The
disasters and catastrophes of development which face the
African and
Asian continents and its people have revived the interest of scholars and
different political theorizing and debate. Barring this; however, according
to Claude Ake (in Kenneth
2000:67) what has been developing in post colonial Afro-Asian
nationalities is
underdevelopment. The said regions have averaged negative growth rates for
over two decades and more. Meanwhile the past has been so disastrous
and catastrophic,
that the future looks hopeless and desperate. Indeed, the only certainty of
development developing countries for the rest of the century is that poverty will spread and
intensify unobstructed.
The
most underlying concept of underdevelopment like development is masked in controversy
and storm, because
it has no precise definition and scholarly consensus. Intentionally on the other hand,
some scholars see underdevelopment as the direct opposite or the other side of
development altogether. To increase curiosity, some others define it by comparing the levels
of development
of two or more societies and
while others see it as absence of development. In most case, underdevelopment is neither
opposite nor absence of development and it is some what
very complex and intricate issue.
Underdevelopment
as per Daniel (1980) refers to the state of an economy of a satellite economy
characterized by underemployment of human and natural resources and such
economy is characterized by low real income per capita in comparison with those
of North America and West Europe altogether.
Therefore,
underdevelopment scholars argued that the status of insufficient development
and under employment of human and natural resources was acquired under
historical circumstances such as colonialism, drain of wealth, slavery, imperialism and
neo-colonialism in most part. To surprise they
contend that
underdevelopment is synonymous with exploitation, domination and
highhandedness.
A plethora of components
characterize under-development and to put in far broader forms that spread
across factors. The characteristics of under-development are exclusive and
exhaustive. There are many factors and attribute that overlaps and mutually
antagonistic too in respect of its attributes.
Caharcteristics of
Under-development
1.Predominance
of agriculture as a source of employment.
2.Low per
capita income.
3.Use of traditional
and less efficient techniques of production.
4.Low
standard of living.
5.Existence
of widespread poverty.
6.Large
inequalities.
7.Low rate
of saving and capital formation.
8.Higher
contribution of agriculture in National Income.
9.High
rate of population growth.
10.facilities
and poor sanitation facilities.
11.Existence
of large unemployment.
12.Inadequate
infrastructural facilities.
13.Predominance
of primary exports.
14.Poor
quality of human capital, low literacy ratio, low level of education,
inadequate availability of health
This proves that under-development
of developing countries is multi-faceted and diversified. To put it in one arch
card is almost foolish and unrealistic. Understanding the nature and causes of underdevelopment is a
complex task complicated by theoretical debates between scholars and a large
amount of terminologies, variables, labels and categories. However,
for most reason
there are several theoretical postulations as to why some parts of the world
are developed while others are underdeveloped and hence the underdevelopment theory
survive to exist all debate. Most obviously the underdevelopment theory otherwise
known as the UDT premised their argument on the main thesis that development
and underdevelopment are two aspects of a historical process through which the
underdeveloped countries were integrated into the international capitalist
system
and systems of unequal exchange that can come ut with contradicting phenomenon
in different streams of nations.
To
put in other words, there
is a dialectical relationship between development and underdevelopment in the
sense that the western capitalist countries that are developed and in the
process underdeveloped the present day underdeveloped countries
by a historical process if unequal exchange; that the process of development and underdevelopment came
with the worldwide mercantilists and capitalist expansion of
European first through slavery and then colonialism following, subsequently
in neo-colonial activities. With
out any objection, this
perspective of the underdevelopment theorists and understanding of
underdevelopment, Afro-Asian underdevelopment, can be viewed
from the nature and degree of capital penetration and resource exploitation,
depletion of resources, structure and varieties of dependence and economic
domination, their impact on development policies and strategies as well as the
mechanism through which surplus value is extracted and transferred between bloc.
Under-development is foremost
theoretical perspectives on development. The leading theories are Liberal,
Marxist and under-development perspectives. In the late 70s and 80s, political
scientists and sociologists began to focus on global poverty and inequality by
scholarly interest. Because of improvements in global
communication the North becomes aware of poverty in the South and South began
to learn how to want things that the North has but should be shared on several
grounds.
This growing understanding was
prominently because gap and deformities between rich and poor increased poles
apart. The poor in rich countries are much wealthier than those in poor
countries and enthusing. Dividing line not so much between rich and poor of one
country became outdated, but between North and South began to surface and
attract much attention. Robert Gilpin
notes three theories that seek to explain global poverty, underdevelopment, and
inequality that are Neoclassical Liberalism, Marxism and Underdevelopment.
The liberal points to the fact that
developing countries have labour surplus and capital deficit; if national
borders open to free trade and investment, developing countries receive more
capital that which accelerates growth that can result in removing poverty and
development problems. So that they can attain development and under-development
in different modus operandi of global trade. While a global open economy leads to
development; this process is not uniform across territories. There are some domestic factors that hinder
development by same time, despite openness in developing countries. Inefficient
government. Subsistence agriculture. Lack of technological education are
instances.
While there are many differences
among liberal development theories that stand in conflict, they do seem to
agree on two causes of international poverty.
Poor integration of LDCs in the world economy and inefficient economic
policy of developing countries. According to Gilpin, liberal theories of
development have one important shortcoming to our dismay. That is absence of politics from explanations
of development and under-development.
According to Marx and Engels, the globalized
production and imperialism lead to development in the world. The driving force
of development is class conflict to them.
Some societies (in the South) lack class conflict and it has some
reasons. Imperialism destabilizes the status quo by introducing modern
technology and therefore, deposits the seed of class conflict. So Lenin adds that
exporting capital and technology to the periphery will on the one hand; develop
these countries and on the other hand weaken the core.
In underdevelopment arguments far
more, the globalization of production systematically leads to
underdevelopment. Gilpin focuses on two
positions that seek to explain this relationship assuch. Structuralism and Dependency
theory. For structuralists, trade is bad
for poor countries. Developing countries are trapped in a position of underdevelopment
by their social, political, and economic structures. There are some
particularly bad structures in such economies. subsistence agriculture, overpopulation, low
propensity to save,, inefficient governments and dependence on primary exports.
World look like according to structuralists in to two streams (Prebisch).
Countries belong to either of two categories that is Core means advanced,
wealthy countries of the North. Periphery that is underdeveloped, poor
countries of the South.
Structuralists see unbalanced
exchanges between the core and periphery as the driving force of underdevelopment. This has to do with the disadvantageous terms
of trade of the periphery relative to the core. The terms of trade refers ratio between export
prices and import prices. Terms of trade
are biased against the periphery because their export prices are low and import
prices high. The
underlying cause of this disadvantage is technological gap between core and
periphery.
Another one is dependency. This is
a situation where the economic development in one country is conditioned by
economic changes in another country by far.
The latter country is self-sustaining, while the former is dependent. Control
in the world of dependency theorists is exerted through economic neo-colonialism.
The questions who and what are the main instruments of domination and
exploitation is important in the analysis of dependency theories.
There are three
international-economic mechanisms through which dependency theorists explain
underdevelopment. Exploitation theory
that is core advances at cost of
periphery not only does capitalist economy keep the periphery underdeveloped,
but it also immoderate it. Imperial
neglect position that is capitalism favored some developed countries over
others by not receiving trade and investment from the developed world, the
ignored countries cannot progress. Dependent development that is growth can
happen even with the exploitation by core capitalists, but it’s not
self-sustaining and does not lead to independence.
There are also the political
mechanisms that explain underdevelopment that is domestic elites ally with
international capitalists. As a result
of this, instead of protecting their country and seeking independence;
periphery leaders allow the economic exploitation by international capitalists
to continue. The only solution to wipe out under-development is
revolution. Socialist revolution
replaces the corrupt elites and brings about an equitable society. Nationalist
revolution breaks the links with core countries and brings about independence
In fact what exactly constitute the
reasons for the under-development of developing country is a question that
needs to be explored with utmost care since this a question that has many
traps. What caused the underdevelopment in Asia, Africa and Latin America is a
complex issue. Europe’s past and present exploitation of Africa played a
significant part altogether. Prior to the Europeans arrived in in Asia, Africa
and Latin America, these part of the world had vibrant social, economic, and
political structures. In fact these were severely interrupted by Europeans to
create wealth for themselves[i].
The renowned scholars Paul Baran
and Andre Gunder Frank are the originators of the concept of economic
underdevelopment and it popularized during the late 1960s. This is also known
as the Baran-Frank thesis in under-development studies. The summary of the
thesis was that industrialized rich nations obstruct or delay the development
of poor nations by the help of policies and interventions designed to protect
their global dominance over world trade and power. One of the main
points that the thesis layout is the concept of the development of the
underdevelopment. The concept of development of underdevelopment is actually a
process where several countries have made development by exploiting resources
causing underdevelopment in many countries for most reasons. The process
started by the European nations in the early 16th century by colonizing much of
world with their superior military equipments derived from the countless wars
in Europe at that time. This colonization has lasted until the very end of 20th
century.[ii]
It
is wrong to assume that under-development is due to reasons that are produced
by developing countries. Developing countries are no more responsible for their
under-development. Under-development has many far reaching and complex reasons.
Under-development and development is by any yardsticks are some kind of
capitalist criteria to dissect some of reason why some countries are rich and
others are poor. However development can no longer be measured in terms of
mere, material criteria. Instead of growth theories it is better to approach
development through some qualitative measures. For instance, human development
index, gender index, etc. Instead of
mere roads, large dams, and contraction it is better to improve living
condition s and standard of life of people.
Under-development
is the result of a historical process of unequal exchange between dualities.
The measure of comparison is problematique. Developing countries are not
responsible for their under-development. The dependency school is right in
their observation.
Yet there are some factors needed to include in the
literature on under-development form poor country perspective. A historical
perspective is essential in order to understand why African countries have
failed to take part in the international economic development we have seen in
this era of ICT and new age technologies.
Lack of political stability accounts for many of the development problems in
post-colonial African and Asian nationalities. The main reason for the weak
development of developing countries after independence is the failure of the
state machinery. For most cases form of governance, are often referred to in
many literature as ‘patrimonial rule’ or ‘personal rule’, reflects traditional
African political culture[iii].
It is an intellectual challenge to fully grasp the historical causes of
Africa’s underdevelopment and to distinguish between internal and external
components.
On the one hand, the fact is that
many of developing country problems are due to a combination of Western and
African factors and the fact that Africa has been integrated into the world
economy on unfavorable terms[iv].
Along with it was that the intrinsic geographical and demographic disadvantages
that means an international effort on a completely new scale is needed to lift
the continent out of its present state of underdevelopment altogether.
On the other end of the spectrum,
many of the problems facing African countries in particular are due to internal
causes and factors. Ethnic differences and political and cultural traditions
have made it difficult to build strong institutions and state machinery.
[i] The underdevelopment of Africa
by Europe, (http://www.revealinghistories.org.uk/africa-the-arrival-of-europeans-and-the-transatlantic-slave-trade/articles/the-underdevelopment-of-africa-by-europe.html) accessed on 19-03-2013
[ii] Development of Underdevelopment,
Oct 2005,
(http://www.studymode.com/essays/Development-Underdevelopment-66941.html)
accessed on 19-03-2013.
[iii] Jarle Simensen, Africa: the
causes of under-development and the challenges of globalization,
(http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/ud/kampanjer/refleks/innspill/afrika/simensen.html?id=533474)
accessed on 19-03-2013.
[iv] Ibid.
Reference
Kenneth
N. (2000) Corruption, leadership and the Dialectics of Development in Africa.
Associated printing and Litho Co. Ltd Enugu Nigeria.
Daniel A.O,(1980)Imperialism and
Dependency: Obstacle to African Development. Fourth Dimension Publishers, Enugu, Nigeria.
No comments:
Post a Comment