“Dependence is dead, long live dependence and the class struggle” thus the title of an article by the dependency theorist André Gunder Frank, published in 1974 in Latin American Perspectives. Indeed, it has often been stated that dependency theory has lost its significance in explaining underdevelopment and has thus been “relegated to footnote status in the field of development studies”. Yet, in recent years, a lot of scholars have attempted to refute this statement, claiming that dependency theory still has its use in development studies, even though they have identified a number of flaws.
Emerging in parallel with other development theories in the 1950s, dependency theory mainly focuses on Latin America, the most important authors being Prebisch, Furtado, dos Santos, Frank and finally Cardoso and Faletto, whose theory this paper concentrates on. Most of the different approaches within dependency theory share several Marxist core assumptions, such as the construction of base (means and relations of production) and superstructure (the political, cultural and social consequences of these means and relations of production). On the international level, all politics, whether external or domestic, takes place within the framework of the capitalist world economy which determines the behavior of actors as well as patterns of interaction between them. In this paper, the question of whether dependency theory as presented by Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Enzo Faletto is still useful in explaining underdevelopment will be examined considering as example the events occurring in a typical example of an underdeveloped Latin American economy – Bolivia. The election of the left-wing populist Evo Morales potentially represents a paradigm shift for one of the poorest Latin American countries – a shift away from the neoliberal ideology towards a still capitalist regime with a socialist flavor to it (if one is to believe the declarations of Morales’s vice president Alvaro García Linera). Applying Cardoso and Faletto’s approach to the case of Bolivia reveals its strengths, but also some methodological as well as textual weaknesses. In order to show this, the first section will present their theory as exhibited in their publication Dependency and Development in Latin America and in an article published by Cardoso in the New Left Review in 1972. The second section focuses on the events in Bolivia, pointing at strong and weak points of the approach. Section four concludes.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. CARDOSO AND FALETTO’S DEPENDENCY AND DEVELOPMENT IN LATIN AMERICA
2.1. Dependency Theory in International Relations
2.2 Dependency and Development in Latin America
3. DEPENDENCY AND DEVELOPMENT - THE CASE OF BOLIVIA
3.1. The Economic Policies of the 1980s and 1990s
3.2. The success of social movements
3.3 The Government of Evo Morales
4. CONCLUSION
Research Objectives and Themes
This research paper examines the contemporary relevance of the dependency theory developed by Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Enzo Faletto, using the recent political and economic trajectory of Bolivia as a case study. The work explores the tension between neoliberal economic shifts and the rise of nationalist-populist movements.
- Evaluation of Cardoso and Faletto’s dependency framework within modern development studies.
- Analysis of Bolivia’s economic transformation during the 1980s and 1990s under neoliberal reforms.
- Investigation of the role of social movements and their influence on democratic governance.
- Critical assessment of the limitations of dependency theory regarding cultural factors and political agency.
Excerpt from the Book
3.3 The Government of Evo Morales
Morales’s idea is to move away from the neoliberal agenda of the Washington consensus. A move to socialism however, according to his vice-president Linera, is not possible yet, since […]on the one hand, there is a proletariat that is numerically in a minority and politically non-existent, and you cannot build socialism without a proletariat.
Secondly, the potential for agrarian and urban communities is very much weakened. There is an implosion of community economies into family structures, which have been the framework within which the social movements have arisen. In Bolivia, 70 per cent of workers in the cities work in family-based economic structures, and you do not build socialism on the basis of a family economy.
Instead, he declared that the government seeks to establish a new form of capitalism labeled “capitalismo Andino-Amazónico”, stressing the traditional, communitarian forms of production and endowing the state a strong role.
Summary of Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION: Outlines the persistence of dependency theory in current debates and sets the scope for analyzing the Bolivian context.
2. CARDOSO AND FALETTO’S DEPENDENCY AND DEVELOPMENT IN LATIN AMERICA: Details the theoretical framework, emphasizing the structural relationship between core and peripheral economies and the critique of traditional modernization perspectives.
3. DEPENDENCY AND DEVELOPMENT - THE CASE OF BOLIVIA: Examines the practical application of the theory, contrasting neoliberal policy impacts with the rise of social movements and the emergence of the Morales government.
4. CONCLUSION: Synthesizes the strengths and weaknesses of Cardoso and Faletto’s model, highlighting the need for incorporating political and cultural dimensions into economic analysis.
Keywords
Dependency Theory, Latin America, Bolivia, Underdevelopment, Neoliberalism, Social Movements, Evo Morales, Capitalism, Structuralism, Political Economy, Globalization, Development Studies, Class Struggle, Washington Consensus, Andean Capitalism.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research paper?
The paper evaluates the applicability of Cardoso and Faletto's dependency theory to explain modern underdevelopment, specifically using Bolivia as a representative case study.
What are the central themes explored in the text?
The core themes include the interaction between global capitalist structures and national economic policies, the rise of populist social movements, and the critique of dependency theory's methodology.
What is the core objective of the research?
The objective is to determine if Cardoso and Faletto’s structural-historical approach remains a useful tool for understanding development, while acknowledging its blind spots regarding political and cultural shifts.
Which methodology is employed in this study?
The study employs a theoretical analysis of dependency literature combined with a qualitative case study approach to examine recent political and economic events in Bolivia.
What does the main body of the work cover?
It covers the theoretical roots of dependency in International Relations, a critical review of Cardoso and Faletto’s seminal work, and an empirical look at the transition in Bolivia from neoliberal reforms to the "Andean capitalism" envisioned by Evo Morales.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include Dependency Theory, Bolivia, Neoliberalism, Social Movements, Evo Morales, Structuralism, and Political Economy.
How does the author evaluate the "dependency" situation in Bolivia?
The author highlights how Bolivia's economy is shaped by the export of raw materials and how the influence of international financial institutions has historically dictated its economic policy agenda.
What criticism does the author level against Cardoso and Faletto?
The author argues that they overlook the power of culture and discourse, and that their model is not falsifiable because they are reluctant to empirically measure "degrees of dependency."
What is meant by the term "capitalismo Andino-Amazónico"?
It refers to the model proposed by the Morales administration that seeks to integrate traditional, communitarian forms of production while moving away from the pure neoliberal agenda of the Washington consensus.
- Quote paper
- Nora Anton (Author), 2006, Cardoso and Faletto's "Dependency and development in Latin America" - A Bolivian perspective, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/85362
