Friday, March 13, 2015

A short summary on Modernization Theory Based on the writing of Giovanni E. Reyes



Prepared by- Anup Aacharya, Priya Shrestha, Rakesh Maharjan and Upasana Gurung 
Date: 13th March, 2015

Development theories have been changing over the years with changes in the events in the history. Although, there was some form of development before the term ‘development’ was coined, it became eminent after the Second World War in 70s. Since then development theories have changed from Modernization to Dependent theory to several others. In this summary, our group has tried to focus particularly on Modernization theory as part of group assignment based on the narration of Giovanni E. Reyes. This summary deals in short with background of Modernization theory, its major ideas, strength and critics.

Background:
Three major events played a vital role in giving way to the theory of modernization, according to Alvin. Firstly, US and Great Britain rose up as world power with the decline of German and France after World War II. Secondly, on the other side, former USSR was extending communism in Korea, China and some parts of Eastern Europe. Thirdly, since Europe was decolonizing new nations were formed and they needed some structure and policy for their economic and social development. Hence, these new nations and the old ones devastated by the war were sandwiched between two powers, capitalism upheld by the US and communism held by USSR.

Major Ideas and concept of Modernization:

1.      Modernization theory regards the system of First world to be superior.  According to this theory, modern societies are more productive and seek the welfare of all in their society. Hence, third world countries need to adapt their system to achieve similar success.
2.      Development takes place in stages, it never happens at once. Hence, modernization theory supports gradual unilinear development rather than development through revolution. For this Rostow has proposed 5 stages of development.
I.                    Traditional stage: In this stage, people depend on subsistence economy rather than aiming for saving and investment.
II.                 Pre-condition for Take-off stage: In this stage, people start saving and invest on productive sector.
III.               Take-off stage: People now focus on production and distribution in this stage.
IV.              Maturity stage: Production takes place within the boundary of a country in this stage. Consumption, production and distribution of products are high in this stage.
V.                 Mass consumption stage: Production is so high for a country at this stage that it is distributed beyond its boundary, thus increasing a nations wealth.
Rostow has proposed that third world countries need to follow the same path of economic development for economic prosperity like that of First world countries. Hence he further argues that if third world countries do not have enough expertise and capital for productivity, the first world countries should provide aid in the form of capital, technology and expertise.

Since it is a slow and gradual process, it might take even centuries for the third world countries to achieve success like that of the first.

3.      Modernization is a homogenizing process. When every country follows the same process of modernization, they will reach to a point where every one of them will have the same level of progress, technology and expertise thus converging the societies into one.
4.      Modernization embraces evolutionary theory and structural theory to elaborate their social development. Evolutionary theory regards the British culture to be supreme disregarding the values and tradition of underdeveloped countries. Aligning with this, modernization theory claims that a country should give up all sort of tradition and adopt new technology and structure to be developed.

Strengths of modernization theory:
1.      Modernization theory has been adopted by wide range of researches. From psychologist to religious sociologists to political sociologists.
2.      Modernization theory is based on abstraction and comparison of the first world with the third. Such abstraction and comparison needs a strong analytical framework for which this theory is well appreciated.

Critiques:
1.      Modernization favors the development process of the US, which was unidirectional. But development can be multidirectional. Revolution can also lead to change. Despite of South Korea and China having authoritarian regime, they developed in a short period of time.
2.      Tradition of third world countries not always hinders development. China is the best example for this. China developed drastically in spite of abiding to traditional philosophy of Confucianism.

Improvements in the neo-classical modernization theory:
   The aforementioned points were based on classical modernization theory. New modernization theory emerged making changes on some of the aspects of classical modernization theory focusing on Third world development. The new theory studies a nation in terms of internal factors, cultural values and social institutions that was neglected before. Secondly, the new theory adds tradition as a catalyst to development rather than hindrance. Thirdly, it focuses more on study of a nation’s historical context rather than abstraction to come up with policies for development. Finally, the new theory also gives importance to external factors and conflict, which the neo-classical theory had ignored.

Conclusion and Reflection:
Our country is sandwiched between the concept of modernization and traditional values. In terms of technology, the whole country is dependent on First world and emerging nations like China. Our young generation speaks English language better than Nepali language, fashion trend popular in the US and Korea gets it market here in Nepal. There are several examples as these. Modernization has created dependency on foreign aid, technology and expertise paralyzing our innovation and economy. There are certain traits of the First world countries, which are exemplary, yet modernization theory itself is not the means to achieve the end.