Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Dependency theory emerged in the 1960s and 70s, primarily from Latin American scholars, as a response to the perceived failures of modernization theory to explain underdevelopment in the region. Modernization theory posited that traditional societies could develop by following the path of developed nations, but Latin American intellectuals argued this framework ignored the historical and structural constraints imposed by the global capitalist system. The theory fundamentally challenges the notion of underdevelopment as an internal problem, instead framing it as a consequence of the historical exploitation of peripheral nations by core nations. This essay will explore the Latin American perspective on dependency, outlining its core tenets, evolution, and continuing relevance.
The Genesis of Dependency Theory
The roots of dependency theory can be traced to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), particularly the work of Raúl Prebisch in the 1950s. Prebisch, in his work on the terms of trade, argued that there was a secular deterioration in the terms of trade for peripheral countries exporting primary commodities to core countries. This meant that the price of raw materials tended to fall relative to manufactured goods, leading to a transfer of wealth from the periphery to the core. This unequal exchange was a central tenet of the early dependency school.
Core Arguments of Dependency Theory
Several key arguments underpin the Latin American perspective on dependency:
- Unequal Exchange: As highlighted by Prebisch, the exchange between core and periphery is inherently unequal, benefiting the core at the expense of the periphery.
- Centre-Periphery Relationship: The global economic system is structured around a centre (developed countries) and a periphery (developing countries). The periphery is dependent on the core for capital, technology, and markets.
- Historical Context: Dependency is not a natural state but a product of historical colonialism and imperialism. The colonial legacy continues to shape the economic and political structures of Latin American countries.
- Development of Underdevelopment: Dependency theorists argued that underdevelopment is not simply the absence of development, but is actively *caused* by the relationship with the core. The periphery is deliberately kept underdeveloped to serve the interests of the core.
Key Thinkers and their Contributions
Several Latin American scholars significantly contributed to the development of dependency theory:
- Raúl Prebisch (Argentina): Pioneered the concept of unequal exchange and the deterioration of terms of trade.
- Fernando Henrique Cardoso (Brazil): Developed the concept of ‘associated dependency’, arguing that dependency could be a dynamic process, with some peripheral countries becoming more integrated into the global economy. Later became President of Brazil.
- Theotônio Dos Santos (Brazil): Defined dependency as a conditioning situation of societies dominated by others, emphasizing the structural and historical dimensions of dependency.
- Andre Gunder Frank (German-American, but heavily influenced by Latin American thought): Advocated for a more radical interpretation of dependency, arguing that the development of the core was directly linked to the underdevelopment of the periphery.
Stages of Dependency Theory
Dependency theory evolved through different stages:
| Stage | Characteristics | Key Thinkers |
|---|---|---|
| Early Dependency (1960s-70s) | Focus on unequal exchange, terms of trade, and the structural constraints on development. Pessimistic outlook. | Prebisch, Frank |
| Revised Dependency (1970s-80s) | Recognized the possibility of development within a dependent context. Emphasis on the role of internal factors and the state. | Cardoso, Dos Santos |
Criticisms of Dependency Theory
Dependency theory faced several criticisms:
- Lack of Empirical Evidence: Critics argued that the theory lacked sufficient empirical evidence to support its claims.
- Oversimplification: The centre-periphery model was seen as an oversimplification of the complex realities of the global economy.
- Ignoring Internal Factors: Critics argued that the theory neglected the role of internal factors, such as political instability and corruption, in hindering development.
- Success Stories: The economic success of some East Asian countries (e.g., South Korea, Taiwan) challenged the deterministic nature of the theory. These countries achieved rapid development despite being located in the periphery.
Relevance in the Era of Globalization
Despite its criticisms, dependency theory remains relevant in understanding the challenges faced by developing countries in the era of globalization. The rise of multinational corporations, global financial markets, and the increasing concentration of wealth in the hands of a few continue to raise concerns about exploitation and unequal power relations. Concepts like ‘global value chains’ and ‘debt dependency’ echo the core arguments of dependency theory, highlighting the continuing structural constraints on development in the Global South.
Conclusion
Dependency theory, born out of the Latin American experience, offered a powerful critique of traditional development models and highlighted the structural inequalities inherent in the global capitalist system. While the theory has evolved and faced criticisms, its core insights regarding unequal exchange, historical legacies, and the centre-periphery relationship remain relevant in understanding the challenges of development in the 21st century. The theory serves as a reminder that development is not simply a matter of adopting the right policies, but also of addressing the underlying power imbalances that shape the global economy.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.