< < <
Date Index > > > |
Re: difference WS and dependencia theories by Carl Nordlund 13 April 2002 18:44 UTC |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |
A nice read regarding the geneaology of both "DT" and WSA is So, A.Y.'s 'Social change and development - modernisation, dependency and world-system theories' (Sage publ, 1990). Another nice book is, imo, Oman and Wignaraja's 'The post-war evolution of development thinking' (OECD, St.Martin's press, 1991); although it doesn't delve into world(-)system(s) analysis, it gives a good overview of the major actors within the dependency school (Frank, Cardoso, Faletto, Sunkel etc) as well as the very influential work of ECLA/Prebisch back in the 50's. It also gives a better account of the roots of the roots, i.e. how Prebisch's work (1951) can in many ways be back-tracked to neo-classical modernisation theory, esp the formulation of the Prebisch-Singer-theorem. Another interesting aspect of differences between DT and WSA is the default 'focal point' of research activities: DT was/is solely focused on analysing the periphery but WSA is interested in all sub-parts of the global economy as well as the whole system in itself. - - - Carl nordlund, PhD student carl.nordlund@humecol.lu.se Human Ecology Division, Lund University, Sweden www.humecol.lu.se > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: wsn-owner@csf.colorado.edu [mailto:wsn-owner@csf.colorado.edu]För > Jozsef Borocz > Skickat: den 13 april 2002 19:21 > Till: g kohler > Kopia: wsn@csf.colorado.edu > Ämne: Re: difference WS and dependencia theories > > > On Sat, 13 Apr 2002, g kohler wrote: > > |having mentioned dependencia theory recently, I am now realizing that > |the difference between dependencia theory and world system (and > |world-systems) theory is not very clear to me after all. I would > |appreciate it if someone could clarify that. Thanks. > > My 2c' worth, in brief: dependencia theories (DT) emphasize > single chains of > dependency (e.g., Honduras >> United Fruit Co. >> United States); > world-systems theory (WST) is in this respect a comprehensive > generalization > of the dependency principle to the "world." In addition, WST is more > resolutely historical by explicitly allowing, and even aiming to predict, > mobility, qualitative change and the necessity of the end to the > system than > much of DT. On the other hand, WST is more vulnerable to criticisms of > "holistic determinism," i.e., a certain kind of insensitivity to local > variation and difference. Soviet- and Chinese-style state > socialism presented > a particularly tough challenge to WST. > > I still find the first chapter in Gary Gereffi's book on the > pharmaceuticals > to be a very useable summary of of the developments that have lead to WST. > > József (Böröcz) > >
< < <
Date Index > > > |
World Systems Network List Archives at CSF | Subscribe to World Systems Network |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |