Can Models Explain Power?
• Look at the three models.
• What are they trying to say?
• Can you write a theory for each one
which explains power; some nations
become wealthy and powerful whilst
others don’t.
Theories Explaining the Growth
of Superpowers
• Since the end of WW 2 in 1945, the most notable
changes in the geography of superpowers has been:
• The superpower struggle for superiority between US and
USSR
• The decline of the colonial superpowers such as the UK
• The emergence of growing economies which may in turn
become superpowers eg BRICS, MINTS, CIVETS,
TIGER CUBS, EU etc
Explaining changing superpower geographies –
there are several different theories
• Modernisation Theory (Rostow)
• Dependency Theory (A.G. Frank)
• World System’s Theory – Wallerstein
• Could also consider the value of
Mackinder’s Heartland Theory here
Rostow’s take off model – modernisation theory
• 1960s model emphasising the rise of power through the
creation of wealth and rise of capitalism
• linear economic growth –countries develop in 5 stages
• Argues that countries develop very slowly until certain 'pre-
conditions for take-off' are achieved (pg 142)
• Once achieved, industrialisation with growth in
manufacturing and increasing urbanisation would begin
and wealth would increase as trade expanded, poverty
was reduced and income increased creating more middle
class consumers. Cumulative causation and multiplier
effect are important here. (link to winners of global shift in
Year 12)
• applicable to Asian Tiger economies to some extent.
• Useful framework but is only descriptive – it doesn’t help
us understand how countries gain political and cultural
power
• Economic wealth and an industrial economy are, however,
precursors to military power so this helps explain this type
of power.
Can you see a
correlation
between the
rise of the NICs
and Rostow's
Modernisation
Theory?
Modernisation Theory
The Asian Tigers are examples of where this succeeded.How were they able to implement the preconditions for take off? - link your learning to what we have found out so far about the original Newly Industrialised Countries and how they 'took off'
Criticism of Rostow's Model
• In order to achieve 'pre-conditions for take
off', many countries borrowed from the
World Bank to invest in infrastructure.
• This led to debt and trade liberalisation
with unfavourable terms and conditions for
many developing countries which kept
them in a state of under-development
Are these countries ever likely
to become superpowers?
Dependency theory is based on the notion that there is a group of wealthy states (core) and satellite underdeveloped states (the periphery). Resources are extracted by the core from the periphery to sustain their economic growth and wealth. This is an on going process.
According to dependency theory, poverty and underdevelopment in the peripheral states is not the result of tradition or backwardness. It is necessary for the development of capitalism in the core states. In other words the very success of the core states is the cause of underdevelopment of the periphery. This is because of the coercive and exploitative manner by which the peripheral states have been integrated into the world economy.
Dependency theory sees the global economy is characterized by a structured relationship between the core states which, using political, military and economic power extract a surplus from the peripheral countries. Any attempt by the dependent nations to resist the influences of dependency often result in economic sanctions and/or military invasion and control.
Dependency Theory
• exploitation of the
South by the North
• simple core-
periphery (Marxist)
terms
• imperial/colonial
model
• little room for
development in the
periphery.
How do models help us to understand relationships
between superpowers?
1. Can developing countries (peripheral) ever become developed core
countries according to this model?
2. What is the critique of this model?
To summarise Dependency Theory:
• A dependency pattern
• The ‘south’ being dependent on the ‘north’ and essentially the developed
countries keep developing nations in a state of underdevelopment by
controlling terms of trade
• Low value commodity exports move to developed countries whilst high
value goods move to developing world- Prebisch-Singer Theory
• Developed world controls debt and refinancing of debt along with
Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) – loans provided by the World
Bank and IMF intended to reduce poverty but often criticised as require
trade liberalisation policies and de-regulation at expense of the developing
country, high skilled out migration from developing world (brain-drain), aid
is often tied eg developed world promises military assistance. TNCs also
influence via patent royalties which limits innovation in the periphery. This
is very similar to colonial rule and is similar to neo-colonial rule which is
more subtle but the same result
• Exception: over simplistic – some countries have moved out of
dependency eg Japan, NICs, BRICS and power has shifted in cycles
eg USSR and UK so too simplistic to say it is static
• BUT some may argue these would not have emerged without
the economic aid and political support from the USA
Wallerstein’s World Systems Theory 1974
• North-South pattern began to break down in the 1980s because of:
• Rise of the Asian Tiger economies that broke free from poverty and
underdevelopment suggesting the world is more complex than a
superpower core and underdeveloped periphery relationship
• Wallerstein’s ideas are partly related to the economic theory of
Supercycles (Kondratiev waves) accounting for cycles of power and
economic power
• Wallerstein’s World Systems Theory views the world as divided into
3, rather than 2:
• 1. Core regions – OECD countries and the USA and EU superpowers
• 2 Semi-periphery regions – NICs of Latin America and Asia and
emrging powers of China and India
• 3. Periphery regions – rest of developing world
Rise and fall of modern
empires- supports Wallerstein
“In economic terms we already live in a bi-polar world. Between
them the US and China today control over a third of world output
(on a PPP basis)."
• Napoleon Bonaparte:
"Let China sleep, for
when she awakes,
she will shake the
world."
• "America’s global economic
dominance has been
declining since 1998, well
before the Global Financial
Crisis. A large part of this
decline has actually had little
to do with the actions of the
US but rather with the
unravelling of a century’s
long economic anomaly.
China has begun to return to
the position in the global
economy it occupied for
millennia before the
industrial revolution."
Views which support
Wallerstein
World Systems Theory
• Less a theory than a world view
• core, periphery and semi-periphery
• BRICs / NICs have a ‘chance’ of further growth
this model is less static
• BRICs (China) exploit the periphery’s resources
i.e. Africa:
1. Page 143/144 supporting evidence of
Wallerstien's world systems theory
Who are the exceptions?
• Which countries have adopted Rostow’s model and broken the dependency theory?
• The Asian Tigers
• Why?• USA funding! Both economic support and aid.
• Why did they do this? – think back to how superpowers can exert and extend their influence.
• Strong capitalist economies in Asia would contain Communist China.
India and China
• Why have their economies recently risen?
• Two conflicting arguments:– Wallerstein argues Europe initiated industrial
capitalism.
– The rise of I and C another stage in the growth and spread of the global economy.
– A. G Frank argues it’s a shift back to an older world order where I and C were powerful economic forces.
– The global system was replaced for 500yrs by European hegemony.
– European powers are the first NICs.
• Why should the global centre of economic gravity shift from east to west and back again?
Are there other models?
• Mackinder’s Heartland Theory – how could
you incorporate this into an answer
explaining the rise of superpowers?
Summary of Superpower theory • There are several theories which help
explain the rise and pattern of superpowers
• WW Rostow’s ‘Take Off’ model
(modernisation theory) is often used to
illustrate how countries move from relative
underdevelopment, to a state of high mass
consumption
• Not all countries have managed to
industrialise and develop
• AG Frank’s Dependency Theory argues
that this is because the developed
countries (superpowers and emerging
powers) maintain the developing world in a
‘state of underdevelopment’, draining it of:
Human capital (‘brain drain’)
Resources (minerals, ores, food)
• This helps maintain the developed world’s
lifestyle, cheaply
• The BRICs, and NICs, have
developed in recent decades
• This suggests some countries
have broken free from
dependency and developed in
the way Rostow’s model
suggests
• Immanuel Wallerstein’s World
Systems Theory seeks to model
this ‘three sided world’:
• Wallerstein’s ideas are partly
related to the economic theory of
Supercycles (Kondratiev waves –
see table)
• These suggest economic growth
passes through phases based on
key new technologies
• These new technologies bring
growth to particular geographical
regions
Date and Cycle Technology Location
1770-1850 Industrial
Revolution
Cotton, steam engines UK
1850-1920 Industrialization Rail, steam ships, iron
and steel,
Increased
involvement of
Europe and USA
1920-1945 Motorization Petrochemicals, cars,
electricity
Increasing
dominance of the
USA
1945– 1990 Cold war era White goods, consumer
goods
Rise of Japan and
Asian Tigers
1990 onwards Internet, wireless,
biotechnology
Shifts in production
toward India and
China
2020 onwards? ???? Asia?
June 2011 unit 3
b. Explain how theories such as
Dependency Theory and World
Systems Theory can contribute to an
understanding of changing patterns of
global power (15)