Frank Underdevelopment Dependency

1.0 Introduction

This undertaking study looks to the theories, constructs and surveies of the well-known German prolific and controversial development Economist and Sociologist of post-war epoch, ‘Andre Gunder Frank’ . Frank was best known as an early advocate and laminitis of thedependence theory, which maintained that rich, developed states gained from hapless, under-developed states ; so long as they remained in the international capitalist system ( Economy Professor, 2006 ) .

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

This study will concentrate chiefly on the apprehension and analysis of the most important constructs and theories of Frank on Underdevelopment ; thenceforth his constructs will be applied to states of Latin America and Asia, which were the most affected from the pestilence of Underdevelopment.

Get aid with your essay from our adept essay authors…

2.0 Preface of Andre G Frank theories

Frank is considered to be one of the major laminitiss of the universe system theory along with Immanuel Wallerstein, Samir Amin and Giovanni Arrighi. He is the writer of many plants in universe system and universe accretion. Andre Gunder Frank was interested in the procedures of capital accretion in Latin America and other parts, such as Asia. These parts were analyzed by Frank within the universe context.

The name of Frank is closely connected with the development and dependence theories. He is the writer of really interesting publications and books devoted to the connexion between economically developed states and developing states. When Andre Gunder Frank wrote hisCapitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin AmericaandThe Development of Underdevelopmenthe was influenced by the radical thoughts in Latin America and some other states at that period. Bing a societal scientist, Andre Gunder Frank was interested in multiple topics, events, subjects, but he is considered to be one of the major subscribers to the subject ‘development of underdevelopment’anduniverse system theory. His analysis of modern-day place of some states has influenced the sociology scientific discipline.

He was one of the research workers who furthered the development and dependence theories. In his bookCapitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin AmericaAndre Frank has shown his extremist place towards development and underdevelopment. He wrote that the universe and national capitalist economy has generated underdevelopment in the yesteryear, and still produces underdevelopment at present. ( Frank, 1967a ) Andre Gunder Frank has expressed an sentiment that the economically developed states were undeveloped but non developing. He believed that the present underdevelopment of a state is the result of its historical development in the past and at present, and the consequence of its dealingss with metropolitan states ( Frank 1966, pp. 17-31 ) .

Frank was the first scientist who realized the significance of the universe economic system. He understood that there is the possibility of independent development among the states in the South:

‘The importance of the cardinal subject of the universe economic system and of its mutuality … has become of all time stronger. What has changed is my belief, which was mostly inexplicit in the thought of dependance, that a province of independency, or at least non-dependence, could be achieved through de-linking from the universe economic system through conjunct political actions in the Third World states or parts. On this last issue, I suppose I have changed the most, particularly since the putsch in Chile. Experience has shown it to be highly hard, if non impossible, for voluntarist political action to de-link peculiar states from universe economy’ ( Kay 1989, p.1181 ) .

2.1 Development and Dependency theories

The development theory unites several theories, which province that some good alterations in a peculiar society are to be achieved for the common benefit. These theories ( Modernization theory, Dependency theory, World Systems theory, and State theory ) are based on a assortment of societal scientific attacks and subjects.

Frank criticized the modernisation theory, which was the cardinal position in sociology at that period of clip. He called in inquiry the major premises of the modernisation thesis elaborated by Talcott Parsons, Bert Hoselitz, Wilbert Moore, Everret Hagen, Daniel Lerner, David McClelland and Walt Whitman Rostow. Furthermore, Frank criticized the thesis which stated that ‘the developing states with their traditional societies would bit by bit go developed and modern states by prosecuting with the developed capitalist economic systems and modern societies’ ( Frank, 1967b, pp. 20–73 ) . Therefore, he has presented the new analysis of the relationships between economically developed and developing states.

Dependency theory is a portion of the development theory, which was elaborated after the modernisation theory. The dependence theory is based on the thought that the effects of colonialism on undeveloped states must be taken into consideration when further development is expected to take topographic point. Dependency theory is tightly connected with Latin America. Scientists have recognized Frank’s part to dependency theory. Andre Gunder Frank was a bookman who developed and enriched the research of this theory. He stressed that the modernisation theory was a procedure via which developing states became more dependent upon economically developed states. Furthermore, the dependence theory divided all states into several classs harmonizing to their degree of development. This theory examines states by spliting them into fringe and centre provinces: the Centre consists of the already developed and colonising states, whereas the fringe consists of the development and colonised states.

Dependency theory became a tool for political commentary and a model of accounts. Frank was a scientist who has found the basic constructs for the dependence theory. His invention to the universe system theory and to the development theory was based on the incorporation and the connexion between economically developed and developing states with the aid of the impression of capitalist economy and all the economic, political, societal and cultural alterations which became the effects of the visual aspect of capitalist economy dealingss.

2.2 The Development of Underdevelopment Theory

In his bookThe Development of Underdevelopment( Development Studies, 1966, p. 27 ) Frank stated: “Since the historical experience of the colonial and developing states has provably been rather different, available theory hence fails to reflect the yesteryear of the developing portion of the universe wholly, and reflects the yesteryear of the universe as a whole merely in portion. More of import, our ignorance of the history of these developing states leads us to presume that their yesteryear and so their present resemble earlier phases of the history of the now economically developed states. More surveies of development and underdevelopment fail to take history of the economic and other dealingss between the city and its economic settlements throughout the history of the mercantilist and capitalist system.”

Frank gave accent to the fact that, in his belief every state passes through all the phases of development, and every phase of this procedure will change in clip, depending on the place of the state. Besides, he stressed that there is no construct of ‘an underdeveloped country’ if we talk about the economically developed states – these are states which were at one point simply undeveloped, but non developing: “… economic development occurs in a sequence of capitalist phases and … today’s developing states are still in a phase … of history through which the now developed states passed long ago. … underdevelopment is non original or traditional and that neither the past nor the nowadays of the developing states resembles in any of import regard the yesteryear of the now developed states. The now developed states were ne’er underdeveloped, though they may hold been undeveloped” ( Development Studies p. 28 ) . The impression of ‘the development of underdevelopment’ which he has elaborated during the research is the chief construct in the development theory ( Kay, 1989, p. 1180 ) .

Frank pointed out that the modern-day underdevelopment place of a state is the consequence of its economic, cultural, political and societal characteristic characteristics. Furthermore, the underdevelopment as the consequence of yesteryear and present dealingss is an built-in portion of the universe construction: “… present underdevelopment of Latin America is the consequence of its centuries-long engagement in the procedure of universe capitalist development…” ( Development Studies, p. 30 ) . He pointed out that the capitalist system has developed quickly during the last centuries and its consequence has reached the most stray parts of the developing universe. Furthermore, the metropolis-satellite dealingss have been spread in the Latin American settlements and states, holding structured the economic, political, and societal life of these states. Frank has come to a really interesting decision that underdevelopment is generated by the historical procedure which has generated economic development and the development of capitalist economy. “The other sort of isolation which tends to corroborate the 2nd hypothesis is the geographic and economic isolation of parts which at one clip were comparatively decrepit tied to and ill integrated into the mercantilist and capitalist system” ( Development Studies, p. 31-33 ) . Therefore, the two types of states are connected with each other through development and colonisation. Frank has found the connexion between the development of the Centre and the fringe states.

Besides this, Andre Gunder Frank explained in his bookThe Development of Underdevelopment,that Latin America and other similar states are developing states owing to the foreign competition, and the debut of free trade, which is in the involvement of the governing groups of the economically developed states: “… in Latin America it was these parts, which initiated and experienced the most promising self-generating economic development of the classical industrial capitalist type. The most of import regional instances likely are Tucuman and Asuncion, every bit good as … Mendoza and Rosario…” ( Development Studies, p. 33 ) . The now developing states have non had the chance to go on developing in the conditions of turning capitalist economy. Consequently, the development of these states has had to be sacrificed for that of others. Therefore, the modern-day underdevelopment of certain states is connected with their close ties with now economically developed states, which have become economically developed owing to these developing states in the yesteryear, and which have abandoned them when the wealth of their mines, natural stuffs and natural resources disappeared.

3.0 Frank’s Underdevelopment Theories with Relation to Latin America and Asia

3.1 Introduction

The constructs of Frank’s surveies onDevelopment of Underdevelopmentand chiefly his Calciferolependency Theoryare known for the manner Frank applied them to Latin American states, with relation to Western European Countries and the United States.

3.2 Latin America

Frank ( 1966 ) believed Latin America to be a victim of capitalist economy ; holding been integrated into the universe capitalist system since the beginning of the 16th century. Although Sao Paolo has established the largest in Latin America, this has non helped the remainder of Brazil to develop, but has deepened their underdevelopment. Furthermore, Frank maintained that although the development and industrialization of Sao Paolo may hold been carried out independently in the beginning, it is progressively get downing to come in the clasp of the universe capitalist system, which is presenting a lifting figure of limitations for possibilities of farther development of the metropolis.

When composing about Latin America, Frank ( 1969, p. 432 ) made mention to a “metropolis-satellite” construction. This, he believed, is what the universe market for goods, capital, and the international division of labor, have produced. This description portrays Frank’s belief that the developed, metropolitan states take, or “suck” all of the capital or economic excess from the other states, or ‘satellites, ’ in order to “feed” and increase their ain development, but push the development of these other states further down, finally into an developing province. Although these states may merely hold been undeveloped to get down with, the intervention of the more developed states has proved to be farther detrimental than had they non interfered, or ‘helped, ’ at all.

There are several grounds for which the states of Latin America are being exploited by developed states. This development began in the 18Thursdaycentury, and some of the grounds for development included their natural resources ; gold and Ag, from Mexico, Peru, and Brazil ; and the sugar and java besides produced in Brazil. The sugar production by slaves in Brazil benefited Europe both at place, and when in competition with others abroad, such as Asia. During the 19Thursdaycentury, peculiarly towards the terminal of it, Brazil continued to progressively export sugar and java, while Mexico, Peru, and Chile resumed excavation, and Argentina exported wheat and meat for Britain and Europe ( Frank, 1992 ) . With so many natural stuffs and produced goods to offer, such an developing state is susceptible to being taken advantage of by those states which need them, and have the money and power to work whoever or whatever gets in the manner of them obtaining what they want or need.

The underdevelopment of Latin America can besides be seen to profit developed states in the signifier of labor ; this includes labor which has been brought to the developed states, every bit good as labor in the developing state. Specifically Latapi and Martin ( no day of the month ) mentioned Mexican immigrants trying to get away their universe of underdevelopment by migrating to the United States, but being used by the United States for inexpensive labor. These high Numberss of immigrants lead to an addition in the United States’ productiveness, and besides the net benefit received due to higher Numberss of immigrants take downing the rewards of other immigrant workers.

3.3 Asia

Equally good as Latin America, the underdevelopment of states in cardinal Asia had besides been the topic of much of Frank’s theories on underdevelopment. One such state specifically was China, which was believed to be one of the taking economically developed states between 1400 and 1800 ( Frank, 2005 ) . Since its decolonization and release in 1949, China has been predicted to recover its high place in the universe economic system, and this is the ground behind Frank’s book ‘ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asiatic Age.’ In the book, Frank draws upon the words of Smith ( 1776 ) ; “China is a much richer state than any portion of Europe” ( Frank, 1998, p. 13 ) . As Frank believed that Asia, and in peculiar China, is get downing to repossess its topographic point amongst the top participants of the economically developed universe ; he besides believed that the history of Asia should besides be right portrayed, hence the above book was written.

Frank was outspoken in that his ideas of universe history, in peculiar concerning Asia, were that they have been falsely portrayed by Europe. The alleged history of economic development is believed to be a Eurocentric portraiture which Frank claimed denies the existent history of the universe and neglects most of human world ; every bit good as changing the perceptual experience of Europe’s history. That is to state, history has been portrayed in such a manner so as to concentrate on the people and civilization of Europe, doing it look about superior to others, including that of Asia. China’s bead from its high rates of development, to its current undeveloped state of affairs, is seen to be the consequence of development on behalf of already developed states, such as those of Europe ( Frank, 2005 ) .

Furthermore, Frank stated that “underdevelopment is non traditional… it is the consequence of dependent capitalist development of underdevelopment” ( Frank, 2005 ) . Frank’s belief once more stems from the statements and grounds which imply that China was no more traditional than Europe between its period of peak economic system ( from 1400 to 1800 ) , and that it was in fact greater, and more developed than Europe. The above quotation mark could be interpreted to intend that underdevelopment is non the consequence of a deficiency of development of certain states ; but the consequence of the intervention of developed states which are dependent on undeveloped states. These developed states can merely stay so if the undeveloped states remain undeveloped ; therefore they encourage the development of their undevelopment. This accordingly causes the undeveloped states to go classed as developing states, as their attempts to go developed are really hindered by developed states, decreasing any hope they may hold had of going modern.

At the same clip, Frank ( 2005 ) argued to the consequence that capitalist economy does non in fact have any existent being in the universe, but is merely an political orientation. Although this contradicts his earlier work, he now states that the political orientation of capitalist economy was merely created in order to do ill-defined universe economical history, and it continues to make so for contemporary universe economic science. Frank shared in the positions of Samir Amin, in that they both believed the manner for China, every bit good as any other state, to be released from all signifiers of dependance, was to interrupt all links and connexions from the external universe capitalist economic system, and to interrupt free from the internal socialism which were believed to be the root causes of dependance.

This theory nevertheless was merely possible, so to talk, in theory. Frank continued to reflect on his ain beliefs by claiming that to the present twenty-four hours no state has managed to go to the full free from dependance, merely the South East Asiatic Tigers had managed to make so partly, and even they were still capable to fiscal jobs. Frank concluded that there has non been a definite and clear reply given as to what to make if and when freedom from dependance would of all time happen.

Furthermore, Frank highlighted his unfavorable judgment of theModernisation Theory, which stated that any state could go modernised with the aid of those states which are already modernised. He quoted ; “The Europeans did non make anything – allow alone ‘modernize’ – by themselves” ( Frank, 2005 ) . Using Europe as an illustration, he argued that the modernization theory merely applies to certain states ; shown by the fact that although Europe was having really inexpensive money in the signifier of dollars from America, this type of aid was non made available to Asia. He continued to implement theDependency Theorywhich states that developed states have become so, by depending on developing states ; as Europe has come to depend on the inexpensive labor it uses from Asia. Frank’s accent was that Europe uses developing states like China as a measure ladder in order to derive, and maintain, a good foot-hold in the modern universe ( Frank, 2005 ) .

The development of China by developed states can besides be seen by looking at the United States. An illustration given by The National Labor Committee ( 2006 ) is the findings of an probe of 16 mills in China, bring forthing a big figure of different points, such as auto stereos, TVs, motorcycles, places, gym shoes, vesture, chapeaus, and bags, for some of the largest companies in the United States, viz. Wal-Mart, Nike, Huffy, and others. The findings highlight the dismaying conditions under which some people have to work, such as one mill where workers forced to work 12 to 14 hours a twenty-four hours, 7 yearss a hebdomad, with lone one twenty-four hours off a month, at an mean pay of 3 cents an hr. The low rewards did non give workers any benefit, as they still ended up in debt to the company. Workers were fed two repasts a twenty-four hours, and 16 workers were housed in one little residence hall. Some workers could non even afford the coach menu to go forth the mill in order to look for another occupation, and in the past any protest about the working conditions has led to 800 workers losing their occupations.

This is a premier illustration of what Frank has referred to as the development of developing states by developed states. Without this type of development, states like those of the United States would non be able to increase their net income borders and go every bit rich as they are.

Another illustration in Asia is Japan, which is believed a quickly modernising state, peculiarly towards the terminal of the 19Thursdaycentury. This was done peculiarly with the usage of “technical and scientific preparation and research, ” and this type of instruction is what is believed to be an indispensable factor for developing states. The effects of this can be seen by the South East Asiatic Tigers, as mentioned by Frank, who are increasing in degrees of modernization and economic development due to this type of preparation and instruction. Australia, as a developed state, has been thought to hold benefit by supplying some of this preparation for states like Japan, every bit good as others. However, it has been argued that unless Australia improves its substructure, states in Asia will justly make up one’s mind that they no longer necessitate the aid of developed states like Australia, and can make a better occupation themselves. In relation to Frank’s theories, this can be seen support to his positions of the Dependency Theory. Blakey ( 1997 ) stated that Australia is profiting from the developing states ; but as these developing states are going more and more independent and modernised, they may no longer necessitate the alleged ‘help’ of these states.

Blakey ( 1997 ) besides claims that Great Britain’s industrial society is no longer every bit advanced as it used to be ; fabrication and scientific discipline are now believed to be in diminution. This could be said to be the consequence of underdeveloping states going more independent ; the effect of which is the economic system of the developed states falling to those degrees which the developing states have had to cover with for old ages.

Another societal theoretician who agrees with Frank is Glyn who, as highlighted in an interview by Hoveman ( 2006 ) , claims that Japan’s deficiency of economic betterment in the last 15 old ages has been welcomed by Europe and the US. In add-on, Glyn states that China’s dramatic rise in economic development could turn out to be unsafe for already developed states, such as the United States, due to the fact that the Chinese pecuniary governments buy big sums of dollars. Should they of all time halt, the value of the dollar would fall dramatically ; this would ensue in the United States holding to increase involvement rates to forestall rising prices rates from lifting dramatically. This could so in bend lead to, at the really least, the danger of lifting economic development coming to an disconnected arrest for the United States ; the menace of ‘stagnation.

4.0 Conclusion / Discussion

On the whole, what is made apparent in this study is that in Andre Gunder Frank ‘s thesis, the development of the Centre non merely involves, but requires the underdevelopment of the antecedently undeveloped fringe. This is because development has depended upon resources which are stolen from the fringe, and resources which are exploited ; every bit good as people which are exploited. At the same clip the fringe becomes progressively dependent upon the Centre for certain important “ modern ” resources, including engineering and cognition ( Bronferbenner, 1972 ) . Frank ‘s early guess onThe Development of Underdevelopmentwas superb and important for the outgrowth of both the dependence theory and the world-system paradigm. His attempts at consistently associating the external economic behavior of the socialist confederation to the larger capitalist division of labor, has been instrumental in our apprehension of non merely the nature and function of bing socialisms, but the overall kineticss of the universe economic system ( Bergesen, 1982 ) . In his position, Asia and Latin America have really developed underdevelopment ; whereas Europe, North America, and Australia have accumulated capital at the disbursal of the fringe. This accretion of capital has been made possible through the procedure of unequal exchange between parts, and the transmutation internally of parts at the productive, societal, and political degrees.

Frank applied his theories of development to assorted states affected by underdevelopment ; specifically those of Latin America and Asia. These nevertheless are merely to call a few ; his theories could be applied to many other developing states. Frank viewed the present universe as a manifestation of the laterality the Centre city has over the dependent fringe ; affecting unequal exchange and development.

The development of the people, and of the natural resources and natural stuffs of these states, is what Frank believed to be the key behind his Dependency Theory. He asserted that developed states such as Britain, Australia, have merely received the labels of being ‘developed countries’ because of their dependance on these developing states. The low rewards given to workers of these developing states, together with the natural resources and natural stuff which are either stolen or bought at exorbitantly low monetary values, are all a combination of what allow the developed states to hold such big borders of net income. These high sums of net income can so be reinvested in order to increase the wealths of the states further ; all at the disbursal of developing states.

That is to state, if developed states did non work developing states, so in Frank’s positions they would non be such a thing as an ‘underdeveloped county ; ’ all states which have non become economically developed, would merely be undeveloped. The term undeveloped at least allows a state the chance to go developed ; whereas underdeveloped implies it can ne’er go developed due to the go oning development of these developed states.


Bergesen, A. ( 1982 ) Reviewed Work: ‘Crisis: In the World Economy, ’ by Andre Gunder Frank.Contemporary Sociology. 11 ( 1 ) , pp. 55-56.

Blakey, L. ( 1997 ) ‘The Death of Australian Science and Technology, ’ABC Radio National[ online ] . Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: // ( Accessed 27 April 2007 ) .

Bronfenbrenner, M. ( 1979 ) World Accumulation, 1492-1789. By Andre Gunder Frank.Journal of Economic Literature. 17 ( 4 ) , pp. 1460-1461.

Development Surveies: Thinking about Development, reprinted in full from Monthly Review September ( 1966 ) , pp. 27-37.

Economy Professor ( 2006 )Andre Gunder Frank.Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: // ( Accessed 17 April 2007 ) .

Frank, A. G. ( 1966 )The Development of Underdevelopment. Monthly Review 18 ( 4 ) , pp. 17–37.

Frank, A.G. ( 1967a )Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical Surveies of Chile and Brazil,New York, Monthly Review Press.

Frank, A.G. ( 1967b )Sociology of Development and Underdevelopment of Sociology, Catalyst 3: pp. 20–73.

Frank, A. G. ( 1969 ) ‘Latin America: Underdevelopment or Revolution, ’The Economic Journal, 81 ( 322 ) , pp. 432-434.

Frank, A.G. ( 1992 ) ‘Latin America at the Margin of World System History, ’The Andre Gunder Frank Official Website. Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: // ( Accessed 29 April 2007 ) .

Frank, A. G. ( 1998 )ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asiatic Age. Berkeley, University of California Press.

Frank, A. G. ( 2005 ) ‘Personal Research Interests for Public Policy Practice, ’The Andre Gunder Frank Official Website. Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: // ( Accessed 26 March 2007 ) .

Hoveman, R. ( 2006 )The Socialist Review. Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: // articlenumber=9792 ( Accessed 27 April 2007 ) .

Kay, C. ( 1989 ) ‘Andre Gunder Frank: From the ‘Development of Underdevelopment’ to the ‘World System.’ ’Development and Change, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 1177-1183Blackwell Synergy[ Online ] . Available at:

hypertext transfer protocol: // ( Accessed 14ThursdayApril 2007 ) .

Latapi, A. E. and Martin, S. ( no day of the month )Mexico – U.S. Migration Management A Binational Approach. Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: // ( Accessed 29 April ) .

The National Labor Committee ( 2006 )The Role of US Companies in Denying Human and Worker Rights. Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: // ( Accessed 30 April ) .