Menu

Dependency Frank have become important names in

Dependency
Theory and Reflections

                                                             
Name:Hüseyin Y?ld?r?m Dependency theory is the
notion that resources flow from a “periphery” of poor and
underdeveloped states to a “core” of wealthy states, enriching the
latter at the expense of the former. It is a central contention of dependency
theory that poor states are weakened
and rich ones enriched by the way poor states are integrated into the
“world system”.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The theory arose as a reaction to
modernization theory, an earlier theory of development which held that all
societies progress through similar stages of development, that today’s
underdeveloped areas are thus in a similar situation to that of today’s
developed areas at some time in the past, and that, therefore, the task of
helping the underdeveloped areas out of poverty is to accelerate them along
this supposed common path of development, by various means such as investment,
technology transfers, and closer integration into the world market. Dependency
theory rejected this view, arguing that underdeveloped countries are not merely
primitive versions of developed countries, but have unique features and
structures of their own; and, importantly, are in the situation of being the
weaker members in a world market economy.Dependency theory no longer has many
proponents as an overall theory, but some writers have argued for its
continuing relevance as a conceptual orientation to the global division of
wealth.

The theory of dependency emerged
in Latin America in the 1960s. It was born in reaction to the theory of
modernization, which tried to explain the backwardness of the eastern countries
because they did not go through the historical stages of the western countries
and lacked scientific-technological developments. Many scholars such as Samir
Amin, Immanuel Wallerstein, Fernando Cardoso and Andre Gunder Frank have become
important names in this theory. Addiction Theory is essentially an economic
theory. Recently, it has become widespread in different fields and disciplines.
One of these disciplines has been international relations. ”

The Theory of Addiction is a
theory of widespread understanding that criticizes the Western countries’
relations with Third World countries in a fundamentalist manner since the
1960s. The theory basically takes economic imperialism and argues that the main
purpose of aid to underdeveloped countries is to take the poor countries to the
economic tribulation of the helping country. According to addiction theorists,
the reasons for the backwardness of the Third World countries are developed
countries. The development of these countries can be understood by looking at
historical processes, not their internal dynamics. Non-Western societies have
been forced to struggle with internal wars, bumps, etc., under the intervention
of western states as colonial or semi-colonial. The political instabilities in
these countries are caused by their inability to have a single economic and
cultural structure stemming from the interventions. The main reason for the
wealth of developed countries is the exploitation of undeveloped countries.
There is also uneven development and polarization between underdeveloped and
developing countries. As capitalist relations exist, it is inevitable that
there will be uneven developments and there will be polarizations. Third world
societies will not be able to access the status of developed countries as long
as they follow capitalist countries.

1

Immanuel Wallerstein made a statement in
the World System Theory about the relation between developed and undeveloped
countries. According to Wallerstein’s “World System Theory”, there
are central, peripheral and semi-peripheral countries in the world. According
to this theory, there are certain division of labor between the central and
peripheral countries. The role of environment in this division of labor is to
supply raw materials and cheap labor force to central countries. The center
with advanced technology produces advanced products. While it is necessary to
sell environmental products at cheap prices, the center has to buy at high
prices. Semi-environment is; the countries according to the center and the
countries in the center according to the periphery.

The belief that there is a dependency
relation between undeveloped countries and developed countries in relations
between countries is the main assumption of this theory. It is to be emphasized
that the dependency relation would prevent the development of undeveloped
countries. It is not possible for the developing countries to develop.

According to Samir Amin, one of the
idea’s theoreticians of the theory, the foundation of the problem is the
dependency on the central countries. And the way to get rid of this addiction
is to end the relations of the peripheral countries with the central countries.
Political, economic and cultural field-based demarcation must take place. In
this case, the superiority and polarization of the center resulting from
exploitation will disappear. The
theory of dependency has also been developed in the context of international
relations and the assumption that the foreign policies of developing and
underdeveloped countries, which are dependent on economic and other aspects to
developed countries, can not be independent. Accordingly, developed countries
have intense political control over undeveloped countries. Developed countries
do not make this determination by expressing their political wishes openly, but
they can do so by applying economic pressures.

Some thinkers who disagree with this
approach are now considering the assumption that interdependency relations
exist between countries, not dependency relations. In the context of mutual
dependence, contrary to the dependency situation, which is directed by the
power relation, both parties are striving to carry out the relationship, even
at different levels. But this approach has been criticized by the theorists of
dependence for thinking that imperialism and colonial relations are ignored. Three issues made this policy difficult
to follow. The first is that the internal markets of thepoorer countries were
not large enough to support the economies of scale used by the richercountries
to keep their prices low. The second issue concerned the political will of the
poorercountries as to whether a transformation from being primary products
producers was possible ordesirable.The final issue revolved around the extent
to which the poorer countries actually hadcontrol of their primary products,
particularly in the area of selling those products abroad. Theseobstacles to
the import substitution policy led others to think a little more creatively
andhistorically at the relationship between rich and poor countries.

At this point dependency theory was
viewed as a possible way of explaining the persistent poverty of the poorer
countries. The traditional neoclassical approach said virtually nothing onthis
question except to assert that the poorer countries were late in coming to
solid economic practices and that as soon as they learned the techniques of
modern economics, then the poverty would begin to subside.

                                                             
          2

 However, Marxists theorists viewed the
persistent poverty as aconsequence of capitalist exploitation. And a new body
of thought, called the world systemsapproach, argued that the poverty was a
direct consequence of the evolution of the internationalpolitical economy into
a fairly rigid division of labor which favored the rich and penalized the poor. The debates among the liberal reformers
(Prebisch), the Marxists (Andre Gunder Frank), and the world systems theorists
(Wallerstein) was vigorous and intellectually quite challenging. There arestill
points of serious disagreements among the various strains of dependency
theorists and it is amistake to think that there is only one unified theory of
dependency. Nonetheless, there are some core propositions which seem to
underlie the analyses of most dependency theorists. There
are three common features to these definitions which most dependency theorists
share.First, dependency characterizes the international system as comprised of
two sets of states,variously described as dominant/dependent, center/periphery
or metropolitan/satellite. The dominant states are the advanced industiral
nations in the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The
dependent states are those states of Latin America,Asia, and Africa which have
low per capita GNPs and which rely heavily on the export of asingle commodity
for foreign exchange earnings.Second, both definitions have in common the
assumption that external forces are of singularimportance to the economic
activities within the dependent states. These external forces
includemultinational corporations, international commodity markets, foreign
assistance,communications, and any other means by which the advanced
industrialized represent their economic interests abroad. The Argentine economist Prebisch, both
academically and practically because of the contributions it provides, as the
pioneer of the structuralist approach. Prebish focused on the theories of free
trade in the period when the United Nations was running the presidency of the
Latin American Economic Commission (ECLA). Prebish emphasized that the
assumption of the “internationalization of each country from foreign
trade”, which is the classical theory of international trade, raises suspicion,
thus pushing Latin American countries to addiction (Ercan, 2003: 126). The main
reasons for the underdevelopment of Latin American countries are fluctuations
in commodity prices in the short run and in the long run they are shown to be
dependent on exports of raw materials, which tend to fall in relative prices.

Prebisch analysis, participation in
world trade system with neoliberal-based policies and that it has resulted in
loss for the developing country. For
this reason Prebish, the relationship between the central and peripheral
countries of the world economyand that this relationship constitutes the basic
justification of backwardness, and therefore calls for an orientation towards
imported substitute politics to ensure the development of underdeveloped peripheral
countries. Looking at the development of the dependency theory it is observed
that it develops in three main streams. These are the “neo-colonial school
of addiction”, an “indirect paradigm of Marxist thinking”,
“the paradigm of wrong paradigm” and “dual development
theology”. For neo-colonial dependency school, the backwardness and
poverty of third world countries depend on the historical development process
of the unequal international capitalist system, which is based on rich-poor country
relations. According to the wrong paradigm model, the backwardness and poverty
of underdeveloped countries are associated with the wrong policy proposal for
fighting against poverty by developed country-based authorities.

 

3

 

The recommendation of national and / or international aid agencies, as well as the policy of
combating poverty by multinational corporations and international financial
institutions, has not been taken into account in the structural features of
underdeveloped countries, but rather by a wholesome approach. Therefore,
standard policies have not been successful with the same effect in economies
with different reasons for poverty. According
to the third and last trend of bilateral development, backwardness and poverty
are the result of ongoing economic relations between the environment and the
central countries.

 Centralized
sovereignty created in peripheral countries creates extreme distortions,
deformities and disarticulation in the economies of neighboring countries. The
capitalist expansion in peripheral countries leads to the deterioration of
internal integrity in these countries, but it is blocking the path of
development. As a result, it is directed towards the outward-facing growth
center needs. As a result, the
economic structures of the peripheral countries were formed in favor of the
exporters of the capital of the central countries.

The theory of dependence was developed
by Paul Baran in the 1950s with underdeveloped countrieshas been developed in
the context of relations between countries. According to P.Baran, the interests
of underdeveloped countries are in conflict with the interests of developed
countries. Undeveloped countries, which send important raw materials that
developed countries need, which provide their companies with huge profits or
investment areas, are always indispensable hinterlands for developed countries. For this reason, the US and other
developed countries oppose the industrialization and development of the underdeveloped
countries, which are called the resource countries, and they create all kinds
of disabilities. According to P.Baran, the underdevelopment of capitalist
developmentalternative costs. This alternative cost is in the process of
economic activity the value added created by commercial relations, relatively
less developed countriesas a result of disproportionate transfer to developed
countries.

Concentration of value added emerging in
international economic relations in developed countries results in
impoverishment of other countries. Development and underdevelopment are
considered two sides of a medallion. Baran
(1957); While the developed countries are obstacles to the development of the
underdeveloped countries, the other side of them is the political and
ideological deception as to the necessity of the development of these
countries. The main purpose
of the subsidies given to the underdeveloped countries is to reduce the demand
for industrialization of the society and to slow down the socioeconomic
progress by raising the living standards of the people of these countries
slowly and gradually (Baran, 1957: 120-122). A.G.Frank,
influenced by P.Baran’s views,the great states in the region and those who
encourage “free trade” in the world economythe concept of the
development of underdevelopment, which has been developed to describe the
consequences of policies of international organizations, has an important place
in the popularity of addictive schools in the 1970s (Ercan, 2003: 134;
Wallerstein, 2004: 12).

                                        

 

   
                                                              4

Your underdevelopment, like A.G. Frank,
P.and that it is a phenomenon that exists together with capitalist
expansion.Like most addictive theorists, A.G.Frank also has developed countries
and other to the transfer of the development of countries from developed
countries to developed countries through the exploitation of the resulting
increase. The important point that separates A.G. Frank from P.Baran is that it
relies on the metropolitan-satellite connection to convey the economic surplus.
Metropolitan countries are developed countries while satellite countries are
underdeveloped countries. According to this, the satellites can only develop as
long as they are not in conflict with the interests of the metropolises and
when the metropolises allow it. Immanuel
Wallerstein developed the world system theory. According to Baran,Unlike the
leading names of the dependency theory like Frank and Amin, they changed the
assumptions of dependency. Accordingly, the world system is the capitalist
world system.

According to Walsstein, capitalism has
existed since the 16th century and is concentrated in three regions: central,
semi-periphery and periphery. The
center is the sovereign power of the capitalist system and exploits the
economic remnants of the periphery. According to Walzerstein, socio-economic
structure in semi-periphery and peripheral countries is determined by world
market opportunities, technological production possibilities and state
structure and politics are in the interests of the dominant forces.

I.Wallerstein says that the only way to
get rid of this situation is to cut relations with the center. Moving from here, the revolutionary
movements in the world to end the oppressive attitude of the center of the
cause, and on the part of the states this revolutionary it is expressed that
there is a real expectation that the development of movements can be realized
in the real sense. Polish
economist Oskar Lange, “the less developed countries to solve the
problemsmonopoly capitalism and imperialism did not allow the underdeveloped
countries to follow the path of traditional capitalist development.
“Monopoly capitalism and imperialism did not allow the underdeveloped
countries to follow the path of traditional capitalist development. That’s why you have it. The most
important thing is the shudder: the main capitalistin countries, the
capitalists there are less, with the development of large capitalist monopolies
they were not interested in investment in development in developed countries;
because this kind investments, a competition that may threaten their robust
monopolistic position As a result, developed countries’ investments in
underdeveloped countries have gained a special character. The main objective of
these investments was to exploit the natural resources used by the developed
countries as raw materials and to improve the production of nutrients in
underdeveloped countries to feed the populations in the developed countries. As a result, the economies of
underdeveloped countries are uni-directional raw materials andhave become
economies exporting nutrients.

 Foreigners in these countries the profits
gained by the capital are not used again for the investments in these
countries,has returned to the countries where the capital has come. These
profits are the reality of modern economic development.for any large-scale
industry investment we know to be dynamicIt was used.(Dobb, 1981: 123-124)

 

 

5

Explained all the way, explain the
dependency theory, your underdevelopment capitalism is a phenomenon that occurs
in the developmental process. Developed countries development processes also
constitute the causes and processes of underdevelopment of underdeveloped
countries. Differences in development between countries, especially following
the industrial revolution, have revealed the possibility of underdevelopment. The return of inter-country terms of
trade to developed countries has led to a steady increase in disparities in
development. From this point of view, it will not be wrong to say that poverty
and underdevelopment are the result of capitalist expansion. According to
dependency theoryRicardo’s criticism of the comparative advantages theory is
that international trade is not made between equals and the value added is
transferred unequally to the surrounding center (Wallerstein, 2004: 12)

x

Hi!
I'm Viola!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out