Among the theories explaining global stratification are (1) Modernization Theory, (2) Dependency Theory and (3) World System Theory. MODERNIZATION THEORY • The development of wealthy nations is attributed to the “correct” beliefs, values, and practices of its people. These cultural traits include a willingness to work hard, to abandon tradition in favor of new ways of thinking …
Dependency Theory states that underdevelopment is caused by the position of some developing countries in the world. These developing countries offer cheap labor and resources to the world just to survive. On the other hand, these countries are tied to accept finished products from developed countries at a higher price. In terms of global stratification, Dependency Theory …
Describe the modernization and dependency theory perspectives on global stratification As with any social issue, global or otherwise, scholars have developed a variety of theories to study global stratification. The two most widely applied perspectives are modernization theory and dependency theory. Modernization Theory
The Functionalist View. Recall from Chapter 1 “Sociology and the Sociological Perspective” that functionalist theory assumes that the various structures and processes in society exist because they serve important functions for society’s stability and continuity. In line with this view, functionalist theorists in sociology assume that stratification exists because it also serves …
Dependency Theory. The structural explanation for global stratification is called dependency theory. Not surprisingly, this theory's views sharply challenge modernization theory's assumptions (Packenham, 1992).
The two most widely applied perspectives on global stratification are modernization theory and dependency theory.
sociologist Max WeberThe three-component theory of stratification, More widely known as Weberian stratification or the three class system, was developed by German sociologist Max Weber with class, status and party as distinct ideal types.
The class sociologist Max Weber formulated a three-component theory of stratification that saw political power as an interplay between “class”, “status” and “group power. ” Weber theorized that class position was determined by a person's skills and education, rather than by their relationship to the means of production ...
"World-system" refers to the inter-regional and transnational division of labor, which divides the world into core countries, semi-periphery countries, and the periphery countries.
Whereas modernization theory attributes global stratification to the “wrong” cultural values and practices in poor nations, dependency theory blames global stratification on the exploitation of these nations by wealthy nations.
According to the bureaucratic theory of Max Weber, bureaucracy is the basis for the systematic formation of any organisation and is designed to ensure efficiency and economic effectiveness. It is an ideal model for management and its administration to bring an organisation's power structure into focus.
Marx's main argument is. that class is determined by economic factors alone, whereas in contrast, Weber. argues that social stratification cannot be defined solely in terms of class and the. economic factors which affect class relationships.
According to this set of scholars, Weber maintained that stratification is an organized manifestation of unequal power in society separated into three spheres of activity for analytical purposes: economic, social and political, and, within each sphere, power is designed according to class, status and party.Feb 4, 1983
Key Takeaways. Marxism is a social, political, and economic theory originated by Karl Marx that focuses on the struggle between capitalists and the working class. Marx wrote that the power relationships between capitalists and workers were inherently exploitative and would inevitably create class conflict.
The functional theory of stratification provided by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore suggests that social inequalities are functional for society because they provide an incentive for the most talented individuals to occupy jobs that are essential to the orderly maintenance of a society.Dec 4, 2017
For Marx, classes are defined and structured by the relations concerning (i) work and labour and (ii) ownership or possession of property and the means of production. These economic factors more fully govern social relationships in capitalism than they did in earlier societies.Sep 29, 1999
The structural explanation for global stratification is called dependency theory. Not surprisingly, this theory’s views sharply challenge modernization theory’s assumptions (Packenham, 1992). Whereas modernization theory attributes global stratification to the “wrong” cultural values and practices in poor nations, dependency theory blames global stratification on the exploitation of these nations by wealthy nations. According to this view, poor nations never got the chance to pursue economic growth because early on they were conquered and colonized by European ones. The European nations stole the poor nations’ resources and either enslaved their populations or used them as cheap labor. They installed their own governments and often prevented the local populace from getting a good education. As a result, the colonized nations were unable to develop a professional and business class that would have enabled them to enter the industrial age and to otherwise develop their economies. Along the way, wealthy nations sold their own goods to colonized nations and forced them to run up enormous debt that continues to amount today. Because dependency theory implies that poor nations remain poor because of lack of opportunity owing to exploitation by wealthy nations, it falls into the conflict perspective on stratification.
According to this view, poor nations never got the chance to pursue economic growth because early on they were conquered and colonized by European ones. The European nations stole the poor nations’ resources and either enslaved their populations or used them as cheap labor.
In this regard, sociology’s structural approach is in line with dependency theory and suggests that global stratification results from the history of colonialism and by continuing exploitation today of poor nations’ resources by wealthy nations and multinational corporations.
Dependency theory. The poverty of poor nations stems from their colonization by European nations, which exploited the poor nations’ resources and either enslaved their populations or used them as cheap labor.
Together, both theories help us understand the reasons for global stratification, but most sociologists would probably favor dependency theory because of its emphasis on structural factors in the world’s historic and current economy.
As should be clear, modernization theory has direct implications for strategies to reduce global poverty. The theory implies that people in poor nations must learn the proper beliefs, values, and practices to succeed economically.
In January 2010, an earthquake with a magnitude of 7.0 devastated Haiti, one of the poorest countries in the world. The quake reportedly killed more than 200,000 people, about 2.5% of Haiti’s population, injured 300,000, and left 1 million homeless.
The two most widely applied perspectives are modernization theory and dependency theory.
It states that global inequality is primarily caused by core nations (or high-income nations) exploiting semi-peripheral and peripheral nations (or middle-income and low-income nations), which creates a cycle of dependence (Hendricks 2010). As long as peripheral nations are dependent on core nations for economic stimulus and access to a larger piece of the global economy, they will never achieve stable and consistent economic growth. Further, the theory states that since core nations, as well as the World Bank, choose which countries to make loans to, and for what they will loan funds, they are creating highly segmented labor markets that are built to benefit the dominant market countries.
Stratification results from lack of opportunity and from discrimination and prejudice against the poor, women, and people of color. It is neither necessary nor inevitable. Symbolic interactionism. Stratification affects people’s beliefs, lifestyles, daily interaction, and conceptions of themselves.
One of the most insightful analyses of stratification that fits into a symbolic interactionist framework was Thorstein Veblin’s (1899/1953) famous discussion of conspicuous consumption, or the acquisition and display by the wealthy of lavish products that show off their wealth.
Recall from Chapter 1 “Sociology and the Sociological Perspective” that functionalist theory assumes that the various structures and processes in society exist because they serve important functions for society’s stability and continuity.
We saw in Chapter 3 “Culture” that about 60% of Americans attribute poverty to laziness and lack of willpower, compared to less than half that in Mexico, Russia, Spain, and Sweden. Belief in the American Dream evidently helps lead to a blaming-the-victim ideology that blames the poor for their own fate.
The former take advantage of their position at the top of society to stay at the top , even if it means oppressing those at the bottom. At a minimum, they can heavily influence the law, the media, and other institutions in a way that maintains society’s class structure.
In slave societies, the dominant ideology, and one that at least some slaves accepted, was that slaves are inferior to their masters and deserve no better fate in life. When U.S. slavery existed in the South, it was commonly thought that blacks were biologically inferior and suited only to be slaves.
If you decide to shine shoes, you can begin making this money at age 16, but if you decide to become a brain surgeon, you will not start making this same amount until about age 35, as you first must go to college and medical school and then acquire several more years of medical training.
This explanation was developed more than 60 years ago by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore (Davis & Moore, 1945) in the form of several logical assumptions that imply stratification is both necessary and inevitable. When applied to American society, their assumptions would be as follows:
Stratification is necessary to induce people with special intelligence, knowledge, and skills to enter the most important occupations. For this reason, stratification is necessary and inevitable. Stratification results from lack of opportunity and from discrimination and prejudice against the poor, women, and people of color.
Recall from Chapter 1 “Sociology and the Sociological Perspective” that functionalist theory assumes that the various structures and processes in society exist because they serve important functions for society’s stability and continuity.
It is neither necessary nor inevitable. Stratification affects people’s beliefs, lifestyles, daily interaction, and conceptions of themselves.
One of the most important beliefs in the United States is the American Dream, epitomized by the story of Abraham Lincoln. According to this belief, people born into poverty can lift themselves up by the bootstraps and become successful if they work hard enough.
We saw in Chapter 3 “Culture” that about 60% of Americans attribute poverty to laziness and lack of willpower, compared to less than half that in Mexico, Russia, Spain, and Sweden. Belief in the American Dream evidently helps lead to a blaming-the-victim ideology that blames the poor for their own fate.
The former take advantage of their position at the top of society to stay at the top , even if it means oppressing those at the bottom. At a minimum, they can heavily influence the law, the media, and other institutions in a way that maintains society’s class structure.
Globalisation has also been explained as a strategy in the contest for power between several major states in contemporary world politics. They concentrate on the activities of Great Britain, China, France, Japan, the USA and some other large states.
Theory of Political Realism: Advocates of this theory are interested in questions of state power, the pursuit of national interest, and conflict between states. According to them states are inherently acquisitive and self-serving, and heading for inevitable competition of power.
There are structural power inequalities in promoting globalisation and shaping its course. Often they do not care for the entrenched power hierarchies between states, classes, cultures, sexes, races and resources. 2.
Marxism is principally concerned with modes of production, social exploitation through unjust distribution , and social emancipation through the transcendence of capitalism . Marx himself anticipated the growth of globality that ‘capital by its nature drives beyond every spatial barrier to conquer the whole earth for its market’. Accordingly, to Marxists, globalisation happens because trans-world connectivity enhances opportunities of profit-making and surplus accumulation.
As such, transplanetary connectivity is derived from human drives to maximise material well-being and to exercise basic freedoms. These forces eventually interlink humanity across the planet.
Patterns of production and governance are second-order structures that derive from deeper cultural and socio-psychological forces. Such accounts of globalisation have come from the fields of Anthropology, Humanities, Media of Studies and Sociology.
Identity provides frameworks for community, democracy, citizenship and resistance. It also leads from nationalism to greater pluralism and hybridity. Earlier nationalism promoted territorialism, capitalism, and statism, now these plural identities are feeding more and more globality, hyper-capitalism and polycentrism.
The more there are rises in consumer culture, the more the inequalities become worse.
Consumption across the world is very uneven. There is a large amount of mass consumption in the world but there is also a large gap between the comfort and conditions that people are living in.
Farmers have to meet certain standards such as a minimum price on the products and environmental criteria.
Socio-economic background factors that have received both research interest and empirical support are type and level of education and occupational experiences. In comparison to sociological variables, socio-economic background factors lend themselves more readily to objective measurements.
The theories of entrepreneurship are based on psychological/personality traits, sociological models and socio-economic factors influencing the success of small businesses.
Sociological Theories of Entrepreneurship. These theories suggest that entrepreneurial behavior is a function of the individual’s interaction with the society. Sociological models that have received significant empirical support are the inter-generation inheritance of enterprise culture, social marginality and ethnicity.
Industrial (technical or market) expertise; 2. Management expertise; and. 3. Entrepreneurial experience. An individual’s managerial experience as well as previous entrepreneurial experience is considered to be incentives for one to become a successful entrepreneur.
The first is that formal education can operate as an impediment/hindrance to entrepreneurship because, rather than develop creative thinkers, it fosters c onformity and low tolerance for ambiguity, leading to thought and behavior process that refuse to admit tolerance, and social values that preclude “ getting one’s dirty”.
The ethnic groups often quoted in the literature as being overrepresented in entrepreneurship include Ibos in Nigeria, Kikuyus in Kenya and Chagga in Tanzania. All of these are spread in different parts of their countries in which they overepresented in entrepreneurial careers.
Locus of control. This theory contends/states that there is a degree to which one believes that he/she is in control of one’s destiny. This can either be internal or external. Internals: The internals believe that what happens to them is a result of their internal efforts whether it is good or bad.
Nature theories are extreme in that they do not make any allowance for environmental factors and fail to take into account the ideal outcomes may be different depending on the culture and social norms of the child’s environment. The ideals in each of these theories are mainly applicable to western societies.
The term “human growth and development” is used to explain the changes a person will undertake from cradle to grave. These changes include; physical, emotional, social and intelligence changes and will cover life events such as bereavement and loss.
There is a third, and growing theory in the nature verses nurture debate in that both nature and nurture affect development. Howe (1995) discusses the growing research into how both aspects can affect a person and detail studies on the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) of children living with adoptive families.
The fifth stage, adolescence, is when the desired outcome would be to develop a sense of identity. Successful transition through this stage would result in a young adult having a strong sense of self and the ability to set their own goals for the future and understand how they fit into society.
Formal Operations (12+ years) – A child can now form new ideas and support them with logic, even without prior experience of the event. For a long time, Piaget’s (1950) theory of cognitive development has been used in the field of education as it provides a comprehensive view on how a child learns and thinks.
Environmental factors are said to play a minimal part and should remain neutral during development, as extremes in any direction would be harmful and leave a child stuck in their current stage. External influences are described more as a trigger for development rather than the cause, Howe (1995).
It is important for a social worker to understand how people develop and comprehend how life events can impact a person’s quality of life and their interaction with society . This can be done through the application of development and learning theories.