(1959) infamously put forth a five-stage theory of economic development, extrapolating from the experiences of the great industrialized nations. However, as dependency theories strongly pointed out, the conditions under which those countries industrialized is significantly different from those that prevailed after decolonization. In addition to this, democratic capitalism experiences turbulence, which I argue makes development under this global system a struggle against powers and against what I call 鈥淏urawoyan Cycles鈥�.Read More »
Category: Dependency
Economic Development in the 21st Century: A Review
by Ramiro Eugenio 脕lvarez (University of Siena) and聽Santiago Jos茅 Gahn (Roma Tre University)
What drives economic development? What is the nature of the external constraints that developing economies face? What is the role of industrial policy and the central banks in the development process? These were the core questions that were posed in the recent webinar series on Development in the 21st Century, organized by the of the . These four meetings were particularly oriented towards examining notions such as distribution, patterns of specialization, industrial policies and balance of payment constraints. The discussion of such phenomena is especially important in a context of deep academic divides regarding the drivers of economic development.
Following the tradition of the Latin American structuralist school, the meetings placed special emphasis on the inherent challenges of conditions associated with being in the periphery when the problem of development is faced. During the meetings, processes of economic integration that perpetuate asymmetric economic relations of the center-periphery type were examined, as well as the role played by public institutions, e.g. central banks, in the development of industrial economies.Read More »
e-Book Launch: Can Dependency Theory Explain Our World Today?
Is it time for dependency theory to make a comeback? Its central idea is that developed (鈥漜ore鈥�) countries benefit from the global system at the expense of developing (鈥漰eriphery鈥�) countries鈥攚hich face structural barriers that make it difficult, if not impossible, for them to develop in the same way that the already developed countries did. As neo-classical economics came to dominate the field in the 1980s, the theory lost prominence and traction. Given the vast imbalances that persist within and among nations in the global economy today, it鈥檚 an opportune time to revisit the framework.
To that end, INET鈥檚 Young Scholars Initiative (YSI) has released a new e-book, . The volume, released by YSI鈥檚 Economic Development Working Group, comprises interviews with 13 scholars from around the world who express a variety of viewpoints on the meaning and relevance of dependency theory in today鈥檚 context.
Is 鈥業mperialism’ a Relevant Concept Today? A Debate Among Marxists
This month, four prominent Marxists met at The New School in New York to debate the relevance of imperialism. The debate was related to the publication of (Jawaharlal Nehru University) new book (written with Utsa Patnaik). With him in the panel were geographer (CUNY), political scientist (The New School), and economist (The New School). Economics Professor (The New School) moderated the debate. The main question for the panelists was: Is 鈥業mperialism’ a relevant concept today? A fruitful debate followed, suggesting that contemporary imperialism is crying out for analysis and critique.
Can Latin America Learn from Europe鈥檚 Mistakes? Divergence in Regional Economic Integration
By Collin Constantine (Kingston University) and Johanna Renz (University of Oxford)
A powerful core and a powerless periphery 鈥� these are features of the European Monetary Union (EMU). The union has gone much further than Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) in its integration efforts and has suffered from a severe economic crisis. Since LAC鈥檚 economic integration is still ongoing, it can and should learn from the EMU鈥檚 mistakes before it is too late.
Is Development Possible In Capitalism?
By Douglas McDonald [re-blog from ]
Last Friday was the Debating Development conference, organized by the titular scholars of , a group coordinated by NSSR鈥檚 own Ingrid Kvangraven. The conference put many scholars of different regions and different theoretical perspectives in conversation. Although it was titled 鈥渄ebating development,鈥� as NSSR economics professor Sanjay Reddy noted in his opening remarks, most of the perspectives presented were more intersecting than mutually exclusive, so the conference could also be understood as a means to compound or complexify perspectives, rather than adopt or discard them.
黑料社区 