: After Dependency: Recent Studies of Class, State, and Industrialization. ” Latin American Research Review 20(2): 149–160.

Evans, Peter . 1987 . “Class, State and Dependence in East Asia: Lesson for Latin Americanists.” In The Political Economy of New Asian Industrialism , ed. Frederic C. Deyo . 203–226. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Evans, Peter . 1995 . Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Evans, Peter . 1997 . “ The Eclipse of the State? Reflections on Stateness in an Era of Globalization ” World Politics 50(1): 62–87.

Evans, Peter . 1998 . “Transnational Corporations and Third World States: From Old Internationalization to the New.” In Transnational Corporations and the World Economy , Richard Kozul-Wright and Robert Rowthord . 195–224. London: Macmillan.

Evans, Peter . 2005 . “Counterhegemonic Globalization: Transnational Social Movements in the Contemporary Global Political Economy.” In Handbook of Political Sociology , ed. Thomas Janoski , Alexander M. Hicks , and Midred Schwarts . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Evans, Peter . 2008 . “ Is An Alternative Globalization Possible? ” Politics & Society 36: 271–305.

Evans, Peter , and Sarah Staveteig . 2008 . “The Changing Structure of Employment in. Contemporary China.” In Creating Wealth and Poverty in Postsocialist China , ed. Deborah S. Davis and Wang Feng . Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Evans, Peter , and Michael Timberlake . 1980. “ Dependence, Inequality, and the Growth of the Tertiary: A Comparative Analysis of Less Developed Countries. ” American Sociological Review 45(4) (August): 531–552.

Firebaugh, Glenn . 1992. “ Growth Effects of Foreign and Domestic Investment. ” American Journal of Sociology 98(1) (July): 105–130.

Firebaugh, Glenn . 1996. “ Does Foreign Capital Harm Poor Nations? New Estimates Based on Dixon and Boswell’s Measures of Capital Penetration. ” American Journal of Sociology 102(2) (September): 563–575.

Firebaugh, Glenn . 2003 . The New Geography of Global Economic Inequality . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Frank, André Gunder . 1966. “ The Development of Underdevelopment. ” Monthly Review 17 (September): 17–31.

Frank, André Gunder . 1967 . Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical Studies of Chile and Brazil . New York: Monthly Review Press.

Frank, Andre Gunder . 1998 . ReORIENT: Global Economy in the Asian Age . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Furtado, Celso . 1960. “The Brazilian Economy in the Middle of the Twentieth Century.” Industrial Conference on Science in the Advancement of New States, Israel.

Furtado, Celso . 1965 . “ Development and Stagnation in Latin America: A Structuralist Approach. ” Studies in Comparative International Development 1: 159–175.

Furtado, Celso . 1971. “ Dependencia externa y teoría económica. ” El Trimestre Económico 38 (April–June): 335–349.

Gallagher, Kevin , and Roberto Porzecanski . 2010 . The Dragon in the Room: China and the Future of Latin America Industrialization . Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Gereffi, Gary . 1983 . The Pharmaceutical Industry and Dependency in the Third World . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Gereffi, Gary , and Donald Wyman . 1987 . “ Determinants of Development Strategies in Latin America and East Asia. ” Pacific Focus 2(1): 5–33.

Gereffi, Gary . 1989 . “ Rethinking Development Theory: Insights from East Asia and Latin America. ” Sociological Forum 4(4): 505–533.

Girvan, Norman . 1973 . “ The Development of Dependency Economics in the Caribbean and Latin America: Review and Comparison. ” Social and Economic Studies 22(1): 1–33.

Gold, Thomas . 1986 . State and Society in the Taiwan Miracle . Armonk, NY: Sharpe.

Guillén, Mauro . 2001 . “ Is Globalization Civilizing, Destructive of Feeble? A Critique of the Five Key Debates in the Social Science Literature. ” Annual Review of Sociology 27: 235–260.

Haggard, Stephan . 1990 . Pathways from the Periphery: The Politics of Growth in the Newly Industrializing Countries . Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Haggard, Stephan , and C. I. Moon . 1983 . “The South Korean State in the International Economy: Liberal, Dependent, or Mercantile?” In The Antinomies of Interdependence: National Welfare and the International Division of Labor , ed. John Ruggie . 131–189. New York: Columbia University Press.

Hamilton, Nora . 1982 . The Limits of State Autonomy: Post-Revolutionary Mexico . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Hein, Simeon . 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) (April): 495–521.

Hirschman, Albert O.   1968 . “ The Political Economy of Import-Substituting Industrialization in Latin America. ” Quarterly Journal of Economics 82(1): 1–32.

Hobson, J. A.   1902 . Imperialism: A Study . London: Allen & Unwin.

Hobson, John M.   2004 . The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hung, Ho-Fung . 2009. “ America’s Head Servant? The PRC’s Dilemma in the Global Crisis. ” New Left Review (November–December): 5–25.

Jackman, Robert W. 1982. “ Dependence on Foreign Investment and Economic Growth in the Third World. ” World Politics 34(2) (January): 175–196.

Jenkins, Rhys . 2009 . “The Latin American Case.” In China and Latin America: Economic Relations in the Twenty-First Century , ed. Rhys Jenkins and Enrique Dussel . 21–64. Bonn and Mexico City: Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik with Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.

Johnson, Chalmers . 1982 . MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925–1975 . Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Keck, Margaret , and Kathryn Sikkink . 1998 . Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics . Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Klug, Heinz . 2008 . “ Law, Politics, and Access to Essential Medicines in Developing Countries. ” Politics & Society 36: 207–245.

Kohli, Atul . 1994 . “ Where Do High Growth Political Economies Come From? The Japanese Lineage of Korea’s Developmental State. ” World Development 22(9): 1269–1293.

Kohli, Atul . 2004 . State-Directed Development: Political Power and Industrialization in the Global Periphery . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Koo, Hagen . 1987 . “The Interplay of State, Social Class, and World System in East Asian Development: The Cases of South Korea and Taiwan.” In The Political Economy of the New Asian Industrialism , ed. Frederic C. Deyo . 165–181. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Korzeniewicz, Roberto Patricio , and Timothy Patrick Moran . 2009 . Unveiling Inequality: A World-Historical Perspective . New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Lechner, Frank , and John Boli . 2000 . The Globalization Reader . 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Lenin, V. I.   1916 . Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism . Moscow: International Publishers.

Little, Ian . 1979 . “An Economic Reconnaissance.” In Walter Galenson (ed.), Economic Growth and Structural Change in Taiwan . Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Mahoney, James . 2010 . Colonialism and Postcolonial Development: Spanish America in Comparative Perspective . New York: Cambridge University Press.

McGuire, James W.   1994 . “ Development Policy and Its Determinants in East Asia and Latin America. ” Journal of Public Policy 14(2): 205–242.

McMichael, Philip . 2000 . Development and Social Change: A Global Perspective . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge.

Moore, Barrington, Jr.   1966 . Social Origins of Democracy and Dictatorship: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World . Boston: Beacon.

O’Donnell, Guillermo . 1973 . Modernization and Bureaucratic-Authoritarianism . Berkeley: Institute for International Studies.

O’Riain, Sean . 2000 . “ States and Markets in an Era of Globalization. ” Annual Review of Sociology 26: 187–213.

Packenham, Robert A.   1992 . The Dependency Movement: Scholarship and Politics in Development Studies . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Paige, Jeffery M.   1997 . Coffee and Power: Revolution and the Rise of Democracy in Central America . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Palma, Gabriel . 1978 . “ Dependency: A Formal Theory of Underdevelopment or a Methodology for the Analysis of Concrete Situations of Underdevelopment? ” World Development 6: 881–924.

Pomeranz, Kenneth . 2000 . The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Prebisch, Raúl. 1949. “ El desarrollo económico de la América Latina y algunos de sus principales problemas. ” El Trimestre Económico 16:3 (July–September): 347–431.

Ratliff, William . 2009 “ In Search of a Balanced Relationship: China, Latin America, and the United States. ” Asian Politics & Policy 1(1): 1–30.

Reyes, Giovanni . 2001 . “ Four Main Theories of Development: Modernization, Dependency, Word-System, and Globalization. ” Nomadas: Revista Crítica de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas . http://pendientedemigracion.ucm.es/info/nomadas/4/gereyes1.htm

Robinson, William I.   2005 . “ Gramsci and Globalisation: From Nation-State to Transnational Hegemony. ” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 8(4): 1–19.

Robinson, William I. , and Jerry Harris . 2000 . “ Toward a Global Ruling Class?: Globalisation and the Transnational Capitalist Class. ” Science and Society 64(1): 11–54.

Rodney, Walter . 1972 /1982. How Europe Underdeveloped Africa . Washington, DC: Howard University Press.

Rodrik, Dani . 1997 . Has Globalization Gone Too Far? United States: Institute for International Economics.

Rodrik, Dani . 2006. “What’s So Special about China’s Exports?” Working Paper No. 11947. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Rotberg, Robert I. (ed.). 2008 . China into Africa: Trade, Aid, Influence . Baltimore: Brookings Institution Press.

Rueschemeyer, Dietrich . 2009 . Usable Theory: Analytic Tools for Social and Political Research . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Saslavsky, Daniel , and Ricardo Rozemberg . 2009 . “The Brazilian Case.” In China and Latin America: Economic Relations in the Twenty-First Century , ed. Rhyn Jenkins and Enrique Dussel . 159–226. Bonn and Mexico City: Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik with Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.

Sassen, Saskia . 1996 . Losing Control?: Sovereignty in the Age of Globalization . New York: Columbia University Press.

Sassen, Saskia . 2001 . The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo . 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Sassen, Saskia . 2008 . Territory, Authority, Rights: From Medieval to Global Assemblages . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Silver, Beverly . 2003 . Forces of Labor: Workers’ Movements and Globalization since 1870 . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sikkink, Kathryn . 1991 . Ideas and institutions: developmentalism in Brazil and Argentina . Cornell University Press.

Sklair, Leslie . 1999 . “ Competing Conceptions of Globalization. ” Journal of World-Systems Research 5: 143–162.

Sklair, Leslie . 2000 . “Sociology of the Global System.” In The Globalization Reader , ed. Frank Lechner and John Boli , chap. 11. 1st ed. 70–76. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Sklair, Leslie . 2001 . The Transnational Capitalist Class . Oxford: Blackwell.

Skocpol, Theda . 1979 . States and social revolutions: A comparative analysis of France, Russia and China . Cambridge University Press.

Stallings, Barbara . 2008 . “The US-China-Latin America Triangle: Implications for the Future.” In China’s Expansion into the Western Hemisphere , ed. Riordan Roett and Guadalupe Paz . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Stiglitz, Joseph . 2006 . Making Globalization Work . New York: W. W. Norton.

Strange, Susan . 1996 . The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sunkel, Osvaldo . 1967. “ Política nacional de desarrollo y dependencia externa. ” Revista de Estudios Internacionales 1 (May): 1–43.

Sunkel, Osvaldo (with the collaboration of Pedro Paz). 1970 . El subdesarrollo latinoamericano y la teoría de desarrollo . Mexico: Siglo XXI.

Tilly, Charles . 1992 . Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD990–1992 . Cambridge: Blackwell.

United Nations Development Program. 2010 . “Acting on the Future: Breaking the Intergenerational Transmission of Inequality.” Regional Human Development Report for Latin America and the Caribbean. New York: UNDP.

Valenzuela, J. Samuel , and Arturo Valenzuela . 1978. “ Modernization and Dependency: Alternative Perspectives in the Study of Latin American Underdevelopment. ” Comparative Politics 10:4 (July): 535–557.

Wade, Robert . 2003 . Governing the Market . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Wallerstein, Immanuel . 1974 . The Modern World-System . Vol. 1, Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century . New York/London: Academic Press.

Westphal, Larry . 1978 . “ The Republic of Korea’s Experience with Export-led Industrial Development. ” World Development 6: 347–382.

World Bank. 1993 . The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy . Washington, DC: World Bank.

Yashar, Deborah J.   1997 . Demanding Democracy: Reform and Reaction in Costa Rica and Guatemala, 1870s–1950s . Stanford: Stanford University Press.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Theories of Social Change and Development in Africa

• First Online: 06 October 2017

Cite this chapter

• Augustine Okechukwu Agugua 3  

3206 Accesses

3 Citations

The history of contemporary Africa can be traced, though not exclusively, to the events that characterized the Berlin Conference of 1884 on the Scramble for and Partition of Africa among European nations. The event marked the formal recognition and legitimacy status of African nations travails under the thralldom of colonialism, the economic, social, cultural and political consequences of which still linger on in the kind of change and development in Africa today. The foregoing laid the foundation on which this chapter discussed theories of social change and development in Africa. In this respect the chapter delineates three major phases in the history of African people as well as the concomitant effects regarding social change and development. In line with the above conceptualizations, the chapter illuminates theoretical contours of social change from the traditions of the evolutionists, the functionalists, the modernization theorists, the conflict cum neo-Marxists as well as convergence and postmodernist perspectives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Africa and the Development Narratives: Occurrences, History and Theories

African Philosophy of Development

The Humanist Basis of African Communitarianism as Viable Third Alternative Theory of Developmentalism

Feigelman, W., 1980. Sociology Full Circle: Contemporary Readings on Society . New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.

Jangam, R.T., 1993. Textbook of Political Sociology . New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. PVT Ltd.

Olurode, L., 2006. “Modernization and the Dependency Approaches,” in Adebagbo, S.A., Obinyan, T.U. and Olurode, L. (eds.), Family and Social Change: Essays in Sociology and Social Welfare Administration . Lagos: Rebonik Publishers.

Agugua, Augustine, 2003. “Social Change in Nigeria Since Independence,” in Akinjide Osuntokun, David Aworawo and Florence Masajuwa (eds.), History and Cultures of Nigeria up to AD 2000 . Somolu, Lagos: Frankad Publishers.

Friedenfels, R. 1998. Social Change: An Anthology . New York: General Hall, Inc.

Agugua, A., 2003. “Social Change in Nigeria Since Independence,” in Akinjide Osuntokun, David Aworawo and Florence Masajuwa (eds.), History and Cultures of Nigeria up to AD 2000 . Somolu, Lagos: Frankad Publishers.

ECA, 2006. National Strategies for Poverty Reduction and Implementation of the Millennium Development Goals: An Issues Paper . Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: ECA.

ECA, 2003. Summary, Conclusion of the Fifth Regional Consultations of UN Agencies Working in Africa, 16 to 17 May, 2003 . Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: ECA.

Rodney, W., 1972. How Europe Undeveloped Africa . Abuja: Panaf.

Chinweizu, 1975. The West and the Rest of Us: White Predators, Black Slavers and the African Elite . New York: Random House, 33.

Giddens, A., 1990. The Consequences of Modernity . Cambridge: Polity Press.

Parsons, Talcott, 1977. Social Systems and the Evolution of Action Theory. New York: Free Press.

Turner, B., 1999. Classical Sociology . London: Sage.

Jangam, R.T., 1993. Textbook of Political Sociology . New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. PVT Ltd., 222.

Smelser, Neil J., 1976. Comparative Methods in the Social Changes . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Strasser, Hermann and Susan C. Randall (eds.), 1981. An Introduction to Theories of Social Change . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Gosling, R. and Taylor, S., 2005. Principles of Sociology . London, UK: London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE).

Ohmae, K. (ed.), 1995. The Evolving Global Economy: Making Sense of the New World Order . Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.

Scholte, J.A., 2002. Globalization: A Critical Introduction . London: Macmillan.

Rostow, W.W., 1960. The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Olurode, L., 2006. “Modernization and the Dependency Approaches,” in Adebagbo, S.A., Obinyam, T.U. and Olurode, L. (eds.), Family and Social Change: Essays in Sociology and Social Welfare Administration . Lagos: Rebonik Publishers.

Wallerstein, Immanuel, 1974. The Modern World System . New York: Academic Press.

Elias, Norbert, 1987. Technik and Zivilisation . Paper presented at 23rd Bi-annual meeting of the German Sociological Association (Soziologentag), September 29–October 2, 1986 at Hamburg, West Germany.

Kuhn, T., 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolution . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Agugua, Augustine. 2003. Social Change in Nigeria Since Independence. In History and Cultures of Nigeria up to AD 2000 , ed. Akinjide Osuntokun, David Aworawo, and Florence Masajuwa. Lagos: Frankad Publishers.

Google Scholar  

Chinweizu, Ibekwe. 1975. The West and the Rest of Us: White Predators, Black Slavers and the African Elite . New York: Random House.

ECA. 2006a. Conclusion of the Fifth Regional Consultations of UN Agencies Working in Africa, 16 to 17 May, 2003 . Addis Ababa: ECA.

———. 2006b. National Strategies for Poverty Reduction and Implementation of the Millennium Development Goals: An Issues Paper . Addis Ababa: ECA.

Elias, Norbert. 1986. Technik and Zivilisation . Paper presented at 23rd Bi-annual meeting of the German Sociological Association (Soziologentag), September 29–October 2, Hamburg, Germany.

Fanon, Frantz. 1966. The Wretched of the Earth . New York: Grove.

Feigelman, William. 1980. Sociology Full Circle: Contemporary Readings on Society . New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.

Friedenfels, Roxanne. 1998. Social Change: An Anthology . New York: General Hall, Inc.

Giddens, Anthony. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity . Cambridge: Polity Press.

Gosling, R., and S. Taylor. 2005. Principles of Sociology . London: London School of Economics and Political Science.

Harvey, David. 1989. The Condition of Post Modernity . Oxford: Blackwell.

Jangam, R.T. 1988. Textbook of Political Sociology . New Dehli: Oxford and IBH Publishing Company.

Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970. Book and Film Reviews: Revolutionary View of the History of Science: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The Physics Teacher 8 (2): 96–98.

Article   Google Scholar  

Olurode, Lai. 2006. Modernization and the Dependency Approaches. In Family and Social Change: Essays in Sociology and Social Welfare Administration , ed. S.A. Adebagbo, T.U. Obinyam, and L. Olurode. Lagos: Rebonik Publishers.

Ōmae, Kenʼichi, ed. 1995. The Evolving Global Economy: Making Sense of the New World Order . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Onah, Emmanuel Ikechi. 2010. Politics and Government in Africa . Lagos: Concept Publications.

Parsons, Talcott. 1977. Social Systems and the Evolution of Action Theory . New York: Free Press.

Rodney, Walter. 1972. How Europe Underdeveloped Africa . London: Bogle-L’Ouverture Publications.

Rostow, Walt Whitman. 1990. The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Scholte, Jan Aart. 2005. Globalization: A Critical Introduction . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Book   Google Scholar  

Smelser, Neil J. 2013. Comparative Methods in the Social Sciences . New Orleans, LA: Quid Pro Books.

Strasser, Hermann, and Susan C. Randall. 1981. Introduction to Theories of Social Change . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Toffler, Alvin. 1990. Future Shock . New York: Random House.

Turner, Bryan S. 1999. Classical Sociology . London: Sage.

Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1974. The Modern World System . New York: Academic Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Sociology, University of Lagos, Akoka, Lagos, Nigeria

Augustine Okechukwu Agugua

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Thabo Mbeki African Leadership Institute, University of South Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa

Samuel Ojo Oloruntoba

Department of History, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA

Toyin Falola

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Agugua, A.O. (2018). Theories of Social Change and Development in Africa. In: Oloruntoba, S., Falola, T. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of African Politics, Governance and Development. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95232-8_6

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95232-8_6

Published : 06 October 2017

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, New York

Print ISBN : 978-1-349-95231-1

Online ISBN : 978-1-349-95232-8

eBook Packages : Political Science and International Studies Political Science and International Studies (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

ReviseSociology

A level sociology revision – education, families, research methods, crime and deviance and more!

Dependency Theory

Dependency Theorists argue that rich countries accumulated their wealth through exploiting poorer countries. Initially this was through colonialism and slavery, later on through neo-colonialism. To develop, poorer countries need to break free from these exploitative relations.

Table of Contents

Last Updated on June 5, 2023 by Karl Thompson

This post is a brief summary of the Dependency Theory view of Development and Underdevelopment. It is, broadly speaking, a Marxist theory of development.

Andre Gunder Frank (1971), one of the main theorists within ‘dependency theory’ argued that developing nations have failed to develop not because of ‘internal barriers to development’ as modernisation theorists argue, but because the developed West has systematically underdeveloped them, keeping them in a state of dependency (hence ‘dependency theory’).

Dependency Theory is one of the major theories within the Global Development module, typically taught in the second year of A-level sociology.

The World Capitalist System

Frank argued that a world capitalist system emerged in the 16 th century which progressively locked Latin America, Asia and Africa into an unequal and exploitative relationship with the more powerful European nations.

This world Capitalist system is organised as an interlocking chain: at one end are the wealthy ‘metropolis’ or ‘core’ nations (European nations), and at the other are the undeveloped ‘satellite’ or ‘periphery’ nations. The core nations are able to exploit the peripheral nations because of their superior economic and military power.

From Frank’s dependency perspective, world history from 1500 to the 1960s is best understood as a process whereby wealthier European nations accumulated enormous wealth through extracting natural resources from the developing world, the profits of which paid for their industrialisation and economic and social development, while the developing countries were made destitute in the process.

Writing in the late 1960s, Frank argued that the developed nations had a vested interest in keeping poor countries  in a state of underdevelopment so they could continue to benefit from their economic weakness – desperate countries are prepared to sell raw materials for a cheaper price, and the workers will work for less than people in more economically powerful countries. According to Frank, developed nations actually fear the development of poorer countries because their development threatens the dominance and prosperity of the West.

Colonialism, Slavery and Dependency

Colonialism is a process through which a more powerful nation takes control of another territory, settles it, takes political control of that territory and exploits its resources for its own benefit. Under colonial rule, colonies are effectively seen as part of the mother country and are not viewed as independent entities in their own right. Colonialism is fundamentally tied up with the process of ‘Empire building’ or ‘Imperialism’.

According to Frank the main period of colonial expansion was from 1650 to 1900 when European powers, with Britain to the fore, used their superior naval and military technology to conquer and colonise most of the rest of the world.

During this 250 year period the European ‘metropolis’ powers basically saw the rest of the world as a place from which to extract resources and thus wealth. In some regions extraction took the simple form of mining precious metals or resources – in the early days of colonialism, for example, the Portuguese and Spanish extracted huge volumes of gold and silver from colonies in South America, and later on, as the industrial revolution took off in Europe, Belgium profited hugely from extracting rubber (for car tyres) from its colony in DRC, and the United Kingdom profited from oil reserves in what is now Saudi Arabia.

In other parts of the world (where there were no raw materials to be mined), the European colonial powers established plantations on their colonies, with each colony producing different agricultural products for export back to the ‘mother land’. As colonialism evolved, different colonies came to specialise in the production of different raw materials (dependent on climate) – Bananas and Sugar Cane from the Caribbean, Cocoa (and of course slaves) from West Africa, Coffee from East Africa, Tea from India, and spices such as Nutmeg from Indonesia.

All of this resulted in huge social changes in the colonial regions: in order to set up their plantations and extract resources the colonial powers had to establish local systems of government in order to organise labour and keep social order – sometimes brute force was used to do this, but a more efficient tactic was to employ willing natives to run local government on behalf of the colonial powers, rewarding them with money and status for keeping the peace and the resources flowing out of the colonial territory and back to the mother country.

Dependency Theorists argue that such policies enhanced divisions between ethnic groups and sowed the seeds of ethnic conflict in years to come, following independence from colonial rule. In Rwanda for example, the Belgians made the minority Tutsis into the ruling elite, giving them power over the majority Hutus. Before colonial rule there was very little tension between these two groups, but tensions progressively increased once the Belgians defined the Tutsis as politically superior. Following independence it was this ethnic division which went on to fuel the Rwandan Genocide of the 1990s.

An unequal and dependent relationship

What is often forgotten in world history is the fact that before colonialism started, there were a number of well-functioning political and economic systems around the globe, most of them based on small-scale subsistence farming. 400 years of colonialism brought all that to end.

Colonialism destroyed local economies which were self-sufficient and independent and replaced them with plantation mono-crop economies which were geared up to export one product to the mother country. This meant that whole populations had effectively gone from growing their own food and producing their own goods, to earning wages from growing and harvesting sugar, tea, or coffee for export back to Europe.

As a result of this some colonies actually became dependent on their colonial masters for food imports, which of course resulted in even more profit for the colonial powers as this food had to be purchased with the scant wages earnt by the colonies.

The wealth which flowed from Latin America, Asia and Africa into the European countries provided the funds to kick start the industrial revolution, which enabled European countries to start producing higher value, manufactured goods for export which further accelerated the wealth generating capacity of the colonial powers, and lead to increasing inequality between Europe and the rest of the world.

The products manufactured through industrialisation eventually made their way into the markets of developing countries, which further undermined local economies, as well as the capacity for these countries to develop on their own terms. A good example of this is in India in the 1930s-40s where cheap imports of textiles manufactured in Britain undermined local hand-weaving industries. It was precisely this process that Ghandi resisted as the leading figure of the Indian Independence movement.

Neo-colonialism

By the 1960s most colonies had achieved their independence, but European nations continued to see developing countries as sources of cheap raw materials and labour and, according to Dependency Theory,  they had no interest in developing them because they continued to benefit from their poverty.

Exploitation continued via neo-colonialism – which describes a situation where European powers no longer have direct political control over countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa, but they continue to exploit them economically in more subtle ways.

Three main types of neo-colonialism:

Frank identified three main types:

Firstly , the terms of trade continue to benefit Western interests. Following colonialism, many of the ex-colonies were dependent for their export earnings on primary products, mostly agricultural cash crops such as Coffee or Tea which have very little value in themselves – It is the processing of those raw materials which adds value to them, and the processing takes place mainly in the West

Second , Frank highlights the increasing dominance of Transnational Corporations in exploiting labour and resources in poor countries – because these companies are globally mobile, they are able to make poor countries compete in a ‘race to the bottom’ in which they offer lower and lower wages to attract the company, which does not promote development.

Finally , Frank argues that Western aid money is another means whereby rich countries continue to exploit poor countries and keep them dependent on them – aid is, in fact, often in the term of loans, which come with conditions attached, such as requiring that poor countries open up their markets to Western corporations.

Dependency Theory: Strategies for Development 

Dependency is not just a phase, but rather a permanent position. The historical colonialists and now the neo-colonialists continually try to keep poor countries poor so they can continue to extract their resources and benefit from their cheap labour, thus keeping themselves wealthy on the back of exploitation.

It thus follows that the only way developing countries can escape dependency is to break away from their historical oppressors.

There are different paths to development with differing emphasis on the extent to which developing countries need to become independent of their historical colonial masters, their neo-colonial ‘partners’ or from the entire global capitalist system itself!

• Isolation , as in the example of China from about 1960 to 2000, which is now successfully emerging as a global economic superpower having isolated itself from the West for the past 4 decades.
• A second solution is to break away at a time when the metropolis country is weak , as India did in Britain in the 1950s, following world war 2. India is now a rising economic power.
• Thirdly, there is socialist revolution as in the case of Cuba. This, however, resulted in sanctions being applies by America which limited trade with the country, holding its development back.
• Many leaders in African countries adopted dependency theory, arguing that and developing political movements that aimed to liberate Africa from western exploitation, stressing nationalism rather than neo-colonialism.
• Associate or dependent development – here, one can be part of the system, and adopt national economic policies to being about economic growth such as
• Import substitution industrialisation where industrialisation produces consumer goods that would normally be imported from abroad, as successfully adopted by many South American countries. The biggest failure of this, however, was that it did not address inequalities within the countries. ISI was controlled by elites, and these policies lead to economic growth while increasing inequality.

Criticisms of Dependency Theory

Some countries appear to have benefited from Colonialism – Goldethorpe (1975) pointed out that those countries that had been colonised at least have the benefits of good transport and communication networks, such as India, whereas many countries that were never colonised, such as Ethiopia, are much less developed.

Modernisation theorists would argue against the view that Isolation and communist revolution is an effective path to development, given the well-known failings of communism in Russia and Eastern Europe. They would also point out that many developing countries have benefitted from Aid-for Development programmes run by western governments, and that those countries which have adopted Capitalist models of development since World War Two have developed at a faster rate than those that pursued communism.

Neoliberalists would argue that it is mainly internal factors that lead to underdevelopment, not exploitation – They argue that it is corruption within governments (poor governance) that is mainly to blame for the lack of development in many African countries. According to Neoliberals what Africa needs is less isolation and more Capitalism.

Paul Collier’s theory of the bottom billion . He argues that the causes of underdevelopment cannot be reduced to a history of exploitation. He argues that factors such as civil wars, ethnic tensions and being land-locked with poor neighbours are correlated with underdevelopment.

Signposting/ Related Posts 

Evaluate explanations of development and underdevelopment put forward by dependency theorists – essay plan

World Systems Theory – kind of an updated version of dependency theory which is focussed more on the global system rather than country-country relationships.

The New Rulers of the World – summary of the documentary by John Pilger, which seems to be a pretty unambiguous dependency theory perspective on the role of the World Bank, the IMF, and Transnational Corporations in globalisation. The video focuses especially on their role in underdevelopment in Indonesia.

Sources/ Find out More

This Wikipedia article on Andre Gunder Frank provides a brief summary of his theory and links to his main publications.

Please click here to return to the homepage – ReviseSociology.com

Share this:

• Share on Tumblr

16 thoughts on “Dependency Theory”

• Pingback: Difference Between Growth and Development
• Pingback: The Bottom Billion – Paul Collier – A Summary – ReviseSociology
• Pingback: Is the Environmental Crisis Built on Systemic Racism..? – ReviseSociology
• Pingback: CRITICISM OF SOCIOLOGY - Social Vibes
• Pingback: Arguments and Evidence that Transnational Corporations Harm Developing Countries – ReviseSociology

The sites really focused on the AQA spec TBH but The content will be useful for all A level specifications

this website actually helps a lot .I hope you have piled notes on everything needed for Cambridge learners to pass their sociology exam:)

I love this website- hashtag, savedmylifeyouarethebestgottalovesociologyyayayayayiamgettinganA*

• Pingback: A Colonial Conscience – TOK talk
• Pingback: Dependency Theory Applied to Gender and Development | ReviseSociology
• Pingback: Trends in Global Wealth Inequality and Poverty | ReviseSociology
• Pingback: The Marxist Perspective on Society | ReviseSociology
• Pingback: The Marxist Perspective on Crime | ReviseSociology
• Pingback: The Bottom Billion – Paul Collier – A Summary | ReviseSociology
• Pingback: People Centered Development | ReviseSociology
• Pingback: World Systems Theory | ReviseSociology

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Discover more from ReviseSociology

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Dependency and Underdevelopment in Africa

Related Papers

jayverdhan kumar

Political and technological control had enabled the west to extend an empire in Africa during the Nineteenth Century. The underdevelopment of Africa can be explained in the terms of the socio-economic-political and cultural processes and their footprints are clear. European builder had adopted different strategies and policies in Africa to make money through exploration, colonisation, commercialisation, robbery and theft. The poor countries of Africa with the less developed technology are left with the limited possibilities of exploiting the raw material at cheap rates that keep them underdeveloped. Besides this, other contributing factors are colonial legacy, slave trade, wars, poverty, illiteracy, Structural Adjustment Program, large families, corruption and lack of accountability. The Dependency Theory analyses the internal changing scenario of underdevelopment and other various aspects of being dependent. In this, the contribution of Andre Gunder Frank, Wallerstein, Dos Santos, ...

Robbins O W E D E Igbani , Alex B. Pensive

Under-development in Sub-Saharan Africa is caused by both internal and external factors. The external factors according to radical scholars or neo-Marxist are slavery, colonialism and neo-colonialism. While the internal factors are the underdeveloped productive forces among which are: leadership failure, infrastructural deficit, weak institutions, lack of economic integration, underdeveloped agriculture and industries etc. According to the radical scholars, European contact from the 15th century as spearheaded by Portugal, Spain and later Britain, France, Belgium, Germany and Italy, brought about the TransAtlantic slave trade. This slave enterprise lasted for 400 years and the consequent of this trade is depopulation of Africans, unequal exchange and the disarticulation of local economy that was already thriving. The abolition of the slave empire was the beginning of legitimate trade and economic imperialism. The Industrial Revolution in Europe in the late 1700s, brought capitalism to an advanced stage which necessitated the quest for colonies, search for markets, and raw materials for the home industries. This was followed by the Berlin colonial conference of 1884/1885 at the demand of Belgium and Germany, Africa was divided among the colonial powers through conquest and treaties of cession. This was the beginning of formal colonialism that was marked by subjugation, exploitation, disarticulation of the economy through colonial policies of settler economy in East African and Southern Africa and peasant economy in West Africa. The colonial economy only promoted the plantation of cash crops that will serve the needs of the capitalist mode of production rather than local needs. The cash crop policy created an international division of labour as Africans were made to specialize in primary products whose prices are subject to international capitalist manipulation. Educated Africans were also excluded from colonial administration because they see them as a threat to their hegemonic domination. Through agitations, political independence was granted but economically these former colonies were still being control and manipulated by the core countries. They were still being tied to apron string of these former masters who decide major political and economic policies. This is what Kwame Nrumah of Ghana described as " Neo-colonialism " meaning new form of colonialism. The core countries through the instrumentality of the Bretton Woods institutions; World Bank group and IMF, GATT, WTO and the activities of Multinational corporations manipulate these weak and vulnerable economies through different strategies and conditionality. Among which are liberalization of trade, privatization of public industries, removal of subsidies for the poor, financial liberalization, tied aids, loans, technical assistance, transfer of technology etc. thereby further deepening the dependency and the underdevelopment of these TWCs. The question is what went wrong with Sub-Saharan Africa, after many decades of political independence? Thus in spite of her massive wealth in natural and human resources the answer is failure of leadership at all strata of the society, from the family unit to political leadership. This is because her leadership is characterized as inept, corrupt, visionless, intellectually bankrupt, dictatorship, lack of democratic norms, and no respect for the rule of law, lack of accountability, etc. These factors account for her state of underdevelopment. Economic development all over the world is a function of visionary and purposeful leadership.

A.D.A PUBLICATION LIMITED

Abraham D A N Q U A H Amoah

The word development has been controversial in terms of definition to many academicians. Many a time most people especially Africa leaders mean economic development when they use the term, and refer to specifically to industrialisation (Ayittey 2005:77). However, since development is regarded as a goal-directed behavior, it would be inappropriate to apply the concept only in economic senses; development should be applied in political and social contexts. This means that development captures raising the standard of the lives of the people in all aspects (Allen and Thomas, 2000). It presupposes that development simply means internal structural change from a basic level to more advanced one. Of course, every country including African countries strives after development. Even though, the Africa economies have achieved some sort of great uneven developments several decades before their encounter with the Western world (Rodney 2009:55), nonetheless, Ake (1996:1) contended that “… development in Africa have yielded meagre returns. African economies have been stagnating or regressing”. As a matter of fact, this state of meagre yields of development in Africa countries have been made possible by some factors considered to be external and internal forces which have served as serious impediments to development in Africa. This PAPER therefore seeks to discuss some of these factors that have contributed to the reason why most Africa countries had not achieved greater level of development after more than 60 years after independence

Dr jimmy chulu,PhD

Generally, development can simply be considered in the context of economic growth and economic development. More specifically, on one hand, some scholars describe development as not only as a quantitative measure of a growing economy (such as the rate of increase in real income per head). On the other hand, others argue that development is all about an improvement in the quality of life but from the socio-economic aspect rather than only changes that lead to economic growth. It is evident that, there is a difference between the economic development and economic growth though so often they are used interchangeably to refer to progress. Arguably, one would states that growth does not necessarily imply development. Development goes beyond this assumption as changes in the economic growth rate does not imply economic development in real terms. Today, development experts argue that there is a distinction between the more commonly used terms, economic development and economic growth. The challenge is that when development is perceived purely from the growth rate point of view, the outcome is that economic development is often translated to mean economic growth rate even when there is no tangible improvement in the well-being of the people. It can be argued that there is no single established definition of development that which is so comprehensive as to incorporate all the features of development. It can be further debated that economic growth rate does not necessarily mean improvement in economic welfare for the majority poor. An increase in economic well-being does not lead to economic development unless there is resultant distribution of national income across the majority. Ideally, one can clearly state that development is a multi-dimensional and complicated concept. Development is normally conceived as a multi-dimensional process from the economic as well as social and environmental changes.

Negussie Muluneh

nicholas obeng

This paper considers the development dichotomy between the global north and global south. The focus of this paper is not about the global north but the underdevelopment and development options available to the African continent. It highlights the various theories of development and the flaws associated with such theories. This paper uses the theory of modernization, dependency and alternative development theories to operationalize how development is understood along the development trajectory. The paper also highlights the causes of underdevelopment of African continent and finally proposes ways forward for the continent of Africa encompassing strong institutions, culture and development, transfer of technology and African countries strategically positioning themselves in the world capitalist system.

Victor H Mlambo

The paper examines African development through the lens of the dependency theory. It asks if Africa is still socio-economically and politically dependent on its former colonisers. Employing a qualitative research approach, where a literature review was undertaken, the paper reveals that indeed, Africa is still very much dependent on former colonisers for its political and economic direction. Additionally, Africa has failed to break free from colonial domination not only because African leaders have become complacent with the status quo but because of the unorthodox intervention by former colonisers in the affairs of Africa. Consolidating the spirit of Pan-Africanism will contribute towards Africa breaking free of colonial chains.

International Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education

Ezekiel Michael

NAMRATA DHINGRA

According to development theories such as modernisation and dependency, The theory of colonialism explains a big part of development circumstances of countries such as Africa. This article / discussion is a reflection on the historical and economic experiences of Africa. The impact of colonialism on economic development of Africa as all countries were colonised. Because, of scientific pursuits - Colonialism defined the control of one nation by “transplanting” people of another nation — often a geographically distant nation that has a different culture and dominant racial or ethnic group. The period until 1914 saw the scramble for the rest of the world among European powers mostly in Africa

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

March Mifsut, I.J., Bueno M., P. y A. Barrero, 2021. Evaluar la efectividad en el manejo de las áreas protegidas de Latinoamérica y El Caribe. En. Informe Planeta Protegido 2020: Latinoamérica y el Caribe. pp. 41-55.

Ignacio José March Mifsut

Water Science and Technology

Giorgio Bertanza

Teshome Werku

Pure and Applied Chemistry

Jerald Bradshaw

Memory & Cognition

Timothy Jordan

Gregory P Makabila

Enzyme and Microbial Technology

mahboobeh nazari

Defence Colony

call girls delhi

Ketogen Tropfen

ketogen mae

Clinical Gerontologist

Liat Ayalon

Daniel Oliveros

Journal of Monetary Economics

Fernando Broner

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

Kojiro Irikura

Werner Blau

International Perspectives in Psychology

Christina Groark

Mahmoud Azaz

Stefan Drees

Peter Klinkhamer

Nucleation and Atmospheric Aerosols

michael macrossan

Chemistry Letters

José I. Borrell

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024