< < <
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
Human Ecology Division, Lund University, Sweden

> -----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
> > >