INTRODUCTION
It's matters little how much information we possess about development if we have not grasped
it's inner meaning ( Denis Goilet, the Cruel choice)
Answering the question, what is development is indeed a daunting exercise. Though the
desirability of development is not in doubt, the path to development is one that attracts a lot of
quarrels and disagreement among scholars, statesmen and multi-lateral aid agencies.
Perhaps, what fueled the conflict on the real meaning of development, was the fact that despite
many years of implementing policies fashioned by western 'Development' Agencies and
scholars, the third world nations are still neck deep in poverty and are in some cases getting
poorer. If all the 'theories', programmes and policies which have been forced on the third world
as a key to development have not worked after so many decades, it then means that either the
conceptualization of development is faulty or the approaches towards realizing it is faulty, or
both. Serious studies, have shown that both the western conceptualization of development and
the 'theories' of development are all wrong. It is this realization that has led to جnew view of the
concept of development. This study, adopts this new approach to development, which appears
more genuine and intelligible.
WHAT IS DEVELOPMENT?
As we stated earlier, development has been interpreted in different ways by various people. We
are therefore going to look at development from three broad peripectives; the traditional view
the dependency view and the contemporary view, or 'new development thinking
Waditionally, development meant the capacity of a national economy, whose initial economic
condition has been more or less static for a long time, to generate and sustain ah annual
increase in it's gross national product (GNP) at rates perhaps 5% to 7% or more (Todaro &
Smith 2003)
Development, within this perspective was seen almost as purely an economic phenothienon,
thus the major index of development has been a growth of income per capita or per capita GNP.
It was believed that the benefits of growth will invariably extend to all down effect. Further,
development has been'defined as a type of social change in which new ideas are introduced
into a social system in order to produce higher per capita incomes and levels of living through
more modern production methods and improved social organization (Rogers 1969). segments
of society. This process is referred to as the 'trickle
Basel on the above interpretation of development, some development scholars, have come to
equate dévelopment with developing must struggle to be like the western capitalis
westernization, which implies that any country that is desirous of societies. These group of
scholars, are referred to as th - modernization theorists.
Accortling to Ake (2001)
In it's most common form, modernization theory posits an original state of backwardness or
underdevelopment characterized by, among other things, a low rate of economic growth that is
at least potentially amenable to alteration through the normal process of capital. This original
state of backwardness is initially universal. According to the theory, the industrialized countries
have managed to over come it. All the other countries could conceivably over come
backwardness too if they adopted appropriate strategies.
Modernization theorists, often use such words as modern' and it's permutations and by
categories suches "institutional differentiation", 'development,' 'nation building' 'westernized'
"backward' 'primitive' 'tribal' 'detribalised' etc. Offiong (1980).
Offiong states that
Sd
What modernization theorists most often end up with is in eventuating ethnocentric practical
recipes which admonish the poor societies to imitate them all the way and they would acquire a
sudden leap into the 20 century. In other words. join the calvinistic cult and you will experience a
sudden leap into modernity.
itt 0
Notable theorists of the modernization school are W. W. Rostow His Stages of Economic
Development. Everret E. Hagan Status thwithdrawal, David McClelland Need for Achievement,
Bert F. Hoselitz Assignment and Reward, Piero Gheddo Four Revolutions.
The disappointing performance of most countries that pursued development from the traditional
approach, led to a new thinking of the concept of development. The mindless pursuit of
development through an increase in the income per capita without a thought on how the
benefits of growth are distributed in the society, resulted in great income disparities; a few very
rich people and a mass of people wallowing in abject poverty. While the rich were getting
exceedingly richer, the poor were getting miserably poor. It became apparent that the 'trickle
down effect did not take place. This phenomenon which Celso Furtado described as 'growth
without development', showed that the traditional approach to development has failed to
address the need of the developing countries, hence, the need for a new conceptualization of
development
Perhaps the question posed by Dudley Seers, at the eleventh world conference of the society
for international development in 1969, at New Delhi, India captures the new thinking about
development. According to him
The questions to ask about a country's development are therefore What has been happening to
poverty? What has been happening to unemployment? What has been happening to inequality?
If all three of these have declined from high levels, then beyond doubt this has been a period of
development for the country concerned. If one or two of these central problems have been
growing worse, especially if all three have, it would be strange to call the result 'development'
even if per capita income doubled. (Seers 1969)
This new focus on the meaning of development is one that makes people the target or end of
development. Development in this sense is just not all about growth but all about people. It is
naking sure that the benefits of growth are redistributed to enhance a better quality of life for all.
Development is thus the process by which people create and recreate themselves and their life
circumstances to realize higher levels of civilization in accordance with their own choices and
values (Ake 2001). It must therefore be conceived of as a muls-dimensional process involving
major changes in social structures, popular attitudes and national institutions, as well as the
acceleration of economic growth, the reduction of inequality, and the eradication of poverty. It
must represent the whole gamut of change by which an entire social system, tuned to the
diverse basic needs and desires of individuals and social groups within that system, moves
away from a condition of life widely perceived as unsatisfactory toward a situation or condition of
life regarded as materially and spiritually better. Todaro & Smith (2003)
In his own analysis, Rodney (1972) sees development both from the level of the individual and
that of the society as a whole. At the level of the individual, development implies increased skill
and capacity, greater freedom, creativity, self-discipline, responsibility and material well-being.
On the level of the society, development cannot be seen purely as an economic affair, but rather
as an overall social process which is dependent upon the outcome of man's efforts to deal with
his natural environment.
Dependency theorists, believe that third world underdevelopment is a consequence of the
exploitative contact between the west and these countries. Thus Offiong (1980) argues that
underdevelopment is not an original state as modernization theorists would want us to believe.
The beginnings of African underdevelopment can be traced to the trans-Atlantic slave trade,
abandoning of that trade in favour of 'legitimate trade' and the eventual partition of Africa.
Dependency simply states that crucial economic decisions are made not by the countries that
are being 'developed' but by foreigners whose interests are carefully safe [Link] these
group therefore, development must involve freedom of the third world nations from the
exploitative relationship they are presently having with the west. Thus development is the
coincidence of structural change and liberation of men from exploitation and oppression,
perpetrated by international capitalist bourgeoisie and their internal collaborators. While real
development involves a structural transformation of the economy, society, policy and culture of
the satellite that permits the self-generating and self perpetuating use and development of the
people's potential, (Crockroff et al 1972). Development results from a peoples frontal attack on
the oppression, poverty, and exploitation that are meted out to them by the dominant classes
and their system (Offiong 1980)
THEORIES OF DEVELOPMENT
There are so many 'theories' of development that are competing for attention. We may not be
able to treat all or even most of them in a chapter like this. However we are going to try and look
at two broad categories into which most of them have been grouped and finally treat a synthesis
of both in what is now seen as the new development thinking.
The two categories are the modernization and dependency theories. We now take a look at the
modernization theory.
MODERNIZATION THEORY
The main plank of the modernization theory is that the present state of the Less Developed
Countries (LDCs) is an original state, through which the developed countries passed through.
Therefore, for them to develop, means they must move away from their traditional society and
follow the path of modernity. Simply translated, this means they should struggle to imitate and
look like the west. Development in this instance is equated with westernization. As they move
away from the traditional society,they develop purely western features of a modern society.
These features are, Social patterns of demography, urbanization and literacy, investment, trade
and government finance, and Economic patterns of production and consumption Psychological
attributes of of nationality/calculability, natio ascriptive identity and achievement motivation (Toye
1994).
For countries that are desirous of developing therefore, efforts should be made to bring about
the above features. However, it was observed that the present traditional state of these
societies, meant the prevalence of certain features and attitudes which acted as an obstacle to
the process of development. These obstacles were identified by Szentes (1971) as (a) capital
shortage, (b) prevalence of crude technology, (c) high birth rates and hence high proposition of
dependants per adult, (d) high rates of illiteracy (e) insistence on traditions, and the attitude of
the population towards necessary changes, (F) lack of modern industries and low capitalization
on land.
Based on the above obstacles, some solutions were proffered, which was felt would
automatically transform the traditional societies into modern ones. These solutions were:
import-substitution industrialization, population control, capital accumulation, human resource
development among others. However despite decades of adopting and implementing
programmes of the modernization extraction, most third world countries actually found
themselves worse-off. Thus the editors of the development dialogue 1987 (cited by Chambua
1994) lamented that:
The first decades of independence have been a period of endless imitation and experimentation
with a view to bringing Africa into the mainstream of economic development... the time span of a
generation later, ... today.... rather than being closer to the industrialized world, it 15 further
away, rather than being more self reliant. it is more dependent, and rather then being more
stable it is more volatile and conflict-ridden.
There was simply no doubt that the modernization theory was not at all beneficial to most third
world countries that adopted them. This raised the issue of whether its failure was as a result of
wrong diagnoses and prescriptions or faulty implementation. While the foreign development
agencies (World Bank I.M.F, Aid agencies etc.) contend that their diagnoses and prescriptions
were right, that it was a problem of iniplementation by the locals, they normally cite the example
of the Asian tigers to show that the prescriptions could work if when implemented. Most radical
third world scholars contend that, both the diagnoses and prescriptions were faulty and as such
there was no way it could have [Link] most surprising aspect of the failure of the
modernization theory according to Ake (2001) was that one would have expected the poor
performance of African economies to have undermined confidence in the received neo-classical
paradigm But far from being undermined, the validity of the paradigm wat asserted so
aggressively that the prospect of using another paradigm could no longer be seriously
entertained. For as African economies declined, they became more vulnerable and more
dependent on the international development agencies, whose response to Africa's worsening
crises was to affirm the old paradigm in a more doctrinaire form.
Skocpol (1977), has listed the major objections to the modernization paradigm as: reification of
the nation state as the sole unit of analysis; the erroneous assumption that all countries follow a
similar path of development from traditional to modern (Capitalist) society, disregard of the
transnational structures that effect change in LDCs, and the employment of historical ideal types
in their explanations
Prominent modernization theories include Rostows Stages of growth., the Harrod-Dormar
growth model, Everest Hagan's Status withdrawal, Piero Gheddo's four Revolutions etc.
Due to the evident failure of the modernization theory to address adequately the problems of
third world underdevelopment, some radical scholar in these countries started arguing that the
factors for the underdevelopment of these countries indeed lies beyond their borders. The
model which came out of this thinking is known as the Dependency model. It is to this model
that we now turn.
THE DEPENDENCY MODEL
The crux of the dependency model, is that the incorporation of the third world economies into
the web of international capitalism is mainly responsible for their under development.
It must be pointed out that dependency theories belong to different schools of thought. Jhingan
(1997) has classified them into three namely; Marxists, neo-Marxists and structualists, while
Todaro and Smith (2004) classify them into Neo-colonial Dependency Model, the false-paradigm
model and Dualistic-Development thesis
However, Bath and James (cited in Jhingan 1997) has identified four unifying elements in the
views of dependency economists. They are;
1. Identification of underdevelopment with the expansion of industrial capitalist countries;
2 The view that development and underdevelopment are parts of a unified system:
3. The view that underdevelopment is a persistent natural condition not a temporary
precapitalist, stage, and
4. Agreement that dependence affects internal politics, society and culture.
The concept, [Link] has been defined by many scholars, but the most appealing is that
by Theotonio Dos Santos (1969). According to him;
Dependence is a conditioning situation in which the economies of one group of countries are
conditioned by the development and expansion of others. A relationship of interdependence
between two or more economies or between such economies and the world trading system
becomes a dependent relationship when some countries can expand through self-impulsion
while others, being in a dependent position, can expand as a reflection of the expansion of the
dominant countries, which may have positive or negative effects on their immediate
development. In either case, the basic situation of dependence cause these countries to be both
backward and exploited. Dominant countries are endowed with technological, commercial,
capital and socio-political predominance over dependant countries-the form of this pre
dominance varying according to the particular historical moment-and can therefore exploit them,
and extract part of the locally produced surplus. Dependence then is based upon an
international division of labour which allows industriai development to take place in some
countries while restricting it in others, whose growth is conditioned by and subjected to the
power centers of the world
12
More generally, Chambua (1994) relying on a plethora of dependency and world system
perspective writers (Bach 1980, Hopkins and Wallerstein 1977, Wallestein 1979, Chase-Dunn
1981. Roxborough 1979, Skocpol 1977. Amin 1973, and Stinchcombe 1982) draws out the
basic assumptions of the model ss:
1. Capitalism arose only once and it was a world system from its inception. Of course this is too
general. But it implied that the so-called external factors have to be treated as internal factors.
2. The appropriate unit of analysis is a world-system defined in terms of economic processes
and link, and no units defined in terms, for example of judicial, political. cultural or geological
criteria.
3. Change in the LDCs has primarily been 'the consequence of the externalization of Western
European capitalism through the formation of a world market and through various forms of
imperialism and colonialism
4. Sovereign states or multiple political sovereignties are one of the many kinds of
organisational structures within the system and no one of them can subsume the whole.
5. The (world) system is based on a geographically differentiated (vertical) division of labour
featuring three main zones, core, semi-periphery and periphery tied together by or with the
world market.
6. The law of value rewards the three zones differently te surplus flows disproportionately to the
core (te Metropolitan) arcas
7. Although the economic structures differ according to the mix of economic activities and forms
of labour control, they all give rise to a state and a dominant class within that state oriented
towards the world market
8. The core states dominate the system more than they are constrained by it and this difference
in strength is essential for the maintenance of the system. That is the strong (core) states use
their power to perpetuate and maintain those mechanisms and structures that allow the
differential flow of surplus to their regions.
Ile further argues that according to the model, the exploitation of the periphery by the core is
necessary to the reproduction of capitalism as a world system. This subordination and
exploitation takes place through various mechanisms: capital accumulation, class alliances
between different countries, and through the division of labour in the world capitalist economy.
Based on the location of third world under development in their relationship with the developed
world, the dependency theorists, solutions range from a call for drastic reforms of the system, a
new international Economic order, introduction of socialism, breaking links with the Advanced
capitalist nations (a policy of autarky) to south-south cooperation.
Scholars who have contributed much to the rise and development of the dependency theory are
Theotonio Dos Santos, Samir Amin, Ceño Furtado F.11 Cardoso, O. Sunkel etc.
The theory has been criticized on some grounds According to Todaro and Smith (2003), first,
although, they offer an appealing explanation of why many poor countries remain
underdeveloped, they offer little formal or informal explanation of how countries initiate and
sustain development. Second and perharps more important, the actual economic, experience of
LDCs that have pursued revolutionary campaigns of industrial nationalization and state
production has been mostly negative.
Commenting on the criticisms against the theory, Chakravarty (1997) stated that the failure to
date of dependency theorists to come up with a precise analysis of the asymmetric nature of the
contact between rich and poor societies in space, along with the rapid growth experienced in
recent years by newly industrializing countries like the Republic of Korea, Taiwan and Brazil,
has led many to dismiss their theory as dead.
In a very deep and incisive piece on the study of African development UIF Himmelstrand who
conceptualized development as structural change outlined six criteria of development. They are:
1. Development is the capability of a given society increasingly, to use its own resources of land,
minerals and man-power to feed its own people-even in a situation of population growth.
More indirect and in that sense less satisfactory empirical indicators could deal with results of
food sufficiency, or insufficiency such as the status of health of the population, or levels of child
mortality, which could be assumed to be correlated with food availability without however, being
able to indicate the extent to which the health status is due to own internal productiot…
A given country is capable increasingly to produce make available to farmers/peasants the
basic to needed in food production, or, in countries with a lack of arable land, the tools needed
in other production necessary for the importation of food.
3 There is or emerges through consent or struggle, a set of shared transaction rules regulating
relationships between the main actors involved in economic or other importan social activities
and accepted by the majority as Icgally and/or morally binding.
The very process of development itself cannot take place without some kind of trusted
agreement between the main categories of actors in society about how to transact business,
and other social relations. In the absence of accepted and effective transaction rules, and in the
presence of actor conflict, transactions are likely to be hampered by chaos and struggle.
However, struggle is usually necessary and unavoidable in attempts to rectify unfairness and
injustice emerging in processes of social change. As already indicated, the struggle for greater
fairness and justice of transaction rules is one aspect of the development process itself, unless
such rules can be agreed upon by consent.
a. Without indigenous entrepreneurs and labour there is no further development. The existence
of labour and of indigenous entrepreneurial and innovative activities to manage labour and to
manage other resources in production and other products as well, is a necessary element in
defining the very process of development.
b A development of export/import relationships but with a reasonably balanced transaction of
this trade so as to avoid too much of unequal exchange' is another criterion. This could perhaps
be considered as an effect or development, or in some theories as the forerunner and
precondition of development rather than a, criterion to be used in defining development.
C. Finally, the growth of a considerable measure of autonomy, self rule and democracy is
required in a given national, or other political unit in order for it to qualify as clearly developing or
developed. A country is therefore not developing or may even be defined as hindered in its
development process if it turns out to be a colony or a country who's economy and politics is
overwhelmingly determined by donor countries, or by outside agencies such as the World Bank
or the IMF which for instance may impose structural conditionalitics on that country to make it
eligible for further loans.
The most surprising aspect of the paradıgım shift on development or 'New Development
Thinking is the acceptance by the world Bank that it's previous conceptualization of
development was faulty, hence the rise of a 'New Development Thinking'. In apparent
acceptance of the faulty nature of its previous approach to development, Paul Collier, the
director of the Development Research Group at the World Bank submits that;
Progress on poverty reduction depends primarily on policy and institutional changes in
low-income countries. The World Bank's previous approach to inducing these changes relied on
negotiated conditions on loans, or conditionality The empirical evidence suggests that this
approach was largely ineffective where change occurred, it was chosen by governments rather
than induced by conditions on loans. Various countervailing pressures undermine the
effectiveness of loan conditionality An alternative approach to inducing change is to empower,
through knowledge and participation domestic constituencies to make make chan change. This
approach is tive in promoting policy likely to be more effective change and essential in
promoting institutional change now usually the frontier of economic reform This shift in focus is
part of the rationale for the Banks comprehensive Development framework. (For more on this
see Annual World Bank Conference on Development 2000 Boris Pleskovic and Nicholas Stem
(eds).
In line with this new thinking, the President of the World Bank, James D. Wolfensoln stated that
Our new framework is a holistic and integrated approach to development strategies and
programs that highlights the interdependence of all aspects of development strategy social,
structural, human, institutional, environmental, economic and financial.
A forme laureate forefron which argues societ social devel peop expe acce rout
Am and
While lending his voice to the new Development thinking, a former Director of the World
Development Institute, Paul P. Streeten, opines that
Development must be redefined as an attack on the chief evils of the world today; malnutrition,
disease, illiteracy, slums, unemployment and inequality. Measured in terms of aggregate growth
rates, development has been a great success. But measured in terms of jobs, justice and the
elimination of poverty, it has been a fathercar onde o partial succest
A former chiefeennomist of the World Bank, and the 2001 Nobel Toureate in Economics Prof.
Joseph Stiglitz, who has been in the forefront of challenging the neo-classical view of
development, which has dominated thinking at the World Bank previously. argues that
development should be seen as a transformation of society, a move from old ways of thinking
and old forms of social and economic organization to new ones. Development and
developmental transfontinuon involve a change in the way people think and the way societics
function a change in norms, expectations and institutions. Development involves not just the
acceptance of change bat its promotion and indeed, it's routinization (Stiglitz 2000).
Amartya Sen, the 1998 Nobel Laureate in Economics added yet another angle to the New
Development Thinking. He put forward the idea of what he calls 'functionings'.
According to Scn (1999)
reflects the The concept of 'Junctionnings' various things a person may value doing or being
The valued functionings may vary from elementary ones, such as being adequately nourished
and being free from avoidable disease, to very complex activities or personal states, such as
being able to take part in the life of the community and having self respect.
VALUES OF DEVELOPMENT
Joulet (1971) has put forward, three core values of development which summarizes the
common goals which all individuals and societies seek, and which Tedaro and Smith (2003)
have analyzed so well. These core values are:
a) Sustenance: The ability to meet basic needs
(c) Freedom from servitude To be able to choose
Sustenance, which is the ability to meet basic needs of food shelter, health and protection
should be the basic function of all development programmes. This is because it is when this
basic needs, which Maslow teferred to as physiological needs in his hierarchy of needs theory
are fulfilled that a man can really understand or appreciate the other higher ideals of society of
development.
For a development policy to be able to satisfy this core value, must focus on poverty reduction
(which) would require active, large-scale redistribution policies to offset the forces that seemed
to systematically exclude the poor from the benefits of growth.
Self Esteem: Everybody wants to have a sense of self worth, a
fecling of not been inferior, of having dignity and respect. People want to be respected. These
feelings come from not been in extreme need. When people can take care of their material
needs without relying on others, they naturally have a feeling of selfesteem. They have that
feeling of being a person
Freedom from servitude: Freedom here means the sense of emancipation from alienating
material conditions of life and from social servitude to nature, ignorance, other people, misery
institutions and dogmatic beliefs, especially that one's poverty is one's predistination. It equally
has a political dimension in tha these freedom must include rule of law freedom of expression
political participation and equality of opportunity.
OBJECTIVES OF DEVELOPMENT
Todaro and Smith, (2003) have outlined three objectives of Development which has a universal
application and which corresponds to Goulets (1971) core values of development These are;
1. To increase the availability and widen the distribution of basic life - sustaining goods such as
food, shelter, health and protection.
2. To raise levels of living, including, in addition to higher incomes, the provision of more jobs,
better education, and greater attention to cultural and human values, all of which will serve not
only to enhance material well-being but all to generate greater individual and national self
esteem.
3. To expand the range of economic and social choices available to individuals and nations by
freeing them from servitude and dependence not only in relation to other people and
nation-states but also to the forces of ignorance and human misery.
COMPARING LEVELS OF DEVELOPMENT (THE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX)
Obviously, underdevelopment is not absence of development, because every people have
developed in one way or another and to a greater or lesser extent. Underdevelopment makes
sense only as a means of comparing levels of development. It is very much tied to the fact that
human social development has been uneven and from a strictly economic viewpoint some
human groups have advanced further by producing more