The Dependency

perspectives
Dependency Theory developed in the late 1950s under the guidance of the
Director of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America,
Raul Prebisch. Prebisch and his colleagues were troubled by the fact that
economic growth in the advanced industrialized countries did not necessarily
lead to growth in the poorer countries. Indeed, their studies suggested that
economic activity in the richer countries often led to serious economic
problems in the poorer countries.
Frank: The development of
underdevelopment
Frank started with critique of the modernization school. According to him,

the modernization school is deficient because it offers an internal’ explanation

third world development.

According to Frank, Third world countries could never follow the western path
because they have experienced something that western countries have not
experienced. `Colonialism’.

Frank formulates the concept of `development of underdevelopment’ to denote

that underdevelopment is not a natural condition but an artifact created by the
long history of colonial domination in third world countries.
Metropolis- Satellite model:

Frank has formulated a `metropolis-

satellite’ model to explain how the
mechanisms of underdevelopment work.
Based on this model, Frank has proposed
several interesting hypotheses
concerning development of third world
countries :
Hypotheses 1: Which states are joined to world metropolis, they are under-developed.
Hypotheses 2: The satellites experience their greatest industrial development and especially
their most classically capitalist industrial development if and when their ties to their
metropolis are weakest. It occurs in two ways-
I. Crisis of war and depression.
II. Geography and economic isolation.

Hypotheses 3: The regions which are the most underdeveloped and feudal- seeming today
are the ones which had the closest ties to the metropolis in the past.

Hypotheses 4: When the Metropolis recovers from its crisis and reestablishes the satellite
system, then the previous industrialization of these countries is choked off.
The Structure of Dependence: Dos Santos
The relationship between two or more countries “assumes the
form of dependence when some countries (the dominant ones) can
expand and be self-starting, while other countries (the dependent
ones) can do this only as a reflection of that expansion.”
The Structure of Dependence: Dos Santos
Dos santos has distinguished three historical form of dependence:

1. Colonial dependence
2. Financial-industrial dependence
3. Technological- industrial dependence
Comparison of the dependency and modernization
schools
Similarities Classical modernization Classical Dependency
perspectives Perspectives
Research focus Third world development Same
methodology Focus on the general process of same
development
Polar theoretical structure Tradition versus modernity Core versus periphery
Differences
Causes of third world problems Mostly internal Mostly internal
Nature of national linkage Generally beneficial Generally harmful
Prediction for direction of optimistic pessimistic
development
Solutions for development More western linkages Fewer core linkages, socialist
revolution
 CRITICISMS OF
DEPENDENCY SCHOOL
The following four fundamental aspects of dependency theory
provoke criticism of the approach:
(1) the basic unit of the world system is seen as a dyadic relation
between nations;
(2) models of the world system are cumulations of these units into
hierarchically sets of roles;
(3) geographical and social relationships are collapsed in
description, preventing independent analysis of the latter; and
(4) basic relations among units of the system are exchange instead
of production.