When this western model of development is proved to be irrelevant to traditional societies, much of debate around modernization theory is based on its conceptualization that development is a linear process Rostow with a pre- set ultimate aim. The contemporary development icons of the modern world were conceived as the only expected goals of the pre-modern countries. Parsons , heavily drawing upon Max Weber, presented his renowned theory of variables that implies if pre-modern countries want to be modern, they must follow the countries that are already modern.
The idea that learnings from the already modern world are applied in the pre-modern world basically overlooks the truth that human history is a complex one Menou rather than being linear. However, modernization theorists were able to notice later that different countries have different sets of needs as every society is unique but the fact is that they understood the fact not because of the modernization theory but because of their own theory Gilman This notion of linearity of modernization theory is completely unable to explain the non-linear human development phenomenon of the world.
Any guideline to deal with such non- linear aspects of human development is noticeably absent in the theory and, therefore, the modernization approach fails to encapsulate the notion of linearity of modernization. The theory must consider the situations virtually of all countries to be a theory of strongest merit in any debate regarding human development.
Similarly, the theory completely overlooks some crucial issues of humanitarian aspects making the approach problematic. For example, while issues such as equal income distribution, public health and environmental concerns are important considerations for development Dreze and Sen , Sen , they are completely missing in the theory. Interestingly, the exclusion of these issues makes countries appear more modern than they are supposed to be since modernity does not consider equality and other issues but considers only the average national income.
Although Christoff argues that the ecological modernization school of thought includes environmental aspects into development thinking, evidence is not seen to combine them in the modernization approach. Beside the notion of linearity being problematic, the dichotomization of modernity and tradition offers serious critiques for the modernization approach.
This orientation of modernization holds the idea that non- western countries are substandard even though they share the same living standards such as Japan as western countries such as the United States.
Therefore, modernity and tradition are linked and sometimes interdependent, a reality which the modernization approach simply overlooks. By this subjective conceptualization, the modernization approach actually mechanically and impractically divided the world society into two so-called contrasting categories- modern and traditional Yuan Defining traditional societies negatively in relation to modern societies has been a basic objection to many scholars including Bernstein The approach again becomes vulnerable to critiques because of its ignoring of the external influences on social change.
The proponents of modernization theory Inkeles , Parsons , Rostow completely ignore the external influence on societal change by focussing mainly on the internal aspects of societal structure and values.
Tipps suitably notes that economic development, industrialization, rationalization, secularization or whatever the type of change, the process of modernization is functional at the domestic level. He further goes on to explain that modernization theory fails to explain the situation of those countries though the emergence of these countries contributed to the development of the theory.
The final point of why the modernization approach is controversial is that the term modernization itself is ambiguous. Modernization, as Tipps correctly notes, is a term simply superimposed with industrialization, adding nothing to it. He then goes on to argue that as the term has been used simply as synonym for some pre- existing precise variables such as industrialization, it deserves no functionality to perform as a theoretical framework and therefore modernization as a theory of development is questionable.
In contrast to the above limitations of the theory, the idea of modernity is yet relevant for practical reasons. But how to achieve this modernity is a matter to really think about. Whereas modernization approach is regarded as unfashionable to many scholars, other scholars such as Inglehart and Welzel , Arts et al.
Modernization theory indeed explains the social and economic changes of many countries during the last few decades and hence, should not be completely rejected as a theoretical framework. This is not only because the theory is incapable of functioning as a framework of development but also because some objectionable assumptions are embedded in the theory.
While these objections or limitations such as ethnocentrism, dichotomization of modernity and tradition, failure to recognise the external aspects of change and ambiguity are evident, the suitability and applicability of the theory are simply disproved. Since society will always be changing, existing theories will be unable to rationalise these changes.
Modernization theory came in a particular context to explain how industrialization, secularity and the nation state were relevant to changes and development. But in the course of time while societies still require modernity, modernization approach is reasonably unable to tell how to achieve this modernity. Therefore, alternative modernity, as in the case of China developing their own style of modernity, should be thought of for the betterment of the world as a whole.
Aging and Society, 24, pp. Arts, W. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 40 1 , pp. Bernstein, H.
Journal of Development Studies, 7 2 , pp. Christoff, P. Environmental Politics, 5 3 , pp. Dreze, J. Eisenstadt, S. Halpern, M. Revolution, , pp. Huntington, S. Inglehart, R. Inkeles, A. American Journal of Sociology, 75 2 , pp.
Lerner, D. Levy, M. Li, Y. The perspective of subjectivity in the study of modernization theory and a critique of the functionalist approach. Chinese Studies in History, 43 1 , pp.
Development in Practice: Stimulating Thought for Action, 19 8 , pp. To learn more, view our Privacy Policy. To browse Academia. Log in with Facebook Log in with Google. Remember me on this computer. Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.
Need an account? Click here to sign up. Download Free PDF. Development and Modernization Theory Handout. Perin Gurel. A short summary of this paper. Download Download PDF. Translate PDF. Elihu Root, for example, justified the creation of the Panama Canal in developmental terms.
0コメント