ECON 3066 Economic Developmen t

© Natalya Brown 2008

Part I
‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ Four Approaches Linear-Stages-of-Growth Models Structural-Change Models International Dependence Revolution

Four Approaches
‡ Four major and often competing development theories, all trying to explain how and why development does or does not occur. ‡ Newer models often draw on various aspects of these classical theories. ‡ In the 1950¶s and 1960¶s, linear-stages-ofgrowth models were popular. They described the process of development as a series of successive stages.

‡ These models were replaced in the 1970¶s by Structural Change and International Dependence models. ‡ Structural change models emphasized the internal process of structural changes that a developing country must go through, while international dependence models viewed underdevelopment in terms of international and domestic power relationships, institutional and structural rigidities and the resulting proliferation of dual economies and dual societies both within and among nations of the world.

‡ In the 1980¶s and 1990¶s the neoclassical counterrevolution focused on the beneficial role of free markets, open economies and the privatization of public enterprises and suggested that the failure of some economies to develop is a result of too much government intervention and regulation.

Linear-Stages-of-Growth Models
± Rostow¶s Stages of Growth ± Harrod-Domar¶s Growth Model

‡ The thinking here was that the developing countries could learn a lot from the historical growth experience of the now developed countries in transforming their economies from poor agrarian societies to modern industrial giants. ‡ Emphasized the role of accelerated capital accumulation.

Rostow¶s Stages of Growth
‡ Rostow argued that economic development can be described in terms of a series of steps through which all countries must proceed:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The Traditional Society The Pre-conditions for take-off into self-sustaining growth The Take-off The Drive to Maturity The Age of High Mass Consumption

‡ ‡

Advanced nations were considered well beyond the take-off stage while underdeveloped nations were seen as still in the traditional or pre-conditions stages. Emphasized the need for the mobilization of domestic and foreign investment in order to accelerate growth.

Rostow¶s model states that countries may need to depend on a few raw material exports to finance the development of manufacturing sectors which are not yet of superior competitiveness in the early stages of takeoff. In that way, Rostow¶s model allows for a degree of government control over domestic development not generally accepted by some ardent free trade advocates. ‡ As a basic assumption, Rostow believes that countries want to modernize as he describes modernization, and that the society will ascent to the materialistic norms of economic growth.

‡

Traditional Societies
‡ Traditional societies are marked by their pre-Newtonian understanding and use of technology. These are societies which have pre-scientific understandings of gadgets, and believe that gods or spirits facilitate the procurement of goods, rather than man and his own ingenuity. The norms of economic growth are completely absent from these societies.

Preconditions for Take-off
‡ The preconditions to take-off are, to Rostow, that the society begins committing itself to education, that it enables a degree of capital mobilization, especially through the establishment of banks and currency, that an entrepreneurial class form, and that the secular concept of manufacturing develops, with only a few sectors developing at this point. This leads to a take off in ten to fifty years.

The Take-off
‡ Take-off then occurs when sector led growth becomes common and society is driven more by economic processes than traditions. At this point, the norms of economic growth are well established. ‡ Transition from traditional to modern economy

The Drive to Maturity
‡ The drive to maturity refers to the need for the economy itself to diversify. The sectors of the economy which lead initially begin to level off, while other sectors begin to take off. This diversity leads to greatly reduced rates of poverty and rising standards of living, as the society no longer needs to sacrifice its comfort in order to strengthen certain sectors.

Age of High Mass Consumption
‡ The age of high mass consumption refers to the period of contemporary comfort afforded many western nations, wherein consumers concentrate on durable goods, and hardly remember the subsistence concerns of previous stages. ‡ in the age of high mass consumption, a society is able to choose between concentrating on military and security issues, on equality and welfare issues, or on developing great luxuries for its upper class.

Criticism
‡ Strong bias towards western model of modernization (free vs. controlled markets, China). ‡ Tries to fit economic progress into a linear system

Harrod-Domar Growth Model (AK Model)
‡ Following on Rostow¶s theory the AK model describes the mechanism by which more investment leads to more growth. ‡ Pointed to the necessity of net additions to the capital stock ‡ Used to explain an economy's growth rate in terms of the level of saving and productivity of capital. ‡ It suggests there is no natural reason for an economy to have balanced growth.

Concepts of Growth
‡ Warranted growth ± the rate of output growth at which firms believe they have the correct amount of capital and therefore do not increase or decrease investment, given expectations of future demand. ‡ Natural rate of growth ± The rate at which the labour force expands, a larger labour force generally means a larger aggregate output. ‡ Actual growth ± The actual aggregate output change. ‡ There is no guarantee that an economy will achieve sufficient output growth to sustain full employment in a context of population growth. ‡ The problem arises when actual growth either exceeds or fails to meet warranted growth expectations. A vicious cycle can be created where the difference is exaggerated by attempts to meet the actual demand, causing economic instability.

Components
± Capital stock (K) ± Output (Y) - GDP ± Capital-Output ratio (k): the dollar amount of capital needed to produce a $1 stream of GDP. K/Y or K/ Y ± Savings (S) and the savings ratio (s): the fixed proportion of national output that is used for new investment.

So S = sY (1) ‡ Net investment is the change in the capital stock (2) ‡ Remember that k = K/Y or K/ Y, so that (3) ‡ Net savings must equal to net investment so that S = I. Combining (1), (2) and (3):

I= K

K=k Y

sY = k Y s/k = Y/Y
Y/Y is the growth rate of GDP.

‡ Increasing the savings rate, increasing the marginal product of capital, or decreasing the depreciation rate will increase the growth rate of output;

‡ So the growth rate of GDP is determined jointly by the savings ratio, s, and the national capital-output ratio ‡ So the rate of growth of GDP is positively related to the economies savings ratio and negatively related to the economies capital-output ratio. ‡ The more economies save and invest, the faster they can grow but the actual rate of growth is measured by the inverse of the capital-output ratio ± the output-capital ratio.

‡ The fact that LDCs savings levels are often not enough to meet the levels suggested by the linear-stages models, the need to fill the ³savings gap´ was used to justify massive transfers of capital and technical assistance from developed countries to LDCs. ‡ More savings and investment is not a sufficient condition for accelerated rates of economic growth. Many LDCs lack the necessary structural, institutional and attitudinal conditions to convert new capital effectively into higher levels of output. They also lacked the complementary factors of production (e.g. skilled labour and managerial competence). ‡ Also the development strategies proposed by the stages models failed to take into account the global environment in which developing countries exist ± one in which development strategies can be thwarted by external forces beyond the countries control.

Structural Change Models
± Lewis Two-Sector Model ± Patterns-of-Development Approach

‡ These models tend to emphasize the transformation of domestic economic structures from traditional subsistence agriculture economies to more modern, urbanized and industrially diverse manufacturing and service economies.

Lewis Two-Sector Model
‡ The economy consists of two sectors
± The traditional agricultural sector is typically characterized by low wages, an abundance of labour, and low productivity through a labour intensive production process. ± the modern manufacturing sector is defined by higher wage rates than the agricultural sector, higher marginal productivity, and a demand for more workers initially

‡ Labour can be withdrawn from the traditional sector without any loss of output ‡ Focus is on labour transfer and output and employment growth in the modern sector. The rate at which this occurs is determined by the rate of industrial investment and capital accumulation in the modern sector. ‡ Wages in the industrial sector are fixed at a premium above wages in the traditional sector. It is assumed that rural labour supply is perfectly elastic.

‡ Lewis assumed that with the urban wage above the average rural wage, that the modern-sector employers could hire as many surplus rural workers as the wanted without fear of rising wages ‡The successive reinvestment of profits from the modern sector would increase the production possibilities of that sector leading to successive increases in the demand for labour. The employment expansion in the industrial sector would continue until all the excess labour from the traditional sector is absorbed. From that point onwards, modern sector wages would rise in order for industrial employers to attract additional workers from the traditional sector. ‡Improvement in the marginal productivity of labour in the agricultural sector is assumed to be a low priority as the hypothetical developing nation's investment is going towards the physical capital stock in the manufacturing sector.

‡ Over time as this transition continues to take place and investment results in increases in the capital stock, the marginal productivity of workers in the manufacturing will be driven up by capital formation and driven down by additional workers entering the manufacturing sector. Eventually, the wage rates of the agricultural and manufacturing sectors will equalize as workers leave the agriculture for the manufacturing, increasing marginal productivity and wages in the agriculture while driving down productivity and wages in manufacturing. ‡ The end result of this transition process is that the agricultural wage equals the manufacturing wage, the agricultural marginal product of labour equals the manufacturing marginal product of labour, and no further manufacturing sector enlargement takes place as workers no longer have a monetary incentive to transition.

‡ One of the problems with Lewis¶ model is that it assumes that the

rate of labour transfer and employment creation is proportional to the rate of modern sector capital accumulation. It does not leave room for the possibility that capitalist profits could be reinvested in laboursaving capital equipment nor does it leave room for the possibility of capital flight. ‡ The model also assumes surplus labour in rural areas and full employment in urban areas. By and large this is not the case in most developing nations. ‡The assumption of a competitive modern-sector labour market that allows modern sector wages to remain fixed until the rural sector labour surplus is exhausted is unrealistic. In reality there is a tendency for urban wages to rise over time, even when there is considerable urban unemployment.

Part II
‡ Structural Change Models
± Patterns-of-Development Analysis

‡ International-Dependence Revolution

Patterns-of-Development Approach
‡ Increased savings and investment are perceived as necessary but not sufficient conditions for economic growth. Along with accumulation of human and physical capital, a set of interrelated structural changes are needed to make the transition from traditional economy to a modern one. Changes in:
± ± ± ± ± ± Composition of consumer demand International trade Resource usage Production Urbanization The growth and distribution of the population

‡ Both domestic and international constraints on development are emphasized. ‡ Domestic constraints: country¶s resource endowment and physical population, government policies and objectives. ‡ International constraints: External capital, technology and international trade. ‡ The extent to which countries face these constraints determines their development level. ‡ Recognition is given to the importance of the integrated international system in which developing countries belong ± a system that can promote or hinder their development.

‡ Based on extensive empirical work conducted by Hollis B. Chenery and his colleages using crosssectional and time-series data, patterns of development analysis identified several characteristic features of the development process.
± The shift from agricultural to industrial production ± The steady accumulation of physical and human capital ± The shift in consumer demands from basic necessities to desires for diverse manufactured goods and services. ± The decline in family size and overall population growth

‡ The main hypothesis of structural change models is that development is an identifiable process of growth and change whose main features are similar in all countries. ‡ However recognition is given to the differences in the circumstances of developing countries such as differences in physical endowments. ‡ Practitioners of this approach may be lead to draw incorrect conclusions about causality since the approach is based on empirical observation and less on theory.
± For example, practitioners may observed the important role of higher education in developed countries and recommend policies to develop an advanced university system even before the majority of the population has gained basic literacy. This policy could backfire by leading to an increase in inequality.

‡ Often the patterns identified through empirical observation point to international factors that are largely out of the control of individual countries. ‡ Structural change analysts are optimistic because they believe that the right mix of economic policies will generate beneficial patterns of self-sustaining growth.

International-Dependence Revolution
‡ Neocolonial Dependence Model ‡ False-Paradigm Model
The international-dependence models grew out of the increasing disenchantment with both the stages-of-growth and structural-change models only for them to fall out of favor in the 80¶s and 90¶s as the neoclassical models took over in importance. These models view developing countries as beset by institutional, political, and economic rigidities both domestic and international, and caught up in a dependence and dominance relationship with rich countries.

Neocolonial Dependence Model
‡ It lays the blame for the existence of underdevelopment on the shoulders of the historical evolution of a highly unequal capitalist system of rich country-poor country relationships. ‡ The dominance of the unequal power relationships between the center (the rich countries) and the periphery (the developing countries) renders the attempts by the LDCs to be self-sufficient and independent difficult. ‡ Also the members of the elite class in the developing countries have interests that help to perpetuate the international capitalist system of inequality and conformity. Directly and indirectly the elite class serve and are rewarded by international special-interest power groups (e.g. multi-national corporations, multilateral assistance organizations like the IMF), which are tied by the allegiance or funding to the wealthy capitalist countries. Often, elite activities tend to hinder any reform efforts that might benefit the population at large leading to perpetual underdevelopment.

‡ The continuing poverty in the developing world is largely attributed to the existence and policies of the industrial capitalist countries and their extensions in the form of small but powerful elite groups in LDCs. ‡ Underdevelopment is seen as an externallyinduced phenomenon. Dependent countries can only expand as a reflection of the expansion of the dominant countries. Dependence causes the dependent nations to be both backward and exploited. ‡ Revolutionary struggles or at least the restructuring of the world capitalist system are therefore required.

The False-Paradigm Model
‡ Less radical than international dependence models, these models attribute underdevelopment to faulty and inappropriate advice provided by wellmeaning but often uninformed, biased international advisers from developed-country assistance agencies and multinational donor organizations. The advice given fails to recognize resilient traditional social structures, the highly unequal ownership of land and other property rights, the disproportionate control of elites over domestic and international financial assets and the very unequal access to credit. The policy advice generated from classical and neo-classical models in many cases merely serve to protect the interests of the existing power groups, both domestic and international. Also local university intellectuals, high-government officials and other civil servants receive training in developed-country institutions where they learn inapplicable theoretical models.

‡

‡

‡

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.