The International

Dependency
Revolution
The international dependence theories have their

origins in developing countries and view obstacles

to development as being primarily external in

nature, rather than internal.

The dependency theory is premised on the following:

• Poor nations provide market access to wealthy nations

• Wealthy nations actively perpetuate a state of dependence

by various means.

• Wealthy nations actively counter attempts by dependent

nations to resist their influences by means of economic
sanctions and/or the use of military force.
 The neo-colonial dependence
model

The false paradigm model

Three schools
of thought
which have The dualistic
dominated the development thesis
international
dependency
thinking
 The neo-colonial dependence model

This model states that the

interactions between rich and poor
countries or the Third World's
underdevelopment are thought to be
the product of the highly unequal
international capitalism system.
 The false paradigm model

The model links Third World

underdevelopment to bad and inappropriate
advice given by well-intended but frequently
uninformed, prejudiced, and ethnocentric
foreign advisers from developed country
assistance agencies and multinational donor
organizations.
 The Dualistic Development Thesis

According to dualism, there is a significant disparity

between rich and poor countries and individuals, and the
gap is growing.
•Four basic arguments:
1. There can simultaneously exist multiple sets of
conditions that people live under, some of which foster
growth and some that hinder it
2. These multiple sets of conditions coexist chronically;
inequality acrosscountries will not resolve itself without
some intervention
3. Inequality across countries has been growing
4. People in superior countries/conditions have little
incentive to help theless-advantaged and will tend not to do
so.
Conclusions and implications

Dependency theories are disregarded due to the

exclusive focus on conventional neoclassical
economic theories intended to promote growth
and GDP as the primary indicator of
development, as well as the assertion that these
theories have two significant flaws.