Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 14:05:25 -0500 From: "Forstater, Mathew" <ForstaterM at umkc.edu>
Just getting back from out of town, I haven't been able to read all the back posts, but
1) Prebisch-Singer has gained support in the statistical debate re the net barter terms of trade (e.g., David Sapsford's important work, responding to people like Spraos), so I don't understand the problem. Also, it should go without saying that both P and S revised their initial theses in important ways (e.g., moving away from emphasizing differences deriving from producing different types of commodities--manufactures vs. primary products--to differences deriving from structural conditions more generally).=20
2) Are we distinguishing here between dependency theory (Frank, Latin American structuralism), world systems theory (Wallerstein), unequal development (Amin), and work that comes out of one or more of these, such as uneven and combined development (O'Connor), or are we lumping these all together into one larger group as against mainstream development theory?
Approaches that see 'developing countries' (or 'LDCs') as 'different' from 'industrialized nations' ('DCs'), but do not see the experience of the LDCs as connected to that of the DCs--in other words the historical and structural connections of these two groups of countries in a global capitalist system--are of little value. This is the fundamental contribution of the above approaches.
Rajani Kanth's reader is a good one, I think.
Mat