The Sociology of Development: Theoretical Inadequacies

Abstract

Although many criticisms have been made of the Sociology of Development, these have either focused on the work of particular theorists or on the limitations of its more dubious notions. There has, as yet, been no attempt to provide an overall critique of its theoretical framework, to show why its conclusions are necessarily limited due to the basic concepts operative in its discourse. Thus, whilst critics have, for example, outlined the errors of notions such as Levy’s ‘relatively less modernised societies’, of Eisenstadt’s ‘modernisation’, of Smelser’s concept of ‘differentiation’, or of Bellah’s and Hoselitz’s use of Parsons’ ‘pattern variables’, they have failed to specify the theoretical foundations of such notions. Yet, unless we can analyse why the inadequacies of such concepts result from a set of limited notions being continually reproduced in varying conceptual forms, we cannot have any rigorous basis for assessing the explanatory limitations of the Sociology of Development as a whole. In the present situation, where the analytical field of the structure and development of Third World societies is dominated by a theoretical conflict between the discourses of ‘Development’ and ‘Underdevelopment’, it is vital that we direct our criticisms at the level of their basic concepts. Rather than assessing the validity of particular texts, we should be asking to what extent these theories can generate a framework in which the structure and development of Third World societies can be rigorously analysed.