{"title":"On the Contemporary Relevance of Dependency Perspective: a Critical Appraisal","authors":"M. K. Özekin","doi":"10.1163/15691497-12341564","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nIs dependency theory dead as an explanation of underdevelopment today? Today, a broad consensus answers this question in the affirmative. In contrast to this commonly-held contention, this study counter-argues that despite the need of refinement to account for the recent changes that have taken place in global economy, a certain strand of dependency analyses still maintains validity, and offers inspirations for those wanting to address limits and prospects of capitalist development. The study first critically surveys the barrage of criticisms levied against the dependency school, since any revisiting of this archaic line of thought might be quite easily subjected to an outright dismissal beforehand. Then, the study reveals that the conceptualization of dependency as elaborated by historical-structural dependency analyses still maintains validity, and when wisely applied to the new conditions, offers a basilar IPE framework to address the limits, prospects, and divergent patterns of development in today’s Global South.","PeriodicalId":43666,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Global Development and Technology","volume":"23 1","pages":"418-448"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Global Development and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15691497-12341564","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Is dependency theory dead as an explanation of underdevelopment today? Today, a broad consensus answers this question in the affirmative. In contrast to this commonly-held contention, this study counter-argues that despite the need of refinement to account for the recent changes that have taken place in global economy, a certain strand of dependency analyses still maintains validity, and offers inspirations for those wanting to address limits and prospects of capitalist development. The study first critically surveys the barrage of criticisms levied against the dependency school, since any revisiting of this archaic line of thought might be quite easily subjected to an outright dismissal beforehand. Then, the study reveals that the conceptualization of dependency as elaborated by historical-structural dependency analyses still maintains validity, and when wisely applied to the new conditions, offers a basilar IPE framework to address the limits, prospects, and divergent patterns of development in today’s Global South.
期刊介绍:
Perspectives on Global Development and Technology (PGDT) is a peer-reviewed journal for the discussion of current social sciences research on diverse socio-economic development issues that reflect the opportunities and threats brought about by the world order shift from bipolar to global, the present economic liberalization that constricts development options, and the new enabling technologies of the Information Age. A founding principle of PGDT is that all people are entitled to scientific and technological knowledge to promote human development. PGDT is the international forum where the questions associated with this endeavour are thoroughly examinated and clearly communicated.