Comparing Modernization and Dependency Theories

Comparison between Modernization and Dependency Theories in Explaining Global Inequality

The core nations continue accumulating wealth while the peripheral nations struggle to overcome the cycle of poverty. The difference is best explained by global inequality, where a few nations can afford to provide their citizens with all basic needs, while others struggle to offer similar services to their citizens. The distribution of wealth, income, and opportunities is impaired in the global arena as the core nations remain impactful while the peripheral nations are dependent on the core nations for survival. The rampant inequality explains why the peripheral nations struggle with poverty, political instability, and economic stagnation (Treacy, 2022). The theoretical frameworks of the modernization and dependency theories are critical in defining the concept of global inequality using evidence and assumptions. For modernist theorists, global inequality arises from differences in developmental milestones among nations. In contrast, dependency theorists argue that global inequality is a product of external factors, notably the historical exploitation of the peripheral nations by colonization. While both theories have their strengths, assumptions, and weaknesses, the dependency theory is more logical in explaining global inequality than the modernization theory.

To begin with, modernization theory focuses on internal factors within nations to explain their development status. According to Warf (2025), the basis of modernization theory is that societies follow a linear path, from traditional to contemporary societies. In such an assumption, the West serves as the model for other nations because it is a modern society. It is the main reason it provides developing nations with aid and investment to help them become developed. This theory was developed following World War II as the West sought to reconstruct global order. The aim was to promote capitalism, with people like Walt W. Rostow proposing models like the “Stages of Economic Growth”, which suggests that societies develop through a linear path from traditional to advanced economies (Mohammed & Ibrahim, 2023, p.118). The implication is that developing nations are in their early progression to advanced economies. The assumption that the development of nations is a universal path forms the basis for the modernization theory. Modernist theorists argue that collective societies must adopt rationalism and individualism to advance economically (Bugden, 2022). They believe that underdeveloped nations could gain economic progress through technological innovation, industrialization, and education. They suggest that economic and social modernization are the underlying factors that can stabilize underdeveloped nations.

The strengths of the modernization theory are that it emphasizes change and agency. The assumption that societies can transform when they have access to education, reforms, and industrialization. Singh (2022) notes that the concept of Asian tigers mirrors Western modernization, which explains why nations such as Korea and Singapore have attained rapid economic growth. The suggestion is that underdeveloped nations can achieve global equality by following the Western modernization model. However, the theory has limitations, such as assuming that Western modernization is a universally superior alternative to cultural development models. Besides, it also negates colonization's impact on derailing developing nations' economic development. Slavery and exploitation have been central aspects in shaping the underdevelopment of most developing nations. Besides, modernist theorists ignore that not all nations that adopted the Western model of modernization succeeded. External constraints, such as debt dependency in African nations, have been critical in impairing their development despite adopting the Western modernization model.

On the contrary, the dependency theory outlines that global inequality results from an exploitative relationship between the peripheral nations and the wealthy ones. The exploitation of the peripheral nations arises from colonialism, which paved the way for wealthy nations from the West to obtain cheap raw materials and labor from these nations. However, the poorer nations must purchase finished products at a high cost, showcasing the unfair trade terms involved. The result is the peripheral nations being engaged in a cycle of debt and perpetual economic dependence, challenging their industrialization. The dependency theory arose due to the limitations of the modernization theory in explaining the actual reason for global inequality. Dependency theorists argue that the history of colonialism and the capitalist system are the main reasons for global inequality, making it structural and relational (Kvangraven, 2023). These theorists do not blame internal cultural or institutional deficits for underdevelopment like the modernization theory, but instead the exploitative relationship between the peripheral and core nations. The core nations dominate international trade and technology while using the peripheral nations for cheap raw materials and labor. It is the main reason why Cairó-i-Céspedes and Palacios Cívico (2022) indicate that the core nations' development depends on the peripheral nations' underdevelopment. The dependency theorists suggest that the dependence on foreign investment and technology deems efforts of the peripheral to industrialize. Besides, peripheral nations are prone to price fluctuations in the international markets due to the core nations' dominant nature.

Dependency theory's main strength is its ability to rely upon structural analysis to provide a logical explanation for global inequality's presence and continued nature. Its focus on historical exploitation, notably colonization and unequal trade patterns, is critical in explaining the contemporary under-development of the peripheral nations. Based on Treacy (2022), Latin America is a perfect example of such exploitation as it relies upon commodity exports to sustain its population, a trend established during colonial times to foster economic dependence. Additionally, the core nations rely strategically on neocolonialism as they use Multinational Corporations to access cheap raw materials and labor from the peripheral nations. It is the main reason Treacy (2022) observes that exploitative extraction and political instability are caused by the core nations' need for raw materials and cheap labor. The theory is purposeful in providing real-world examples that explain why peripheral nations may continue to struggle to achieve industrialization as long as they embrace the Western model of modernization. However, the theory has a weakness in its emphasis on structural constraints, which paints peripheral nations as powerless, ignores the corrupt nature of the underdeveloped nations, and generalizes all peripheral nations as struggling economically. Many nations, such as China, have broken free from the dependency structures that the theory assumed when making generalizations.

The basic difference between modernization and dependency theories is that the former focuses on internal factors while the latter focuses on external ones. Modernist theorists argue that if the peripheral nations can focus on education, obtaining advanced technology, and enhancing their cultural values, they can become modernized. On the contrary, the dependency theorists argue that external factors such as colonization, neo-colonization, unequal trade patterns, and foreign exploitative are central to the lack of industrialization in peripheral nations. The argument that adopting the Western model of modernization can help the peripheral nations advance economically is misguided, as dependency theorists indicate that their subordinate position in the global market is a main limiting factor. Therefore, while modernist theorists are optimistic about a possible advancement of the peripheral, the dependency theorists are pessimistic and provide a structural critique of capitalism.

Nonetheless, while modernist theorists provide hope for the peripheral nations, the dependency theorists provide a better argument explaining the main cause of global inequality. Modernist theorists assume that all nations follow a linear path in achieving development, which is an assumption that negates the effect of external factors in influencing development. The factors of foreign dependency and payment of endless debts make the peripheral nations unable to realize development easily. In the global economic system, dependency theorists are logical in showcasing how the peripheral nations are underdeveloped. They argue that the core nations seek value in the peripheral nations and extract it for their profitability and economic growth.

Although modernization and tendency theories contrast each other in their perspectives about global inequality, considering both the internal and external factors is more reliable in obtaining a comprehensive understanding of global inequality. The internal factors, such as a lack of technology and limited education, make nations lag in economic development in the global world. In addition, external factors such as neo-colonization affect the ability of peripheral nations to have independence and make decisions that positively impact their economies. As such, insights from these theories can help the global world work on uplifting each other by eliminating exploitative and dependency behaviors that affect nations' development.