Crystal Sickles - University of Pittsburgh
Lit Map: Development Economics
Joy Braunstein, Fall 2003
PIA 3090 Development Theories
Classical 1750-1914
Classical rationale of colonialism: development could be created by intelligent action of the state
1776- Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand
1700s- Trotsky - capitalism seemed an offspring of the state
Mid-1880s- Marx and Weber
1914-1948- Neoclassical : perfect competition, perfect rationality, can be equilibrium at any level of output and employment (Keynesian)
1934-Schumpater-mutual dependence of economists among producers and consumers, circular flow of econ life, external harmonious view of economy without politics, power or history
Neoclassical Supply Side Economics - MacMillan – middle way, Crossland – Furture of Socialism, Shonfield –
Neoclassical: “laissez-faire” (no barriers between markets, role of government restricted) vs. “free trade” (allows government intervention in economy provided inputs purchased do not differ from cheapest exports)
No division of labour, economic isolation, Gang of Four
1926-1946- Growth Economics (Keynes, Kahn, Robinson, Harrod, Myrdal, Hicks, Domar, Kalecky, Samelson, Kaldor, Sraffa) – Neoclassical
1930s-40s –Galbraith and Shonfield- Britain’s Corporation State-Organized economy, Modern Capitalism and the state as an instrument of the industrial system that almost absorbs private capital – Social Democaratic State Theorists
1940s – worldwide effort to undertake development because transfortmation occurred in more developed countries
WWII- economy as a war-making machine with government direction
End of WWII-capitalism revived
1940s-1960s- econ development depends on increasing capital and investment
1947- Corporatism turned into socialism (Keynesianism, western managed economies)
1948-1958-early theories of economic development
1950s- W. Arthur Lewis, econ development occurs with unlimited supplies of labour, of concern is growth, not distribution, savings and capital formation – Classical tradition-growth was associated with capital accumulation and increasingly specialized labor force, industrialization best, most efficient way of putting to productive use the large pool of un and underemployed (Meir) (Myrdal- tumours of partiality and corruption in very center of administration – 1950s)
Late 50s to early 1960s- major labor shortages in Eastern Europe, full-employment in more developed countries
1957- Polanyi, Karl, economic liberalism, self-regulating market-Anthropology of Modernity, great transformation; Leontieff’s input-output analysis
1958-J.Edgar Hoover, economic consequences of population concentration
1950s PT Bauer-conservative Brit free-market approach to econ develop, individual entrepreneurs best – Monetarist (favor free-market)
1967-Shackle
1970s – Ricardo, Dobb, Foucalt – Ricardian Formulation, theory of value: Labor is a unit common to all merchandise and a source of value because it embodied producing activity.
1974- Anne O. Kruger – introduces problem of govt control leading to a rent-seeking society
1984- Meir – static interlude (once capitalism is working, economics become less and less dynamic, eventually giving way to static considerations)
1989-Harvey- Fordism: “a new type of worker, a new type of man”
1976-1993 – focus on American industry and securing control over sources of raw materials, markets, and consumers (Amin, Borrego, Murphy & Augelli)
Anthropology
1954-Lewis anthropology of a dual economy
1983- Johannes Fabian
Anthropology of Hunger – 1975-1990 (Ferguson, Metz, Dorothy Snith, Wood, Nancy Fraser, Alejandro Sanz de Santamaria, Glauber, Rocha, Micheal Tussig, Foucault
Hunger
1952-1992 - Beginning of Symbolism of Hunger (Josue de Castro to Sheper-Hughes, Susan George, trying to solve problem led to its aggregation, Foucalt, how discourse works produces domains of objects and rituals of truth)
Columbia – 1972-1992 – studies of malnutrition and mental development and projects on malnutrition and work capacity (Valera, McKay, Lappe, Colins, Kinley, Sinisterra, DeJanvry, Burbach &Flynn, Feder, Fajardo, Errzuriz, Balcazar, James Ferguson, Uribe, Gudeman & Rivera
1972- International Food Science and Nutrition – Berg, Scrimshaw, Call
1975- Joy and Payne –special nutritional planning and unit advocacy
1990 began looking at capitalism and politics
Development Theory (Cardoso-dependency theory, Kay, Cowen, ect. Classical Marxism and Modernizationists all agree that ex-colonies exist in a world in which there is a world market and increasingly world system of industrial production, dominated by economies and state power of advanced capitalist countries.)
Modernization-Weber
1950s – theories of development became prolific
Early 1960s- Everett Hagen, Bert Hoselitz, David Mclelland – Development accelerated by injecting businessmen in developing countries with some achievement factor
1949-1967 – no such thing as development economics, Modernity-like (World Bank)
1958s-70s- Fred Riggs, David Lerner – societies in transition from precapitalist to capitalist production
1969-1988 Perkin, Wiener, Callaghy - capitalism is not a causal theory, there are a wide range of factors important for the rise and outcome of capitalism
Dependency Theory-Structuralist
1967-1979-Andre Gonder Frank – periphery capitalist classes and global structure of dependency, Fernando Cardoso and Enzo Faletto less fatalistic- internal capitalist class, specific to countries historical circumstance, Guillermo O’Donnell – bureaucratic authoritarianism
(structural heterogeneity in LDCs, different production systems and modes of production – structural change. Dynamics of development and underdevelopment based on external relations, social classes are agents of change-Neo-Marxist)
1969-Frank – capitalist growth impossible for periphery as long as it is linked to metropoles –cut links of dependency
1970-Prebish – North America exporting primary commodities
Late 1970s to Mid-1980s- Kaplinsky, Langdon, Andre Gunder Frank, Samir Amin, Gavin Kitching, Leys, Swainson, Cardoso– questioning ability to develop under capitalism and industrialization vs the capability and benefits of the capitalist class
1989 – Sudipta Kaviraj “it is men who act, and who must act before classes and abstractions can act through them”
1987 – Burris –social classes can be used as mediating concepts linking agency and structures, they reflect and affect patterns of action (Neo-Marxist)
1992 – William Liddle – class analysis an abstract framework, need to look at human behavior and motivation, individual capacity for autonomous choice within the roll of social classes
Structuralist-Marxian
1969-Eric Hobsbawm, British focus on capitalist/socialist mix
1987- Perry Anderson, analyzed modern bourgeoisie as self-limiting and subordinate
Neo-Marxist Dependency -1970s-1980s Paul Boran – analysis of causes of underdevelopment – internal modes of production/social classes
Marxist Critics of Dependency Theory
1969-David Landes, hypothesis of effect of protestant ethic on rise of capitalist because religious discrimination force minorities into business, Bjorn Beckman
European Historians-60s/70s-Cipolla, Fohlen, Borchardt
Asian Historians -80s/90s- Eckert, Hamilton
Social Class Characterization
69/68-Samir Amin, Mahmoud Mamdani to Indigenous Capitalists Frantz Funon to research began to be focused on domestic capitalist classes (Howard, Fatima Mahmoud to Shatzburg, Micheal
1972- Antonio Garcia – notion of underdevelopment assumed as mechanistic and fragmentary
1975-80-Key, Bill Warren, attack structuralism, but don’t provide theory of peripheral development and varying roles of indigenous capitalist classes, Kay, Sender, Smith (spread of capitalism universal, not necessary –results in sustained economic growth or high mass-consumption society)
Weberian
1978-81- Arndt, growth a remedy for poverty and unemployment rather than an end in itself, classical concern with capital accumulation
1980s – Markovitz, Leonard, Lubeck, Cowen, Leys – highlight the debate between independent capitalist class key to successful national capitalist development – (pro-dependency: limitations of Africa’s capitalist class) (anti-dependency: if local capitalist class shown to exist future of capitalist development assured/not hopeless)
Post-Dependency
1973-1991- Look at structural adjustment, relationship between internal capitalist class and other classes, and the outside status of domestic and indig groups that are outsiders and yet responsible for much of the early development of capitalism (Iliffe, Kennedy, Sender and Smith, MacGaffery, Callaghy, Polantzas, Jakobeit, Harris)
Mid 1980s- Harris, saw importance of Policy and description of “No Worlds,” no common vision of process of national economic development that would support ethic of humanity and Peace
1985-Martin Godfrey, problem lies with population growth and land issues
1990-Godfrey – dynamic tendency in capitalist system for problems to be overcome
1991-Cheryl Pager, development economics from the contemporary debt crisis
1994-Berman, Leys – for capitalist development to occur there must be local, domestic, internal, national land and perhaps indigenous capitalists as well as political and economic capacity
1995-Joel E. Cohen – optimum world population
1997- Anne O. Krueger – an effective state is a precondition for economic development
2000-Diana Hunt – other problem in landlessness and unemployment can be contained in long run by diverting resources indispensable for sustaining growth, ex) problem lies with land distribution, reform presents single most effective means ofavailable of expanding productive employment in agriculture
2001- Ibister - there are ethical issues with foreign aid
Post-Marxist, Marxian
1980s – Methodological Individualism – Maoist influence John Roemer- (matrix of economic classes with structures created through a process of individual choice and action – Mathematical theory of exploitation and classes, exploitation based on economic position of class)
1994 – Martineussen, (modes of production and social classes and industrial structor and foreign trade – degree of dependence of particular peripheral economy), Olsen (levels of industrial development in peripheral societies, can reduce dependency on international capital and simultaneously transform toward a higher degree of autocenticism)
Post-Marxist
1985-Irene Gendizier, Social classes shold not be central object of study
Development Planning
1960s – major focus on economic growth theories, non-Marxist growth plus distribution focus began
1980s- shift to economic discourse, local models and global economy, return to realism
mid-1980s- Fishlow (debt inflation, role of state), Portes & Kincaid, Dietz & Jones (reversal of development, Livingstone (new assessment of development economics), Prebisch (vigorous offshoots, neoliberal experiments), PT Baur (development economists misread factors that characterized economics of LDCs), Dudley Seers, Albert Hirschman, Meier, Hollis Chenery, Blaug, Hunt, Gudeman (dev economics not an objective universal science
1984- Clay & Shaffer – create by planning institutions according to procedures presented as rational and common sense
Ethnographics of Resistance to Capitalist practices-1980s-early 1990s- Nash, Taussig, Scott, Org, Goha, Comaroff & Comaroff, Gudeman & Rivera, de Cerea (housebusiness), Canclini (hybridization), Appackeri (global ethnoscapes), Pred & Wats (prediction of cultural difference within a structural system of global political economy, Beleuze & Guattari (Globla capital, global machine, worldwide oxiomatic
Positivist – 1984-1992 – Schaffer, Anthorpe, Escobar - models, handleable problems, agendas and labels, interventions at the hand of government or international community
Neo-structuralism-1990 – Sunkel
Alternative to Planning – Neo-classical tones- Bela Belassa (countries not planned have much better economic performance than those relying on planning methods)
Internationalization
1960s-1970s – theories of capital and tendencies toward “new international division of labor” based on relations with role of private firms in economic development , Stephen Hymer (internationalization based on competition on product lifecycle)
1968-1973 Neo-Marxist Baran, Sweezy, Vernon, TNCs as the most important actors
1977-1992 – TNCs – countries not primary unit of analysis (Martineussen, Micheal Porter, Tsurumi, Lall and Streeton) – Move toward idea away from Dependency Theory – Countries can control activities of TNCs to create economic surplus that benefits them
1980- Marxist-inspired Frobel, Heirichs, Kreye, looking at global framework conditions as reasoning of companies being attracted to invest in 3rd World: Cheap labor, technical possibilities of splitting production, development of international transport and communications
1985- Harris- LDCs could only grow on same basis of MDCs, by contributing to the common world market
1988 – Dunning, looked at the timing of the 60s and 70s as rational of internationalization in development economics
Mid 1980s- Wallerstein’s world systems theory, Coughlin (problems with MNCs that impede interests of local and industrial and political circles so that decisions are frequently detrimental to nation’s long-term industrialization)
1989-Hellene
1994- Otman, new trends in globalization and regionalization
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- university of minnesota college of education
- university of minnesota school of social work
- wharton school of the university of pennsylvania
- cost of university of scranton
- city of pittsburgh jobs
- city of pittsburgh jobs website
- city of pittsburgh career opportunities
- city of pittsburgh employment
- city of pittsburgh job openings
- city of pittsburgh job postings
- university of pittsburgh the joseph m katz graduate school of business economi
- city of pittsburgh employment application