Critique A.G. Frank’s ‘development of underdevelopment’. (UPSC CSE Mains 2019 - Sociology, Paper 1)
- ‘Development of underdevelopment’ is a concept proposed by Andre Gunder Frank to denote the deteriorating economic condition of the peripheral states as the result of their dependency on the core. According to Frank, underdevelopment is a condition fundamentally different from undeveloped. Undeveloped is a condition of a region, in which its resources are not being utilized. For instance, Asia, Americas, and Africa during the pre-colonial period were undeveloped. Their land and natural resources were not utilized on a scale consistent with their potential.
- However, European powers during the colonial period extracted natural resources of their colonies. As a result, the resources of the colonies drained but it did not provide any benefit to the colonies, however, the economies of the colonial powers improved at the cost of the resources of the colonies. Even after the end of the colonialism, the core countries retain their dominance over the peripheral states. Thus, the exploitation of the core continues to date, and growing economic relations between the core and periphery brings advantage to the former and disadvantage to the latter. In other words, dependency will further exploit the natural resources of the periphery, deteriorate the economic condition of the periphery, and bring prosperity to the core. Thus, Frank’s concept of ‘the development of underdevelopment’ argues that development in the core countries always produces underdevelopment and poverty in the periphery.
Frank`s Criticism of others
- Frank was very critical of the theories of sociology of development and connected processes of modernization and evolution. Hoselitz has used the Parsonian modernization pattern variables to explain the process of development in any country. Frank is convinced that neither developed nor undeveloped societies reveal the characteristics suggested by Hoselitz or, for that matter, by Parsons.
- Frank also rejects the theory of diffusion, which suggests that the less developed societies cannot be developed because they are not able to be influenced by the changes in the developed world due to obstacles to development. Economic diffusions, according to Frank, do not bring about changes in the Third World. Frank also criticizes McClelland (1961) and Hagen (1962). He is of the view that these scholars have ignored the fact that historical circumstances lead to the establishment of one world economic system in which the Third World functions to develop the First World. Though Baran originated the theory of dependency but for its popularity the credit may be given to Frank.
Criticism of Frank`s Theory
- Critics of the dependency theory argue that this dependency is exaggerated. They also say that the theory focuses too much on economic factors and does not take into consideration the country’s political, social, cultural and environmental factors that might be contributing to underdevelopment. Critics also argue that dependency theory is very pessimistic and unrealistic. Critics say that the suggestion that a developing country can disconnect from capitalism and go its own way is impossible in our globalised economy. However, Frank’s ideas and the huge volume of writing that he completed continue to be debated.
Next
previous
Latest News
EDITORIALS & ARTICLES
General Studies