Key Theories of Development and Citizenship Rights

Posted on Sep 28, 2025 in Social sciences

Theories of Development and Underdevelopment

Development is a complex and contested concept that carries different meanings in different contexts. Broadly, it refers to the process through which societies improve their economic, political, and social conditions. It is often linked to economic growth, political democracy, modernization, and improvement in human well-being. However, over time, several scholars have proposed different approaches to understanding development, depending on how they view progress and change in societies.

Defining Development: Perspectives and Progress

Development can be seen from various angles:

• Economic Perspective: Focuses on advancing the forces of production through capital accumulation and reproduction.
• Political Perspective: Includes building democratic institutions, ensuring political participation, and enhancing state capacity.
• Social Perspective: Means improving human needs like health, education, and standard of living.
• Modernization Perspective: Equates development with a transition from traditional to modern societies, similar to the Western path.

Major Approaches to Understanding Development

1. Modernization Theory: This approach sees development as a linear process through which traditional societies evolve into modern ones.
   • David Apter viewed modernization as a system that can innovate and adapt to technology.
   • Walt Rostow outlined five stages of economic growth, such as traditional society, take-off, and age of mass consumption.
   • Samuel Huntington discussed the political side, warning that rapid modernization can cause political decay, such as instability and corruption, if not managed well.
2. Political Development Approach: Scholars focused on institution-building and participation.
   • Seymour Martin Lipset connected democracy with factors like wealth and education.
   • Lucian Pye highlighted institution-building, citizen participation, and mobilization.
   • This approach also addresses crises in development, such as issues of legitimacy, identity, and participation, especially in newly independent states.
3. Nationalism and Development: In many post-colonial countries, development was closely tied to nationalism. Development became a way to create unity among divided ethnic or linguistic groups and build strong independent nations. Nationalism was seen as both a goal and a motivator for development.
4. Dependency Theory (A.G. Frank’s View): A.G. Frank provided a critical alternative, arguing that underdevelopment in Asia, Africa, and Latin America was not because they were “behind” but because they were made dependent by colonial and capitalist exploitation.

Modernization Theory: Stages and Transformation

Modernization is one of the key approaches to understanding development, especially popular in the mid-20th century. It refers to the transformation of traditional societies into modern, industrial, and democratic ones. It assumes that all societies move through similar stages of growth and change, often following the path taken by Western Europe.

Key Features of Modernization

1. David Apter’s View: Apter stated modernization involves:
   • A social system that can constantly innovate.
   • Flexible and differentiated social structures.
   • A framework that equips people with skills and knowledge to live in an advanced, technological society.
2. Linear Progress: Modernization theory assumes a linear path of development, where societies progress from traditional to modern stages, just like Western countries did in the 19th century.
3. Max Weber and Talcott Parsons: These sociologists explained modernization through dichotomies—like traditional versus modern values, religious versus secular authority, and community versus individualism.
4. S.N. Eisenstadt: He emphasized that modernization brings about differentiated political structures and spreads political power and authority into all areas of society.

Stage Theories of Growth

Several theorists outlined specific stages of development:

• Walt W. Rostow, in his book “Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto,” outlined five stages of economic development:
  1. Traditional society
  2. Preconditions for take-off
  3. Take-off
  4. Drive to maturity
  5. Age of high mass consumption (He later added a sixth stage: search for quality of life.)
• A.F.K. Organski gave four stages of political development:
  1. Primitive national unification
  2. Industrialization
  3. National welfare
  4. Abundance
• C.E. Black also explained modernization in phases such as:
  1. Decline of traditional leadership
  2. Rise of modern leaders
  3. Shift from rural to urban society
  4. Economic and social transformation

Criticism: Political Decay (Huntington)

Samuel P. Huntington, in Political Order in Changing Societies, warned that modernization also causes political decay.

• As economic and social change happens fast, institutions often fail to adapt, leading to instability, corruption, and violence.
• He stressed the need for order and strong institutions to manage change.

Conclusion on Modernization: Modernization theory views development as a progressive and necessary shift from traditional to modern forms of society. It values industrialization, democracy, education, and social mobility. However, critics point out that rapid modernization without stable institutions can lead to crisis and decay. Despite criticism, modernization remains an important way to understand how societies transform over time.

Dependency Theory: A.G. Frank’s Critique

Andre Gunder Frank was one of the main thinkers behind Dependency Theory, a perspective that challenged the optimistic view of mainstream development theories. According to Frank, underdevelopment was not a natural or original condition but rather a historically created process tied to the global capitalist system. He argued that poor countries (the periphery) are not just “behind” the rich countries (the center), but are actively kept in a state of underdevelopment through their economic and political relations with the center.

The Development of Underdevelopment

Frank introduced the idea of “the development of underdevelopment.” He argued that development in the center (Western industrialized nations) was directly connected to the underdevelopment of the periphery (Asia, Africa, and Latin America). This means:

1. Underdevelopment is not traditional: Frank rejected the idea that underdeveloped societies are simply traditional, feudal, or backward. He said they were made underdeveloped through historical processes like colonization, slavery, and unequal trade.
2. False idea of dual societies: Many development theorists described societies as made up of two parts: one modern and one traditional. Frank argued that this is misleading, as these societies are deeply connected to global capitalism but are placed in exploitative relationships.

Metropole-Satellite Relationship

Frank described the world as a chain of metropole (center) and satellite (periphery) relationships:

• The metropole extracts resources and wealth from the satellite.
• Even within countries, there are internal metropole-satellite relations (e.g., capital cities exploiting rural areas).
• The closer a region is tied to the metropole, the more underdeveloped it becomes because all surplus is siphoned off, leaving little room for local development.

Historical Examples: Frank used Latin America to prove his theory. Countries deeply connected to the global economy became more dependent and underdeveloped. Conversely, some isolated regions like Tucumán or Mendoza in Argentina had some autonomous development due to limited foreign interference.

Occasional Independent Growth: Frank noted that during times of global crisis like wars or depressions, satellites sometimes developed more autonomously, but this was short-lived. Once normal global flows resumed, the dependency returned.

The State in Peripheral Societies

Based on Frank’s theory, the state in peripheral societies (developing countries) takes on certain characteristics:

• Dependent and Weak Autonomy: The state is not fully autonomous. It often acts in the interests of foreign capital or multinational corporations instead of its own citizens. Economic decisions are influenced by external institutions like the IMF or World Bank.
• Instrument of Elites: The ruling classes in the periphery often have close ties to the center. These local elites benefit from the global system and maintain policies that favor the metropole’s interests.
• Lack of Industrial Transformation: The state rarely brings about full capitalist development because its economy is export-oriented, focused on agriculture or raw materials.
• Political Instability: Peripheral states often suffer from political instability, military coups, or authoritarian regimes, which suppress demands for redistribution.
• Neo-colonialism: Though politically independent, these states are still economically colonized—a form of neo-colonialism where key decisions are made externally.

Conclusion on Development Theories: Development is not a one-size-fits-all concept. While modernization theorists see it as a natural progression towards the Western model, dependency theorists like A.G. Frank argue that such a path is flawed and exploitative. Political and nationalist perspectives add further depth by showing how internal factors like state-building, democracy, and unity also shape development. Thus, development must be understood in a multi-dimensional and critical way.

The Evolution and Theories of Citizenship

The concept of citizenship has evolved significantly over centuries, from being a privilege reserved for a few to a universal right tied to identity, participation, and legal status. Citizenship today is seen as a system of rights and responsibilities granted by the state, but its development has been shaped by historical, political, economic, and philosophical changes.

Historical Evolution of Citizenship Rights

Classical Period: Greek and Roman Citizenship

• In ancient Greece, especially in Athens, citizenship meant active participation in civic life. Aristotle defined citizens as those who “share in the civic life of ruling and being ruled in turn.” However, this was limited, excluding women, slaves, and foreigners.
• In contrast, Roman citizenship introduced the idea of legal status. As the Roman Empire expanded, citizenship became more about having rights and protection under Roman law than active political participation.

Medieval to Early Modern Period

• In medieval Europe, citizenship became more passive, linked to protection by authority. Thinkers like Jean Bodin emphasized the right to liberty and protection by the state rather than active civic responsibility.
• Civic ideals of ancient times faded as monarchies and feudal systems dominated. Citizenship was more about loyalty to rulers than participation.

Revival During the French Revolution (1789)

• The French Revolution brought a turning point by reintroducing the civic republican ideal.
• It emphasized horizontal equality, participation, and rights for all male citizens, challenging the feudal system of privileges.
• Nationalism emerged as a force uniting people and redefining citizenship in terms of belonging to a nation-state.

19th and 20th Century Developments (T.H. Marshall)

• Capitalism and liberalism reshaped citizenship, making it more individualistic and emphasizing personal rights over civic duties.
• T.H. Marshall, a key thinker, explained modern citizenship as consisting of three types of rights:
  • Civil rights (18th century) – freedom of speech, property, justice.
  • Political rights (19th century) – right to vote, participate in government.
  • Social rights (20th century) – right to welfare, education, health.
• Marshall saw citizenship as the promise of equality and inclusion in a national community.

Contemporary Challenges: Globalisation and Diversity

• In recent decades, citizenship faces new questions due to migration, multiculturalism, and globalization.
• Some scholars argue for differentiated citizenship, recognizing group-based rights (cultural, ethnic) besides individual rights.
• The idea of global citizenship emerged, advocating for rights and responsibilities beyond national borders, rooted in universal human rights.

Conclusion on Evolution: The evolution of citizenship reflects a journey from exclusion to inclusion, from privilege to legal rights. Yet, it remains an ongoing process, with debates about identity, equality, and belonging continuing in the face of global challenges and growing diversity.

Core Theories of Citizenship

Theories of citizenship try to explain who qualifies as a citizen, what rights and duties they have, and how citizenship functions in society. These theories are shaped by political ideologies, historical conditions, and social realities.

Marxist Theory: Citizenship as Illusion

• Marx viewed citizenship under capitalism as an illusion.
• Although modern states offer rights and equality, he argued this is superficial because the capitalist system creates deep economic inequality.
• Civil and political rights only ensure workers remain under the control of capitalist structures.
• True citizenship and freedom, for Marx, could only come through human emancipation—freedom from private property and capitalist exploitation. Citizenship could never be truly equal unless the class system was dismantled.

T.H. Marshall’s Liberal Theory: Three Rights

T.H. Marshall offered a widely accepted liberal model in his work “Citizenship and Social Class.”

• He defined a citizen as a “full and equal member of a political community.”
• He believed the development of social rights could reduce inequality and stabilize capitalism.
• His theory emphasizes equality, identity, and integration, evolving through the three stages of rights (Civil, Political, Social).

Michael Mann’s Instrumentalist Theory

• Mann offers a more critical view, describing citizenship as a tool used by the ruling class to maintain control.
• Citizenship rights were often extended not out of moral progress but as part of strategic trade-offs to prevent social unrest.
• Mann shows how citizenship is shaped “from the top-down,” depending on what the ruling class wants, often resulting from compromise and control rather than purely democratic progress.

John Rawls’ Theory: Justice as Fairness

• Rawls provided a philosophical foundation for liberal democratic citizenship in his theory of justice as fairness.
• He argued citizens are free and equal individuals who agree to live under just laws.
• All should have equal rights and opportunities, and inequalities are only justified if they benefit the least advantaged (Difference Principle).
• His vision supports a cooperative society where multiple conceptions of the “good life” can exist.

Multicultural and Global Citizenship

• In a globalized and multicultural world, traditional theories have been challenged.
• Scholars advocate for differentiated citizenship, where people have rights not just as individuals, but as members of cultural or ethnic groups.
• The tension between universalism (equal rights for all) and particularism (rights based on identity or context) is a major debate.
• The concept of global citizenship focuses on human rights and duties that transcend national borders.

Conclusion on Citizenship Theories: Different theories offer different lenses—some highlight equality and rights, others point out power and inequality. Together, they help us understand that citizenship is not just a legal status but a dynamic and contested idea shaped by political, economic, and cultural forces.