Understanding Global Inequality: Samir Amin, Raul Prebisch, and Hegemonic Cycles
Understanding Global Inequality: Samir Amin and Structuralist Thought
Samir Amin, a prominent figure in the structuralist and Marxist schools of thought, focused on the roots of global inequality. His analysis attributes inequality to two primary factors:
The Productivity Gap and Access to Technology
A significant productivity gap exists due to unequal access to technology. Productivity, defined as the capacity to produce, is directly enhanced by technological access. Developed nations benefit from advanced technologies, enabling them to produce more efficiently and rapidly. Conversely, developing nations often lack such access, hindering their productive capacity.
Destabilization Through Capitalist Mechanisms
The introduction of capitalist mechanisms in certain countries can destabilize existing traditional systems. Traditional economies are disrupted without the establishment of functional replacements. For example, the introduction of manufactured goods in developing regions can undermine local industries without providing viable alternatives, leading to economic instability.
The Role of Peripheral Economies
Economies of developing countries often function as extensions of central, developed economies. They primarily produce agricultural goods for export, neglecting domestic needs. Amin argued that protectionist policies are essential for these countries to foster domestic manufacturing and reduce dependence on external economies.
Southern countries often advocate for free trade with Europe, aiming to compete with European products and attract foreign capital.
Raul Prebisch and Dependency Theory
Raul Prebisch, associated with the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC), developed a structuralist theory emphasizing the exploitation of peripheral (poor) countries by central (rich) countries.
Hegemonic Stability Theory: The School of Decline
R. Gilpin analyzes the disparity between actors and the existence of hierarchies, highlighting the unequal power dynamics among states. International relations are viewed as a struggle for hegemony, with historical cycles of stability and change driven by hegemonic powers.
Hegemonies seek to maintain their dominance to reap benefits, but the costs of maintaining power can eventually outweigh the advantages, leading to a shift in hegemony. This transition can occur voluntarily or forcibly, as middle powers emerge to challenge the existing hegemon.
The collapse of the Soviet Union created a power vacuum, with European countries hesitant to assume the burdens of hegemony. The United States remained the sole superpower, while China’s defense spending has significantly increased, indicating its potential to challenge U.S. hegemony.
Mature Theory of Anarchy: Barry Buzan and Security Complexes
Barry Buzan’s work refines realist perspectives on international relations. He replaces the term “power” with security, a broader concept encompassing political culture and military capabilities. Buzan categorizes states based on their internal and external security:
- Strong States: Face primarily external threats and maintain internal order.
- Weak States: Face both external threats and internal divisions, making them vulnerable to external attacks.
This framework emphasizes the importance of both internal and external security. The concept of security is crucial for understanding international relations, as exemplified by policies such as energy diversification.
Buzan’s theory introduces the concept of the Security Complex, suggesting that states, despite their self-interest, tend to cooperate to address shared threats. This cooperation challenges the notion of pure anarchy and individualism in international relations.