Essay on Third World Development

In Encountering Development by Arturo Escobar, Escobar critiques the Development Project, a multi pronged initiative of socioeconomic management of the Third World, specifically Latin America, Asia, and Africa, via the First World powers, in question specifically the United States. The critique entails how industrialization and modernization of the Third World could be seen as the mode through which modernization could be achieved and this was enabled by bureaucratic entities, like the World Bank, whom subjected Third World economies to a heavy handed management via the modernization process which denied autonomy for Third World self sufficiency. The Development process thus denied any legitimate conceptualization of how to properly develop economic prosperity. The rapid “consolidation of power” into the hands of the capitalist First World Elite created a paradigm through which the support of cyclical poverty ensured a need for industrialization in order to fix defunct socioeconomic issues. By creating bureaucratic agencies, like the World Bank, which provided specific subscriptor projects, like DRI, allowed for the First World entities to to create and sustain an ongoing unequal distribution of power between the Global North and the Global South.

Despite the march towards globalization, many people in South America and Sub-Saharan Africa are still mired in poverty. According to Thomas L. Friedman, author of The World is Flat, suggests that the world went into a period of globalization in the 1970’s. In this era of globalization, countries such as China, Russia, Mexico, Brazil, and India initiated what Friedman calls “reform wholesale.” This reform wholesale refers to the focus of the emerging countries on “adopting more market-friendly macroeconomic reform.” Along with the five countries above, many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa and South America also attempted reform wholesale. Rather than becoming major world powers, most countries in these continents failed. Countries need to

In the book Prosperity and Violence, the author Robert Bates reveals the relationship between political structures and economic exploitation. Bates did an outstanding job highlighting the ways the early states in Europe came forth, but his argument had some weakness. Bates shows how in the post World War II era, many of the countries of the Third World gained their independence in the heart of the split of the Cold War, which both the Soviet Union and United States were in search for allies around the world to destabilize the position of the other country. Bates argues that in undercutting the process of state development, both the Soviet Union and United States had to offer exploitation assistance to gain alliances with the new and poor country in order to generate legitimately functioning economies, which I seem not to be convincing. Lastly, Bates argues that the increasing of new cities promoted prosperity, which brought economic growth not only in the urban centers, but also in the countryside, which I believed was logical.

For post-development theorists such as Esteva or Escobar, development is socially constructed and based in a western economic structure and in the power relationships between developed and developing countries, with a clear domination of the first ones (Escobar p.18, Esteva & Prakash, 1998b, p. 175-182). Positivists claim that development can only be sustained and attained by industrialization, which is achieved through human

The emergence of the so called “Development theories” that had become one of the top priorities on the International agenda post World War two, have also become one of the top controversial issues amongst many scholars of Anthropology, economics, and Political scientists. The idea whether the development theories acted as a means of a start or as a means of an end to development has been questioned by many scholars. In this paper I will attempt to discuss whether Neo-liberalism with its market-driven concepts and anti-state dogma have contributed to the decrease in the gap between Third world and first world countries or has worked on increasing it. I will do so by: First, giving brief historical contexts in order to provide to the reader

Thus, according to this theory, underdeveloped countries are perceived as "backward" compared to developed countries as models for having reached the final stage of development presented by Rostow [2]. As highlighted sociologists' modernization Talcott Parsons (1951) and Alex Inkeless (1964), changing values and social structures is a fundamental basis of the process of economic development of a country factor. Indeed, the traditional values of a country need to be replaced by modern Western values , emphasizing individualism and rationality, because without this change of mentality, traditional societies cannot develop modern institutions it are needed to promote progress and economic growth, the ultimate goals of modernization, and ensure the maintenance of order can be challenged by the changes that cause the development [3].

Modernisation is the “process of change towards those types of social, economic, and political systems that have developed in Western Europe and North America” (Eisenstadt 1966, p. 1). Modernisation theory is utilised to elucidate the process by which modernisation occurs within societies. Modernisation theory emanated in the 1950s from the ideas of Max Weber, which proffered the basis for the modernisation paradigm inaugurated by Talcott Parsons, and intended to illustrate the layered development of industrial societies. The theory asserts that societies develop in formulaic stages, that can be easily discerned, which entail increased complexity further down the societal progression.

A nation can develop to prosperity or under develop to devastation. Modernization theory and dependency theory are competing strategies of how to lead a country towards development. Modernization theory contends free enterprise and international trade are two elements that lead toward positive development. Modernization causes a gradual differentiation and specialization of social and political structures that makes democracy possible. In opposition to modernization theory is dependency theory which states capitalistic countries of the north dominate the global economy. The countries that dominate the world economy are known as the “core” while the nations they allegedly exploit are referred to as the “periphery.”

In spite of Third World countries’ similar pre-industrial history and early policies aimed at industrializing, Third World countries have not had the same growth as most European countries. Bates analyzes the process of development and concludes that this time period as an important variable in a countries’ development.

Due to this legacy, it is anticipated that decolonization and industrialization of Third World countries would reduce the North-South divide. The authors moreover, explain that theories of national development believed that industrialization was essential for Third World countries to attain wealth standards of the First World countries. This became the objective of the Third World development efforts and the narrowing of the industrialization gap was the instrument through which this would be achieved (Arrighi,G,. Silver,J,B,. and Brewer,D,B,. 2003.p.6). This subsequently led to synonymous use of industrialization and development.

“Since World war II, development has been the most important term used to describe economic, social and political changes in what have come to be known as Third world countries” (Zhang, 2003).

What comes to mind when you here the term “Third World”? Most of the people in the United States find it hard to come to terms with the life style and struggles that are associated with this term. The term, “Third World” was first introduced during the Cold War. During this time, the “First World” referred to the United States and its’ allies, “Second World” consisted of the Soviet Union and its allies and the “Third World” was associated with the non-allied and neutral countries. After the second world war, these countries, who were mostly new to independence, were left trying to keep up with the fast growing world economy. The countries that couldn’t keep up were in dyer need of

The “Third World” as a political project emerged out of Cold War rhetoric. It referred to a group of non-aligned countries that claimed to operate separately from the influences of the great powers. The movement represented the emergence of the Third World as a “self-conscious political grouping.” Solidarity was predicated upon common economic structures that were distinctive from both the Eastern block planned economies and the Western free market system (Smith, n.d: 17). The Third World as a political project was intrinsically linked to decolonization. Developing nations were encouraged to stand against Western intervention and involvement in the economic affairs of the Third World (Smith, n.d: 17). In addition, the project aimed to establish a new international economic order in which developing countries would have greater control over their own natural resources (Smith, n.d: 18). It also called for more cooperation in the third world in order to lessen their dependence on leading institutional forums. As one of the most influential proponents of the Third World Project, Jawaharlal Nehru specifically worked to promote ideas of global interconnectedness, world peace and non-alignment. Yet despite efforts to uplift the Third World from its peripheral status, evidence of “Western” superiority discourse was still present in the language used by Nehru and other elites. Furthermore, while elites championed Third World principles in word, they generally remained tied to their

Development has recently become a new buzz word in international relations. Through an exploration of political, social and economic development around the globe, scholars are trying to understand which policies are most beneficial, and why certain policies are effective and why some fail. The connection between different types of development is often an important part of this research as well. The connection between political and economic development is of specific interest since the end of the Cold War and the failure of most communist-based systems. The emergence of capitalism as the dominant world economic system at the conclusion of the Cold

This essay is an attempt to compare the modernization and radical approaches to development and deciding which approach of the two offers a plausible explanation to what is prevailing in LDCs like Zambia. It will start by defining the major concepts which are development, modernization and radical approach, and then it shall proceed to make a full analysis of the two approaches respectively. The advantages and criticism will be given specifically for the two approaches, and it shall evaluate which one is better helping us in understanding the problems faced in less developed countries. Finally a conclusion will be drawn in summation of the topic.