Before we get started, let's take a look at some important terms you need to know when looking at development.
What do we call countries that we need to focus on for development?
You might hear the word 'third world' tossed around... and this was ok 30 years ago
but - this is more of a Cold War term
Then we move to the 'developing world'
This was ok for a while, too, but it's becoming outdated
Now we go with Global North and Global South
This stems from the Global North and Global South divide
Where the Global South constitutes what we used to call the 'developing world'
and the Global North represents the industrialized world.
Alright, so let’s take it back about 70 years … it’s 1950, post WWII and the
theory of development emerges.
At this point, development was really synonymous with economic growth
and prosperity.
The way to achieve this was through the ever popular
ideas of John Maynard Keynes, who you might remember from previous videos.
Keynes believed in state involvement to smooth out the highs and
lows of cyclical economic recessions.
At this point, the commonly held belief was that the Global South would
only develop through capital investment
Essentially, if your economy was doing well, you had yourself some
successful development.
By the end of the 1950s, things started to shift, and Modernization theory
emerged Modernization was defined by the assumption
that development as it progressed
in the west was a “how to guide” for the Global South
This obviously assumed many things, one of
which was that the West was the pinnacle
of development. It was then premised on the idea that capitalism
is good, and inevitably conducive to democratization
To quote Heywood, “Backward or underdeveloped societies are
destined to be transformed into modern or developed ones” - you get the
picture, the West is Best … Never heard that one before …
Oh, and it’s important to note that at this point we are still looking only at
the economy to conceptualize and measure development You’ve probably already come to some of
these conclusions yourself, but critics of modernization argue that it ignores
history (Hi, Colonialism), looks only at internal factors, and
advocates for a state of high mass consumption which is unsustainable.
Out of these critiques of Modernization theory emerged dependency theory in the late 1950s-60s.
This is where I like to think of a pendulum swinging from one side to the
other, because this is exactly what development theories have tended to
do over time Dependency theory swung the pendulum all the
way to the left, stemming from Marxist influences and viewing Modernization
as elitist Dependency turned away from looking at only the
internal happenings of the state, and instead looked at the entire capitalist
world system In this system, dependency theorists saw a
cycle of structural inequality, and argued that the underdevelopment of the
Global South was a direct result of its dependency on the Global North
This is kind of how dependency theorists saw it.
The Global North takes resources from the Global South, the Global North then produces and
innovates goods out of these resources, finally the Global North sells these goods back to the Global South at a
higher cost … no opportunity for innovation in the Global South, and lots of profit for the
Global North… you get the picture … In short… the pros of this theory were that
we were finally looking at some external factors for development and it was an essential
critique of Modernization theory… However, it was still economically focused
and left certain development situations unexplained …
Cue the 1970s - It’s time for neo-liberalism. At this point, the global economy was facing
a major recession due to skyrocketing oil prices in the Middle East
Because of this recession we had to say goodbye to our friend Keynes, and hello to
neo-liberalism. Remember that pendulum I talked about earlier?
Yeah, it’s swinging again.
Neo-liberalism viewed the state as an impediment to development, and
blamed underdevelopment on poor governance in the Global South.
Instead, it argued for full trust in the capitalist world market, subscribing to
the principles of the invisible hand, trickle-down economics, privatization,
free trade, comparative advantage, and deregulation - just to name a few.
During this reign of neo-liberalism, Global North countries issued Structural Adjustment Programs
or SAPs to countries in the Global South. In short, these SAPs these were loans with conditionalities.
The Global South countries could take these loans, and they didn't really have much of a choice
but it was under the assumption that they would follow the Global North's rules.
Many today argue that this was a form of neo-colonialism.
But we'll have to save that for another video!
As you can imagine, neoliberalism has it critics: Many have said that leaves the burden to
fall on the weakest in society, that it provides no protection for domestic
industry, it’s based on western ideals, and some even go as far as to say
that is it responsible for the “lost decade of development”
The move to the 1980s then saw the pendulum swing again, but
almost further than it swung with Dependency Theory. Here we have the
emergence of critical theories. Critical theories are different than the theories
discussed up until this point - they always have a specific agenda and they
focus on human emancipation, freedom, and equality
In the simplest terms, critical theories deconstruct development discourse.
What is discourse you might ask?
Discourse is how we talk about something - what is said, what is not said
Who is included, and who's not. Critical theorists are always looking for what power dynamics exist within
the discourse Critical theory has many sub-branches. From Post-development to
post-colonial theory, to feminist theory
but again, this will just have to wait for another video!
Moving to the 1990s, we see potentially the most significant shift in
development up until this point - that is the emergence of what we now call human development.
This concept of human development was coined
by Indian Nobel Prize winning economist Amartya Sen. Sen explained
this as having “The freedoms to lead the kind of lives we have reasons
to value” This is a significant shift from previous
theories such as modernization and dependency, which looked only at economic
prosperity as a sign of development
Instead, Sen argued that we also need to look at the richness of human
lives, and the capabilities that individuals have to lead the life of their choosing
From this idea emerged things such as the Human Development Index or HDI
and today the United Nations compiles an annual human development
report to attempt to measure development beyond economics
Finally, at the turn of the century we saw a new concern emerge
this is the concern with sustainability. The idea of
Sustainable development is a hot topic in the development landscape
today. This theory looks at how to continue global
development in a way that meets the needs of the present, without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs
In short, our kids are going to need a planet to live on, too.
In 2000 we saw the adoption of the United Nations
Millennium Declaration. This declaration included the Millennium Development Goals
or MDGs for short - these were a set of sustainable development goals to be achieved by 2015.
Now I know you may be shocked, but 2015 came and went
and the MDGs went unmet. Because of this, they were adapted to the Sustainable
Development Goals or SDGs. The SDGs are a list of 17 Sustainable Development Goals to be achieved
by 2030. Now, I know - These seem like some pretty big goals
Zero hunger, no poverty, gender equality…
Some say that these goals are simply unachievable. Instead, some critics argue that the Global South
needs to focus on meeting some of their basic needs before they can move into things like
climate change and gender equality.
Others say that this is the necessary direction of development in order to address
the rapidly changing needs of both our population and our planet.
Alright - that was a lot of information, so let’s recap. In the 1950s we had development economics,
followed shortly after by Modernization Theory.
Dependency Theory then emerged out of the critiques of modernization.
While dependency theory did make some good ground, it
wasn’t long before the pendulum swung again and we led into the
decade of neo-liberalism.
Critical theories emerged in the 80s, followed by
Amartya’s Sen’s critical coining of human development in the 90s.
Today, the focus is on sustainability,
But are still faced with many of the same global development issues that have
consumed the system for decades.
What theory do you think provides the best path?
Are any of them accurate?
Or is development just too complex of a concept to be put in such a neat box?
Alright - well, with that, thanks for watching.
Subscribe so you don't miss anything in the future.
And we'll see you again next time!