Social Sciences
Modernisation Theory
Modernisation Theory is a perspective that emerged in the mid-20th century, aiming to explain the process of societal development in non-Western countries. It suggests that traditional societies can progress through stages of modernisation by adopting Western values, technology, and institutions. The theory has been critiqued for its ethnocentric assumptions and oversimplification of complex social change processes.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
10 Key excerpts on "Modernisation Theory"
eBook - PDFUnfinished Agenda
The Dynamics Of Modernization In Developing Nations
- Manning Nash(Author)
- 2019(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
1 Modernization: Meanings Old and New The Meanings of Modernization Modernization. The very word conjures a whole series of images of societies and cultures, visions of historical trajectories, strong passions of hope and despair, and not least a social science melee over the reality, utility, and meaning of the concept itself. These reactions and responses are not strange or unexpected. Modernization is the sort of idea that crosscuts all of the established branches of social science, and it is studied by all of them-anthropology, sociology, psychology, economics, geography, and history. Further, it can be shown that modernization (in the various older terms for it-the great transformation, the rise of capitalism, the evolution of society, the shift from status to contract, the movement from gese/lschaft to gemeinschaft and the change from traditional to modern) is the chief reason the social sciences as such came into being and has from these beginnings been the major concern of these intellectual enter-prises. In the world outside the groves of academe, modernization is an ideological, political, bureaucratic, mythic, and messianic idea (not that any of these elements are absent from the academic intellectual whose concern is chiefly the analysis of modernization). Persons of action, persons of affairs, the international agencies, and not least of all, the bulk of the world's population have a stake in the social definition of what modernization is, how it comes about, and what the real costs and benefits are in choosing one path over another-or if it is even possible to opt for something else and still remain socially viable in a world that is becoming more and more economically interdependent, where decisions in remote metropolitan centers may affect the lives of millions in the wet rice backlands of some Asian nation, or in Africa and Latin America. 1
eBook - PDFSocial Theory and Modernity
Critique, Dissent, and Revolution
- Timothy W. Luke(Author)
- 1990(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications, Inc(Publisher)
a culture that emphasizes the values of science, knowledge and achievement. 30 [Modernization of] the world culture [is] based on advanced technology and the spirit of science, on a rational view of life, a secular approach to social relations. 31 Modernization, then, consists of the growth and diffusion of a set of institutions rooted in the transformation of the economy by means of technology. 32 Here modernization is used primarily with regard to the spread and use of industrial-type roles in non-industrial settings. 33 Industrialization is that aspect of modernization so powerful in its conse-quences that it alters dysfunctional social institutions and customs by creating new roles and social institutions on the use of the machine. 34 By industrialization I refer to economic changes brought about by a tech-nology based on inanimate sources of power as well as on the continuous development of applied scientific research. Modernization . . . refers to all those social and political changes that accompanied industrialization in many countries of Western civilization. 35 235 Discourses of Modernization and Development All of the core's cherished social myths—the belief in social advance-ment through science, a faith in collective improvement through expand-ing knowledge, the desire to master nature to improve human life, and the accomplishment of better living through technology—are articulated in these passages. However, few of the benefits of these myths accrue for the periphery. The technocratic quality of modernization and develop-ment theory mystifies the intrusion of the world capitalist economy and the machine process into the underdeveloped world with technological rationality spreading and diffusing into nonindustrial settings. The core, having already undergone the reconstitution of its social fabric by the capitalist machine process, now rationally manages the periphery's reorganization by capitalist industry to serve its own interests and needs.
eBook - ePubPolitical Development Theory
The Contemporary Debate
- Richard Higgott(Author)
- 2005(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
2From Modernisation Theory to Public Policy: Continuity and Change in the Political Science of Political DevelopmentIt was argued in Chapter 1 that the study of underdevelopment has been marked by a polarisation into two broadly based schools of thought. Despite the recognised weakness of applying such dichotomous classifications, such an approach enables us to discuss not only those debates that exist between schools of thought, but also within those schools of thought and, perhaps more importantly, the processes of transformation that each school has undergone over time. What follows in this chapter, therefore, is an exposition and critique of the recent non-Marxist literature on the politics of development in an effort to establish the clear links that exist between Modernisation Theory of the 1960s and that work which throughout the 1970s has come to emphasise public choice and policy analysis in the broader context of a ‘new political econom’. Sticking closely to the historiographical form of analysis outlined in Chapter 1 , it will be argued that: (1) the research of the 1970s reflects a greater deal of continuity (both conceptual and methodological) with the earlier work than is often assumed, (2) efforts to incorporate or accommodate the early inadequacies of Modernisation Theory have not been successful, and (3) much of the recent literature raises substantial problems in its own right.It is neither possible nor necessary to review Modernisation Theory here; its general characteristics, guides to primary sources in the field and critiques are to be found in numerous survey articles (Bernstein 1971; Frank 1971; Tipps 1973; Higgott 1978). Rather, the intent is to examine the recent literature of North American political science concerned with political development, no matter how the concept is defined. Such a focus allows us to trace the critiques, reactions and modifications to Modernisation Theory over the last two decades. Consequently, the first section of this chapter, borrowing on the work of Robert Packenham (1973) and Ronald Rogowski (1978), delimits a simple threefold classification of political science: legal formalism, behaviouralism and post-behaviouralism. The emphasis is on the second period and what is seen as its transformation into the third. For the purpose of this discussion a further division is also required. The literature of political development, as an integral part of behavioural political science, has been divided into two subsections: that produced between the mid-1950s and the mid-1960s and between the mid-1960s and 1971.
eBook - PDF- Gert Spaargaren, Arthur P J Mol, Frederick H Buttel, Gert Spaargaren, Arthur P J Mol, Frederick H Buttel(Authors)
- 2000(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications Ltd(Publisher)
3 Ecological Modernization Theory and the Changing Discourse on Environment and Modernity Gert Spaargaren Introduction The central task for environmental sociologists is to relate the changing environ-mental profile of modernity to the changing character of modem societies them-selves. In doing so environmental sociologists can profit from insights which result from the debate on 'modernization theory' within the social sciences. This holds true even when the confrontation with the environmental crisis brings out the need for a partial de- and reconstruction of modernization theory in its conventional form, be it Parsonian or not. In this contribution - and in constant debate with modernization theory -1 try to show the relevance of various theoretical perspec-tives in environmental sociology in the context of the broader environmental discourse in modern societies from the seventies onward. It will be shown that changing theoretical perspectives go hand in hand with changing views on the relationship between environment and economic growth, on the role of science and technology and on the role of both governmental and non-governmental actors. We will distinguish between three different periods or phases in the environmental discourse, corresponding with three different perspectives on environment and modernity: the period of the 'limits to growth debate', when de-modernization theories dominated within environmental sociology; the period of the 'sustainable development debate', mirrored within environmental sociology by the dominant position of the ecological modernization theory; and the period of the 'global environmental change debate', bringing to the fore theoretical perspectives which can be referred to as reflexive modernity theory.
eBook - PDFGlobal Modernization
Rethinking the Project of Modernity
- Alberto Martinelli(Author)
- 2005(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications Ltd(Publisher)
In the post-1945 period the United States and the Soviet Union both sought to draw within their spheres of influence the newly-independent states of Asia and Africa with economic aid, technical assistance and political propaganda. Even the United Nations and other international organizations launched aid programs for development and technological assistance. Such an international context created a favorable terrain for studies and research on the requirements and models for development and for consultancy work on the policies of governments of emerging countries, so much so that there was a widespread conviction that the process of industrialization must be brought about by suitable public policies and commensurate international aid. Economists were the first and the most active of the social scientists, but American sociologists and political scientists followed afterwards with the conviction that economic interpretations should be integrated with analysis of the cultural and institutional factors influencing the processes and outcomes of economic development policies. The sociological and political studies were The Classic Theory of Modernization 29 generally located within the fundamental paradigms of evolutionism and structural-functionalism, clearly apparent from the very frequent use of concepts such as adaptation, stage of development, structural differentiation, integration, gradual and continual change, and so forth. Evolutionism was very much embedded in the social science tradition, from the classic sociological formulations of Comte, Spencer and Durkheim to the anthropo-logical ones of Morgan and Kroeber, and the concept of evolution was present, often implicitly, in most modernization studies. Prevailing, in fact, was the idea of a path to modernization that unfolds according to a predetermined sequence of stages, char-acterized by increasing complexity and adaptability to the external environment.
eBook - PDFPerspectives on Modernization
Essays in Memory of Ian Weinberg
- Edward Harvey(Author)
- 2019(Publication Date)
- University of Toronto Press(Publisher)
The Quest for Modernity in Asia and Africa (New York: Free Press, 1963); Myron Weiner (éd.), Modernization, The Dynamics of Growth (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966). See also Cyril E. Black, The Dynamics of Moderni-zation, A Study in Comparative History (New York: Harper & Row, 1966). 26 See J.P. Nettl and Roland Robertson, 'Industrialization, Development or Modernization, 'British Journal of Sociology, 17, no. 3 (September 1966), 274-91. It is ironic that just when social scien-tists were re-examining both the realities in the new nations and their own views, they should be attacked as culture-bound by Moskos and Bell. See Charles C. Moskos, Jr. and Wendell Bell, 'Emerg-ing Nations and Ideologies of American Social Scientists,' American Sociologist, 2, no. 2 (May 1967), 67-72. 27 Ernest Gellner, 'Time and Theory in Social Anthropology, 'Mind, new series 67 (1958), 192. 10 Ian Weinberg change, they might find themselves in this dilemma. Marx consciously took the same direction in the nineteenth century, because in his social and economic theory he knowingly forged a new language in reaction to the liberal philosophers who had gone before him, a language which was avowedly violent, polemical, and destabilizing. M O D E R N I Z A T I O N : T O W A R D S A D E F I N I T I O N If we understand the background to the introduction and use of the term 'moderniza-tion,' a synthetic definition becomes possible. For its definition is rooted in the career of social theory and in the present challenges before social scientists. Modernization is a process of social change which describes the career of new nations since their inde-pendence. As it is used, the term is limited both by geography and by history - the geography and history of colonialism. 28 These new nations are, for the most part, small. 29 They are ruled by elites, generally with a Western education and an orienta-tion to the metropolis.
eBook - PDFInternational Development
Issues and Challenges
- Damien Kingsbury, John McKay, Janet Hunt(Authors)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Red Globe Press(Publisher)
Finally, the question of democracy and freedom raises the question of how far we see development as being a process initiated and implemented by outside forces and actors, or as an essentially an internal transformation fuelled by local initiative and self-help. The emphasis in the field on the role of outside ‘experts’, the inculcation of new and foreign values and methods, and the central role of aid all have conspired to downgrade the role of local mobilization. This is especially true in an era of globalization, when many commenta-tors predict that cultural and economic convergence on some kind of international best practice is bound to take place. In the present era, the whole question of the relationships between globalization and develop-ment theory is opening up as a new battleground in the conflict of ideas 56 International Development and ideologies (see, for example, Jomo and Nagaraj 2001 ; Petras and Veltmeyer 2001 ; Schuurman 2001 ; McKay 2014 ). Theories of modernization None of the complexities, counterarguments or self-doubts introduced in the previous section was allowed to cloud the simple but powerful message espoused by the proponents of modernization theory. During the 1960s and part of the 1970s, within all of the social sciences there appeared studies in aspects of modernization, each couched in the dis-tinctive language and concepts of the particular discipline but all car-rying the same beguiling promise: all nations, however poor, were able, with the implementation of ‘correct’ policies, to achieve a modern standard of living by following exactly the same growth path as that pioneered by the Western nations. Examples of such studies can be found in sociology, geography and political science; however, it was in economics that the seminal work was published, with the appearance of Rostow’s The Stages of Economic Growth (1960). But this is more than just a study in econom-ics, which is part of the reason for its influence over the years.
eBook - PDF- David Jaffee(Author)
- 1998(Publication Date)
- Praeger(Publisher)
These reservations have been incorporated in the theory of the mass society. This theory assumes that rapid social change will have negative psychological effects, increasing the likelihood of unconventional, radical, and violent political behavior. Such instability is regarded as a negative by-product of the traditional-to-modern transition and has resulted in develop- ment theories that prescribe institutional mechanisms aimed at preventing po- tential insurrection. 2 The classical sociological theory of Max Weber also plays a prominent role in the traditional-modern image of social change. The most notable feature of modern society for Weber was the emergence of bureaucratic organization. Bu- reaucratic operating principles, applied to organizations and institutions, were regarded by Weber as the superior and most efficient means for the accomplish- ment of goals. Because the characteristics of bureaucratic organization—clearly defined goals and duties, universal rules and regulations, specialization, meri- tocracy, accountability, rational legal authority—are associated with modern so- ciety and its central institutions, many theories of development prescribe these institutional characteristics and operating procedures as requirements for socio- economic development. The Meaning of Development While the concept of social change tends to be used as a catchall term for any and all forms of change over time within a society, the concept of devel- 6 Levels of Socio-economic Development Theory opment usually refers to some measurable form of progress. The most common measure of development, by far, is gross national product (GNP). GNP measures the total value of goods and services produced by a nation during a single year. For purposes of comparability, GNP is expressed in a common currency, usually dollars, and reported in per capita terms to take into account the size of a nation.
eBook - PDFRemaking Modernity
Politics, History, and Sociology
- Julia Adams, Elisabeth S. Clemens, Ann Shola Orloff, Julia Adams, Elisabeth S. Clemens, Ann Shola Orloff, George Steinmetz(Authors)
- 2005(Publication Date)
- Duke University Press Books(Publisher)
In their essays for Remaking Modernity, the authors have engaged a range of analytic strategies and/or theoretical models in light of more recent so- Introduction 13 ciological research on a process or dimension of historical change. In some cases, there is an obvious continuity between classical theory and contempo-rary research. Given that secularization—including the changing institu-tional relations between church and state and the making of a ‘‘bourgeois’’ and secular self—was identified by Max Weber and others as an important aspect of modernity, for example, how do these claims and assumptions inform recent research? How is current work revealing the limits of these claims and theories? For other themes, the redefinition of key processes is critical. State formation, the transition to capitalism, and professionaliza-tion were originally theorized as European phenomena, so what happens when we widen our frame to take in post-socialist, colonial, or post-colonial states as well? Finally, for some topics, the absence of attention in classical theory is an important feature: how should we reconceptualize theories of social and cultural change in light of research on race, gender, sexuality, nation, and other concepts that were marginalized—or simply unknown— in earlier theoretical debates? We think about these revisions and reformulations under the general heading of ‘‘remaking modernity.’’ The Oxford English Dictionary defines ‘‘modern’’ as ‘‘of or pertaining to the present and recent times, as distin-guished from the remote past.’’ To be modern is to be in the now and (if the metaphor still has life in it) at the cutting edge of history. The concept is a moving index, pointing to everything—and nothing. Sociologists since the first wave have also understood that eternal present as the apex of a develop-mental lineage.
eBook - PDF- Graeme Kirkpatrick(Author)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Red Globe Press(Publisher)
I return to this below. Modernity Theory 53 Communication The third strand within modernity theory to be discussed here also takes its lead from strains in Enlightenment thinking and argues that what defines modern societies is their increased complexity relative to traditional societies. This complexity requires individuals to reflect on how their actions comport with the expectations of society as a whole. Members of traditional society were integrated unreflectively into stable systems of meaning that were not challenged or subject to revision. The endemic change associated with modernity means that finding one’s place becomes increasingly a matter for individuals (Durkheim 1964). Whereas for Enlightenment thinkers the differentiation of science was unambiguously progressive, 8 Mead understood it in more evolutionary terms. The problem of technological change becomes that of main-taining the functional integration of individuals into a social world that is de-stabilized by rapid changes and bereft of the reassurances of tradi-tional authority. In other words, the problem of modernity is that society itself must be kept on a healthy developmental course despite its tend-ency towards convulsions caused by things like technological innovation and increases in complexity of social organization. On the other hand, societies with a more developed technological basis flow from social conditions in which individuals are free to think and experiment for themselves. This positive development presupposes human individuals who have learned from their formative socialization how to be inde-pendent of society, while remaining aware that it has formed them. As the pragmatist philosopher and social psychologist G.H. Mead put it, “A person is a personality because he belongs to a community, because he takes over the institutions of that community into his own conduct” (1967: 162).
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
