DEPENDENCY THEORYAuty (1993) and Khalil and Mansour (1993) sug-
gest that competition between export sectors such
as minerals, oil, and agriculture often impedes
prosperity of the other two or one another. In
countries where that occurs, governments tend to
adopt lax economic policies that, for example,
increase agricultural dependencies in favor of oil
exports. Internal conflicts then become self-per-
petuating and play out in the physical and eco-
nomic well-being of the populace. Some investiga-
tors also point out that the internal dynamics of
different types of export commodities will have
differential impacts on the economy as a whole
and on state bureaucracies as differing degrees of
infrastructure are implicated (Talbot 1998).
A number of critics have asserted that depend-
ency theory is flawed, fuzzy, and unable to with-
stand empirical scrutiny (Peckenham 1992; Ake
1988; Becker 1983). Even Marxist theorists find
fault with dependency theory for overemphasizing
external, exploitative factors at the expense of
attention to the role of local elite (Shannon 1996).
Other critics have focused on the evidence mus-
tered and suggested that only about one-third of
the variance in inequality among nations is ac-
counted for by penetration of multinational cor-
porations or other forms of foreign investment
(Kohli et al. 1984; Bornschier, Chase-Dunn, and
Rubinson 1978). Interestingly, still others have
concluded that economic development of the type
being discussed here is a significant facilitator for
political democracy (Bollen 1983).
Defenders react by challenging measures of
operationalization, the way variables are defined,
and whether the complex of concepts embraced
by the multidimensionality of the notion of de-
pendency can be assessed in customary ways or in
the absence of a comparative framework juxtapos-
ing developing nations with their industrial coun-
terparts (Ragin 1983; Robinson and Holtzman
1982; Boyce 1993). Efforts to isolate commodity
concentration and multinational corporate invest-
ments have not proven to be reliable indicators
and, as noted, even per capita GDP has its detrac-
tors. While important questions on heterogeneity,
dispersion, or heteroskedasticity can be addressed
by slope differences and recognized estimation
techniques (Delacroix and Ragin 1978), propo-
nents of the model are adamant that contextual-
ized historical analysis is not only appropriate but
mandated by the logic of dependency itself (Bach
1977; Bertocchi and Canova 1996). In their investi-
gation of former colonies in Africa, Bertocchi and
Canova (1996) concluded that colonial status is
central to explaining relatively poor economic
performance in ensuing years.
Proponents have also turned to sophisticated
statistical procedures to elucidate their claims. For
example, Bertocchi and Canova (1996) ran regres-
sion models on forty-six former colonies and de-
pendencies in Africa to test their contention that
colonialization makes a difference in subsequent
societal and economic well-being. In a separate
examination of state size and debt size among
African nations, Bradshaw and Tshandu (1990)
concluded that international capital penetration
in the face of a mounting debt crisis may precipi-
tate antagonism and austerity measures as the IMF
and foreign capital debt claims are pitted against
local claimants such as governmental subsidies
and wages. In discussing capital penetration and
the debt crises facing many developing nations,
Bradshaw and Huang (1991) attributed incidences
of political turmoil to austerity measures imposed
on domestic welfare programs by IMF conditions
and transnational financial institutions. They went
on to assert that dependency theorists must take
into consideration international recessions and
global monetary crises if they are to understand
structural accommodations and shifts in the quali-
ty of life in developing nations. In light of inter-
locking monetary policies, a single country teeter-
ing on the brink of economic adversity portends
consequences for not only its trading partners but
many other countries as well.
Several dependency analysts have utilized ad-
vanced analytic techniques to examine whether
income inequality within countries is related to
status in the world economy (Rubinson 1976; Lon-
don and Robinson 1989; Boyce 1993). Both Rubinson
(1976) and London and Robinson (1989) looked
at interlocking world economies and their affect
on governmental bureaucracies and internal struc-
tural differentiation. London and Robinson (1989)
noted that the extent of multinational corporate
penetration, and indirectly, its affect on income
inequality, is associated with political malaise.
Walton and Ragin (1990) concurred, maintaining
that the involvement of international economic
interests in domestic political-economic policy com-
bine with ‘‘overurbanization’’ and associated de-
pendency to help pave the way to political protest.