Industrial convergence,globalization, and the persistence of the North-South divide

This article demonstrates empirically that widespread convergence in the degree of industrialization between former First and Third World countries over the past four decades hasnot been associated with convergence in the levels of income enjoyed on average by the residents of these two groups of countries. Our findings contradict the widely made claim that the significance of the North-South divide is diminishing. This contention is based on a false identification of “industrialization” with “development” and “industrialized” with “wealthy”. Elaborating from elements of Joseph Schumpeter’s theory of innovation, Raymond Vernon’s product cycle model, and Pierre Bourdieu’s concept ofillusio, the article offers an explanation for the persistence of the North-South income divide, despite rapid Third World industrialization and despite dramatic changes in the world political-ideological context for development (that is, the shift around 1980 from the “development” project to the “globalization” project or “Washington Consensus”). While emphasizing the long-term stability of the Northern-dominated hierarchy of wealth, the article concludes by pointing to several contemporary processes that may destabilize not only the “globalization project”, but also the global hierarchy of wealth that has characterized historical capitalism. Giovanni Arrighi is professor of sociology at The Johns Hopkins University. His latest books areThe Long Twentieth Century: Money, Power and the Origins of Our Times (1994) and (with Beverly J. Silver et al.)Chaos and Governance in the Modern World System (1999). Beverly J. Silver is professor of sociology at The Johns Hopkins University. She is the author ofForces of Labor: Workers’ Movements and Globalization Since 1870 (2003) and co-author (with Giovanni Arrighi et al.) ofChaos and Governance in the Modern World System (1999). Benjamin D. Brewer is a graduate student in the Department of Sociology at The Johns Hopkins University. His dissertation is a commodity chains analysis of the professional-sport economy. He has also published articles on sport and globalization. Previous versions of this paper were presented at the American Sociological Association Meeting, Anaheim, August 2001; Lingnan University, Hong Kong, May 2001; the Graduate School, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing, May 2001; the Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, Chicago, February 2001; the Center for International Studies, University of Southern California, November 2000; the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington D.C., September 2000; the Universidad Nacional Pedro Henriquez Urena, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, March 2000; and at the Conference on Ethics and Globalization, Yale University, April 2000. We benefited greatly from the comments of Hayward Alker, Charles Beitz, Peter Evans, Walter Goldfrank, Michael Mann, David Smith, Ann Tickner, and two anonymous reviewers forSCID.     

The Salvadoran elections of 1982–1991

Criticisms of the elections of the Salvadoran transition of 1979–1992 assume an external staging capacity notoriously absent from processes of regime change. An analysis of possible causal determinants of voting turnout in the elections of 1982–1991 suggests a much more complex picture, characteristic of social processes shaped by multiple conjuctural causation. It is not the machinations of the Reagan administration and of the Salvadoran Right, but a complex interaction of legal requirements, contextual nuances, and factors related to party competition, that emerge as more relevant determinants of the nature and outcomes of those elections. Whatever “demonstrative effects” may be attributed to them, one cannot ignore their impact on a domestic audience of ordinary citizens and political leaders who eventually came to understand their, limitations as well as their ultimate efficacy. In 1971 ENRIQUE A. BALOYRA, received his Ph.D. at The University of Florida and joined the Department of Political Science at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he became full professor and director of the Institute of Latin American Studies. In 1985 he joined the Graduate School of International Studies of the University of Miami, serving as associate dean until 1991. His early work was on electoral participation and public opinion in Venezuela. In 1982 he publishedEl Salvador in Transition (The University of North Carolina Press) and followed this with a dozen articles and chapters on the dynamics of the Salvadoran civil war and regime transition. This fall, The University of New Mexico Press is publishingContradictions and Change in Cuba, an anthology which he co-edited and to which he contributed three chapters. His current project is a Boolean analysis of regime transitions.     

Institutions for high-quality growth: What they are and how to acquire them

This article opens with a discussion of the types of institutions that allow markets to perform adequately. While we can identify in broad terms what these are, there is no unique mapping between markets and the non-market institutions that underpin them. The paper emphasizes the importance of “local knowledge”, and argues that a strategy of institution building must not over-emphasize best-practice “blueprints” at the expense of experimentation. Participatory political systems are the most effective ones for processing and aggregating local knowledge. Democracy is a meta-institution for building good institutions. A range of evidence indicates that participatory democracies enable higher-quality growth. Sakenn pe prie dan sa fason (Everyone can pray as he likes.) —Mauritian folk wisdom This paper was originally prepared for the International Monetary Fund’s Conference on Second-Generation Reforms, Washington, DC, November 8–9, 1999. I thank Ruth Collier, Steve Fish, Mohsin Khan, Saleh Nsouli, conference participants, and an anonymous referee for helpful comments. Dani Rodrik is professor of international political economy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. He is also the research coordinator for the Group of 24 (G-24), a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, and a research fellow of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (London). He serves as an advisory committee member of the Institute for International Economics, senior advisor of the Overseas Development Council, and advisory committee member of the Economic Research Forum for the Arab Countries, Iran and Turkey. Professor Rodrik’s recent research is concerned with the consequences of international economic integration, the role of conflict-management institutions in determining economic performance, and the political economy of policy reform.     

When States Implode: The Correlates of Africa’s civil wars, 1950–92

This article provides a systematic analysis of the extent to which political, economic, and cultural factors are associated with civil wars in sub-Saharan African states. Drawing on a theoretical argument that associates the likelihood of civil war with the tumult that arises from the simultaneous challenges of state building and nation building, several testable propositions are derived on the correlates of African civil wars. Results of logistic regression analyses indicate that previous colonial experience is a significant predictor to the likelihood of civil wars. It is also found that economic development reduces the probability of civil war while militarization increases it. Regime type played no significant role in African civil wars. Similarly, no support was found for the thesis that cultural factors are significantly associated with African civil war, which belies the notion that African civil wars are simply “ethnic conflicts.” It appears that politico-economic factors—instead of cultural ones—give rise to civil wars in Africa. Errol A. Henderson, Ph.D. is Associate Professor of Political Science, Wayne State University. He has published articles on international war, foreign policy, domestic conflict, and international political economy inInternational Studies Quarterly, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Journal of Peace Research, Journal of Politics, Peace & Change, andWorld Affairs.     

Society, community, and economic development

Studies of economic development and economic history have long been concerned with the relationship between the transparent and supposedly anonymous forces of markets, rules, and bureaucracies, on the one hand, and membership in groups, such as local communities, associations, or networks on the other. Economists are quite divided about these latter forces: for some, they are necessary underpinnings for the market, providing trust and social capital which in turn reduce transaction costs and moral hazards and hence promote development; for most, they are seen as archaic, leading to nepotism, rent seeking, and institutional rigidity. Indeed, throughout the social sciences, there is an opposition between the roles assigned to what may be called the “societal” and the “communitarian” bases of social and economic development. But each position in this theoretical standoff underestimates the contributions of either society or community to economic development. This is because both society and community have potentially positive and negative effects; together, however, they can act as mutual checks and balances on their potentially negative effects, while reinforcing the positive contributions of each to economic efficiency. Different levels and types of society and community, in interaction, define complex contexts of choice and incentives in economic development, and allow us to see more clearly the basis of different institutional configurations in relationship to development. Michael Storper is professor of regional and international development in the School of Public Affairs at UCLA; professor of economic geography at the London School of Economics; and professor of economic sociology at the Institut d’Etudes Politiques (“Sciences Po”) in Paris. He received his Ph.D. from UC Berkeley.     

Measuring Polyarchy

The authors have developed a scale based on Robert Dahl’s concept of polyarchy. The scale measures the degree to which national political systems meet the minimum requirements for political democracy, where real-world “democracies” rather than abstract ideals are the, standard. The Polyarchy Scale is constructed from indicators of freedom of expression, freedom of organization, media pluralism, and the holding of fair elections. The scale is (1) well grounded in democratic theory, (2) world-wide in scope., (3) demonstrably valid, (4) solves problems of weighting indicators and (5) is easy to interpret and replicate., Some limitations in the scale's applicability are discussed and suggestions are made for improvements and future research. Michael Coppedge is assistant professor in the Latin American Studies Program at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), 1740 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036. He is completing a book on party factions and presidential democracy in Venezuela. Wolfgang H. Reinicke is a Ph.D. candidate at Yale University and a research fellow at the Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036. He is currently completing a dissertation on the politics of global integration in banking and finance.     

Rethinking political development: A look backward over thirty years,and a look ahead

The article analyzes the rise of the political development approach in comparative politics and the reasons for it. It traces the history of the political development literature and its emergence as the dominant paradigm in the field. It then presents and assesses the critiques, that have been levelled against political development. It also assesses the various alternative approaches that came to supplant political development. The article next presents the factors that have led to a renaissance in political development. It concludes by suggesting that while the political development approach was based on some erroneous assumptions in the short term, from a longer-term perspective that approach looks considerably better. Howard J. Wiarda is Professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts/Amherst; associate of the Center for International Affairs. Harvard University; adjunct scholar of the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research; and associate of the Foreign Policy Research Institute. This article is based on a paper presented at the Fourteenth World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Washington, D.C., August 28–September 1, 1988. A somewhat revised version of this article was presented at the Conference on “Comparative Politics: Research Perspectives for the Next Twenty Years,” sponsored byComparative Politics and the Ph.D. Program of the City University of New York, September 7–9, 1988. It will also be published under the title “Concepts and Models in Comparative Politics: Political Development Reconsidered-and Its Alternatives” in Kenneth Paul Erickson and Dankwart Rustow (eds.),Comparative Political Dynamics: Research Perspectives for the Turn of the Century (New York: Harper and Row, 1990).     

Citizenship,equality, and urban property rights in Latin America: The Peruvian case

Research on liberal democracy in newly developing countries has been hampered by the view of civil society as a bounded realm; by insufficient attention to power, class, and legal-juridical institutions; and by too limited a conception of social movements with democratic potential. In this study of urban migrants’ struggle for property rights, the migrants’ political action is found to be associated with a capitalist social movement. The legal changes that the movement helped institute and the means that it employed have enhanced democracy by extending property rights to the poor and by opening up policy processes to public debate and input. Insofar as liberal reform involves the law and its administration, it requires a positive, facilitative state, in spite of liberalism’s broadly antistatist commitments. The study also reveals that liberal reform can have a popular content even if supported by elites. The findings suggest that the realization of full citizenship rights is, for now, at least as crucial to the future of Latin American democracy as the narrowing of economic inequalities. David G. Becker is associate professor of government at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755. He is the author ofThe New Bourgeoisie and the Limits of Dependency (Princeton University Press, 1982); a counthor ofPostimperialism (Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1987); and the author of “Beyond Dependency: Development and Democracy in the Era of International Capitalism,” in Dankwart A. Rustow and Kenneth P. Erickson (ededs.),Comparative Political Dynamic (HarperCollis, 1991), in addition to many other articles on aspects of political development. Becker’s current research centers of the nature of constitutionalism and democracy in Latin America. He is preparing a book-length treatment of the rule of law in Latin America, along with an edited book on postimperialism that will present new case studies of a variety of countries and world regions.     

Political transition and civil society: The cases of Kenya and Zambia

Studies of regime change that focus on the “high politics” of transition tend to overlook the importance of civil society in democratization and liberalization. This article explores the role that organizations and institutions in society play as agents of political change. Elements of civil society influence both the processes and outcomes of political transitions. Case studies of Kenya and Zambia indicate that associational arenas representing civil society made important contributions in liberalizing and democratizing authoritarian regimes. Beyond this, contrasting the two cases highlights the factors that influenced their efficacy as agents of political transition. Differences are found in the character of the civil societies in the two countries. These differences help to account for the extent of Zambia’s transition when compared to Kenya. Peter VonDoepp is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Florida. From 1992 to 1995 he held a Foreign Language/Area Studies Fellowship at Florida’s African Studies Center. He is currently conducting research in Malawi on the role of religious institutions in political change. Until 1997     

Understanding contentious collective action by Chinese laid-off workers: The importance of regional political economy

Episodes of contentious collective action involving laid-off workers have erupted throughout China in recent years. With few exceptions, studies of Chinese laid-off workers’ contention have attempted to generalize from field research in very few⦓r even single⤜ocalities. This limitation has led to several debates that can frequently be addressed by examining differences in political economy among China’s industrial regions. Based on 19 months of fieldwork and over 100 in-depth interviews with workers, managers, and officials in nine Chinese cities, this article offers a systematic, sub-national comparative analysis of laid-off workers’ contention. The article also addresses broader issues in the analysis of social movements and contentious politics, a field that has too often failed to take such regional differences into account. William Hurst is a Ph.D. candidate in political science at the University of California, Berkeley, where he is completing a dissertation on the politics of China’s state-sector lay-offs. His previous publications include “Analysis in Limbo: Contemporary Chinese Politics Amid the Maturation of Reform” (with Lowell Dittmer;Issues & Studies, December 2002/March 2003), and China’s Contentious Pensioners” (with Kevin O’Brien;The China Quarterly, June 2002). This article benefited from the assistance of many Chinese friends and colleagues in Beijing, Benxi, Chongqing, Datong, Harbin, Luoyang, Shanghai, Shenyang, and Zhengzhou. Kiren Chaudhry, Calvin Chen, Ruth B. Collier, Kenneth Foster, Mark W. Frazier, Douglas Fuller, Mary E. Gallagher, thomas B. Gold, Kun-chin Lin, Chung-in Moon, Kevin O’Brien, Dorothy Solinger, Jaeyoun Won, as well as Judy Gruber and all the participants in her Spring 2003 seminar, and two anonymous reviewers offered extremely helpful comments. For their generous financial support during various stages of my research and writing, I wish to thank: the Fulbright Institute of International Education Program, the National Security Education Program, the Yanjing Institute at Harvard University, the University of Hawaii, Beijing University, the Lewis Mumford Center for Comparative Urban and Regional Research at SUNY-Albany, the University, of California Institute for Labor and Employment, as well as the Graduate Division, the Institute for International Studies, the Institute for East Asian Studies, and the Center for Chinese Studies at the University of California-Berkeley.     

Democratization through European integration: The case of minority rights in the Czech Republic and Romania

While scholars have tended to focus on domestic factors as most critical to the consolidation of democracy, the post-communist European Union (EU) candidate states have exhibited a unique confluence of domestic and foreign policies, due to their objective of EU membership. This article assesses and compares the impact of the EU on policy making in two diverse candidate states in their first decade of transition, focusing on minority rights protection as a fundamental requirement of both EU membership and a stable democracy. I find that the EU has played a principal role in the reform process and democratic consolidation of candidate states, even in the controversial field of minority rights. The degree and nature of the EU’s impact, however, has depended in part on the activism of the particular minority, EU interest and pressure, EU Member States’ own domestic policies, and the persistence of racism in society. Dr. Melanie H. Ram is a research associate at the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies at George Washington University and Senior Program Officer for the Japan International Cooperation Agency USA Office. She has written extensively on European Union enlargement and democratic consolidation and reform in Central and Southeastern Europe, and is the author most recently of “Harmonizing Laws with the European Union: The Case of Intellectual Property Rights in the Czech Republic” inNorms and Nannies: The Impact of European Organizations on Central and East European States (2002). Earlier versions of this article were presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, 30 August–2 September 2001, San Francisco, CA and at “Voice or Exit: Comparative Perspectives on Ethnic Minorities in Twentieth Century Europe,” Humboldt University, Berlin, 14–16 June 2001.     

Modelling peruvian debt rescheduling in the 1980s

International debt rescheduling has continued to be a crucial issue in the international political economy. This article develops a political-economic model to examine debt rescheduling between private banks and debtors. The model provides a means of developing bargaining games by allowing the analyst to deduce game payoffs based on actors' “individual situations” as defined by their overall capabilities, their debt-specific resources, and their coalitional stability. Based on these games, it predicts the likely bargaining outcomes in terms of the degree to which banks will make lending concessions and the degree to which debtors will agree to adjust their economies. The model is operationalized based on written sources and interviews and then applied to four periods of rescheduling between the banks and Peru from 1982 to 1990. It proves successful in predicting bargaining outcomes in these cases, and we argue that it should prove helpful in investigating other debt bargaining episodes. Vinod K. Aggarwal is associate professor of political science and affiliated professor in the Haas School of Business at the University of California at Berkeley. He is the author ofLiberal Protectionism: The International Politics of Organized Textile Trade (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press),International Debt Threat (Berkeley: Institute for International Studies), and articles on the politics of trade and finance. His forthcoming book is entitledDebt Games: Strategic Interaction in International Debt Rescheduling Maxwell A. Cameron is assistant professor at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University. He is the author ofDemocracy and Authoritarianism in Peru: Political Coalitions and Social Change (New York: St. Martin's Press, forthcoming), as well as a number of articles on Peruvian politics. He recently coeditedThe Political Economy of North American Free Trade (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1993) with Ricardo Grinspun.     

Will Information Technology Reshape the North-South Asymmetry of Power in the Global Political Economy?

Digital technologies are sufficiently disruptive to current ways of doing things to call into question assumptions about the “inevitability” or “natural state” of many economic processes and organizational principles. In particular, the impact of digital technologies on our conceptions of property rights has potentially dramatic implications for the North-South divide and the distribution of power in the global political economy. Drawing on recent experiences with open-source property rights regimes, we present two scenarios, the “imperialism of property rights” and the “shared global digital infrastructure,” to highlight how debates over property-rights could influence the development of the global digital infrastructure and, in turn, contribute to significantly different outcomes in global economic power. Steve Weber is director of, the Institute of International Studies and professor of political science at the University of California, Berkeley. His most recent book,The Success of Open Source, was published in April 2004 by Harvard University Press. Jennifer Bussell is a doctoral candidate in political science at the University of California, Berkeley. Her research is on the political determinants of information and communication technology access in developing countries.     

Cultural and economic prerequisites of democracy: Reassessing recent evidence

The purpose of this article is to reassess two influential theories of democratic development: the theory of democratic culture and the theory of economic development. The leading predecessors in each domain—Ronald Inglehart and Adam Przeworski—are the prime targets of analysis. We take issue with recent evidence presented by these authors on three grounds: the evidence (1) confuses “basic” criteria of democracy with possible “quality” criteria (Inglehart); (2) conceptualizes democracy in dichotomous rather than continuous terms (Przeworski); and (3) fails to account for endogeneity and contingent effects (Inglehart). In correcting for these shortcomings, we present striking results. In the case of democratic culture, the theory lacks support; neither overt support for democracy nor “self-expression values” affect democratic development. In the case of economic development, earlier findings must be refined. Although the largest impact of modernization is found among more democratized countries, we also find an effect among “semi-democracies.” Axel Hadenius is professor of political science at Uppsala University in Sweden. He is the author ofDemocracy and Development (Cambridge University Press, 1992) andInstitutions and Democratic Citizenship (Oxford University Press, 2001). Jan Teorell is associated professor of political science at Uppsala University. His articles on intra-party democracy, social capital, and political participation appear in international journals.     

Postcommunist divergence: A comparative analysis of the transition to capitalism in Poland and Russia

This article critiques the dominant neoliberal transition paradigm. The implementation of neoliberal reforms in the postcommunist world has fostered the creation of two different types of capitalism. Rather than enabling a transition to Western European-style capitalism, these reforms have produced divergence within the postcommunist world. This article uses comparative firm-level case studies from Russia and Poland to construct a “neoclassical” sociological alternative to neoliberal theory that can explain this divergence. In this account, intra-dominant class structure (the pattern of alliances between the Party bureaucracy, the technocracy, and humanistic intellectuals) at the time of the transition produces different “paths to capitalism,” or policy regimes, which, in turn, have different effects on the ability of firms to restructure. In Russia, this creates a system of “patrimonial capitalism” that will produce long-term economic stagnation. In Poland, a variety of modern rational capitalism emerges. This latter system is distinguished by its very high levels of dependence on capital imports in comparison to the advanced capitalist countries. As a result, this type of economy will be quite vulnerable to economic shocks. Lawrence King is an assistant professor of sociology at Yale University. His book includeThe Basic Features of Postcommunist Capitalism in Eastern Europe (2001) andAssessing New Class Theory (with Ivan Szelenyi, forthcoming). He is currently working on a book entitledPostcommunist Capitalisms. I am grateful for a Yale Junior Faculty Research Fellowship, and the support of the Yale Center for Comparative Research, the Social Science Research Fund at Yale, and the Yale Center for International and Area Studies. I would also like to thank Aleksandra Sznajder and Evgenia Gvozdeva for their invaluable research assistance, and Ivan Szelenyi, Andrew Schrank, Hannah Brueckner, Alison Pollet, and the editors and anonymous reviewers atStudies in Comparative International Development for their comments and suggestions.     

Growth with pollution: unsustainable development in Taiwan and its consequences

During the 1980s, economic development in Taiwan received much attention in development studies. The “Taiwan miracle” has made Taiwan rich and famous. This article examines an often ignored aspect of development—environmental quality—and argues that Taiwan has achieved “growth with pollution” that will not increase but decrease the welfare of the people in the long run. The root cause of Taiwan's environmental degradation rests on the obsession with fast economic growth at any cost by the powerful coalition between the ruling Kuomington and the capitalists. The article argues that the case of Taiwan is far from being a “model” for developing countries. Taiwan's experience of “growth with pollution,” on the contrary, should stand as a warning to other developing countries pursuing similar development paths. Chun-Chieh Chi received his B.A. in sociology from Tunghai University in Taiwan, and his M.A. and Ph.D. in sociology from State University of New York at Buffalo. He is assistant professor of sociology at the University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK 74104. His research interests include sustainable development in Taiwan and Kenya, indigenous people and the environment, and women and the environment in developing countries.     

Reverse brain drain in South Korea: State-led model

Korea’s reverse brain drain (RBD) has been an organized government effort, rather than a spontaneous social phenomenon, in that various policies and the political support of President Park, Chung-Hee were instrumental in laying the ground work for its success. Particular features of Korea’s RBD policies are the creation of a conducive domestic environment (i.e., government-sponsored strategic R & D institution-building, legal and administrative reforms), and importantly, the empowerment of returnees (via, i.e., exceptionally good material benefits, guarantees of research autonomy). President Park played the cardinal role in empowering repatriates at the expense of his own civil bureaucracy, and his capacity for such patronage derived from Korea’s bureaucratic-authoritarian political system. Returning scientists and engineers directly benefited from this political system as well as Park’s personal guardianship. For Park, empowerment of returning “brains” was necessary to accomplish his national industrialization plan, thereby enhancing his political legitimacy in domestic politics. An alliance with the R & D cadre was functionally necessary to successfully consolidate strong presidential power, and politically non-threatening due to the particular form of “pact of domination” in Korea’s power structure. RBD in Korea will continue in the near future given Korea’s drive for high technology, and the remarkable expansion of local industrial and educational sectors. Korea’s future RBD, however, needs to pay closer attention to the following four problems: research autonomy; equality issues; skill-based repatriation of technicians and engineers rather than Ph.D.’s; and subsidies to small and medium industry for RBD. Bang-Soon L. Yoon is assistant professor of political science, Central Washington University. She is currently working onWorld Bibliographical Series: South Korea, to be published by Clio Press, Ltd., Oxford, England, co-edited with Michael A. Launius. An earlier version of this paper was read at the 49th Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois, April 18–20, 1991.     

Overcoming the past: De-communization and reconstruction of post-communist societies

In several of the central and eastern European nations, the fall of Communism has initiated a new round of political intolerance that threatens to destroy the foundations of their fragile democratic regimes. Campaigns of lustration (political “cleansing”) have imposed ideological tests for employment and political participation in the Balkan countries and in parts of the former Soviet Union. The small, poor nation of Albania has been especially seriously impacted by this atmosphere of vengeacean against ex-Communists and their families. Justified by the principles of destructive entitlement—reminiscent of ancient cultural rituals of blood retribution—journalists have been arrested, members of the opposition have been imprisoned, and University programs have been suspended. In response to Albania’s plight, and to a similar pattern of civil rights abuses in neighboring countries, social scientists have begun to analyze the powerful role played by the “past-in-the-present” in current reconstruction efforts. As Jurgen Habermas, Adam Michnik, Seymour Martins Lipset, and others have noted, a new “culture of forgiveness” may well be a necessary condition for the development of stable and authentic democratic societies in the region. Fatos Tarifa is currently at the Department of Sociology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Tirana in 1985. He is director of the New Sociological Research Center (NSRC) in Tirana, Albania, and is the author of several books and journal articles, including a 1991 bookIn Search of the Sociological Fact (published in Albanian). Jay Weinstein is a professor of sociology at Eastern Michigan University. He has travelled widely in the Third World and in Central and Eastern Europe. Author of numerous books, journal articles, and chapters, he is currently working on a volume entitledSocial and Cultural Change: Social Science for a Dynamic World (forthcoming in 1997 by Allyn & Bacon Publishers).     

Quantitative cross-national studies of economic development: A comparison of the economics and sociology literatures

For more than two decades, economists and sociologists have pursued parallel cross-national quantitative investigations of the determinants of economic development. These investigations have proceeded in mutual ignorance despite the often large overlap in statistical methods and data employed. Apparently contradictory findings have resulted, especially regarding the impacts of international trade and foreign direct investment. We find that there are two factors that account for these inconsistent results. One key factor is the use of different variables to measure international trade and investment, the choice of which is in turn driven by underlying differences in theoretical motivations. A second important difference involves sociologists’ greater preoccupation with more complex multivariate models versus economists’ greater willingness to focus on individual variables in multivariate regressions while viewing others as “controls.” A major finding of our survey is that when thesame variables are used, the results of economists and sociologists tend to be consistent, rather than contradictory (as might have occurred, for example, because of the use of different samples of countries or time periods, or the use of other variables included in the regression equations). We also consider some studies whose purviews go beyond economic growth to consider factors such as income inequality, physical quality of life, demographic change, and basic needs provisioning. Angela Martin Crowly is at the Department of Sociology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California 92717. James Rauch is at the department of Economics, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093. Susanna Seagrave is at the U.S. General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C. 20548. David A. Smith is at the Department of Sociology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California 92717.