Dependency And Underdevelopment

 General Introduction
1.1 Background of the Study
The concept of dependency and underdevelopment
draws our attention to the stagnation, deplorable and
peripheral condition of Africa, Asia, Latin America, in the
international system. Africa, among other continents in
the world, is seen as the poorest continent of the world.
In the international system, the G8 (Group of eight) and
other international organizations regard Africa states as
“POOR” thereby seeing Africa as an incapable or
handicapped continent.
The reason becomes why they give out loans to most
African states in order to attain the international
standard of development, thereby making Africa indebted
to the European countries. It is also for the same reason
most international organization are established, towards
the development of Africa states. Development of most
African states here implies meeting up with the European
standard. Taking a look at Africa, it is seen that the
problem of underdevelopment in Africa, centers on their
inability to transform their raw materials to finished
products, as well as their inability to properly manage
and harness their products management and good
leadership. The African continent is presently facing a
unique and unprecedented crisis or problems in its
history as a human society. These problems also
transcends previous calculations of socio-economic
background, balance of payment deficit, poor health
statistics, material poverty indebtedness, poor education,
disorganizing ethnic welfare, rapid capital flight, alleged
law capacity utilization of materials and other human
resources and so on. The above listed problems are what
makes Africa dependent and underdeveloped, as a result
of its incapability to overcome these problems or tackle
them successfully. This study attempts to explore the
dimensions of dependency and underdevelopment and
access the impact of Africa using Nigeria as a reference
point.

1.2 Statement of the Problem
In this analysis, we shall explore into the most of
the problems Africa, and Nigeria, in particular is faced
with and as the analysis goes further, we shall
understand the reason for this underdevelopment, and
try to sort out possible solutions to go into that, it is
paramount to point out factors necessitating the
phenomenon of underdevelopment and dependency in
Africa, such as;
i. The reckless and excess lust for foreign loan
and aid: This has to do with a financial
assistance granted to third world country in
order to boost their economy and project them
capable for international trade.
ii. The domination of import over export trade:
This is one of the major problems in Africa, or
third world countries economy, since they tend to
patronize more of the foreign goods over
indigenous goods thereby bringing the
implication of exploitation from the foreigners at
the detriment of indigenous traders.
iii. Political Crisis and Corruption: Africa is
conversant with the above, since it is married
with different kind of political crisis ranging from
military coups to party crisis and worst of all
which is corruption since it is the end products of
any political unstable nation.
iv. The failure of policies made by the
government: Since policies made cannot be
strictly adhered to them the problems in which
that policy was made for has not yet been
satisfied or settled, and in most cases these
policies made are irrelevant to the countries or
nations development agenda.
v. Lastly but not the least poor education: Here
the level of education which is the key to every
kind of success is too low and a times poor, in
third world countries the education, sector is
dominated with all manner of malpractices which
includes bribery, strikes, indefinite closure of
school, due to illegality in its operations,
unaccredited academic structures and all other
shortcomings etc.
Against this backdrop, this study attempts to
provide answers to the following questions,
i. Is there a link between dependency and
underdevelopment in Africa?
ii. Is foreign aid responsible for Africa’s
underdevelopment?
iii. Is accountability and transparent leadership
capable of endangering sustainable development
in Nigeria?

1.3 Objectives of the Study
The broad objective of this study is to interrogate
the link between dependency and underdevelopment in
Nigeria, especially the study is aimed at;
i. Establishing the link between dependency and
underdevelopment in Africa
ii. Ascertaining that foreign aid is responsible for
underdevelopment in Africa
iii. Determining if accountability and transparent
leadership are capable of engendering
development in Nigeria.

1.4 Literature Review
The term underdevelopment is used in the social
sciences to refer to certain areas of the world; it gained
prominence in the late 1940’s. Prior to this time, other
derogatory terms has been used to quality and describe
these areas as meier has noted, in the 18th century, such
terms as “rude” and barbarous were used to describe
countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. In the 19th
century, those terms were dropped in favour of new
terms such as “backward” and primitive”. In the 20th
century, especially after the end of world war if the
previous terms were equally abandoned in their places,
new terms such as “underdevelopment” and “developing”
were used.
At the inoment, it has been suggested in some
quarters that such tenures as “less developed”,
“developing”, “poor”, and emergent countries should used
instead of underdeveloped countries. The reason for this
suggestion as spotlighted by Walter Rodney, “is to avoid
any unpleasantness which may be attached to it” and
which may be interpreted as including such physical
deformities as mental and moral underdevelopment.
It is also been suggested that the previous
derogatory terms should be dropped in favour of less
offensive or mild ones such as “developing” or emergent.
This is perceived as a calculated design or ploy by the
west to mask or common flag economic stagnation and
exploration exists in underdeveloped areas. It is
contended for instance that the application of such terms
as “developing” instead of underdeveloped gives an
erroneous impression, that these countries are changing
positively and thus are developing and that if the right
policies are implemented, sooner or later these countries
will definitely catch up with the developed countries of
the world.
In view of this assumption, the Marxist Theorist
prefer to use the term “underdevelopment” to describe
the less developed parts of the world. The reason for this
is that the term “underdevelopment” is believed to be best
concept that can apply describe the state of stagnation
and exploitation that is prevalent in these societies. We
now shall examine the meaning of the concept of
underdevelopment.
Underdevelopment the Liberal Perspective
The liberal scholars conceive of underdevelopment
in terms of backwardness and primitivity. This explains
why it is common for them to use the term “agrarian” and
pre-industrial to in apply underdeveloped parts of the
world. Implicit in this conception of underdevelopment is
the fact that it is a natural or original condition, which
has existed from fine immoral. In other words it is
believed by the bourgeois scholars that
underdevelopment is not caused by an external factor
but rather is induced by internal variable.
Pulating the above, it is the alternative explanation
which is equally offered to support the view that
underdevelopment is a natural process. In this view, it is
stated that development and underdevelopment are
natural process ordained by God. It is contended that the
developed parts of the world have been endowed by God
with wisdom and high intelligence quotient (IQ). This
explains why they are superior and advanced. On the
other hand, the same God is said to have created the
underdeveloped societies differently. He makes them to
be culturally and psychologically interior, which is said to
be responsible for their state of backwardness.
It is important to state that even though the
bourgeois scholars are agreed on the fact that natural
and internal forces causes underdevelopment, there is no
agreement with respect to which internal variable
actually bring it about. According to Ragna Nurke in his
work “problems of capital accumulation in poor
countries; a country is backward and poor because it is
poor.
This represents a vicious circle of poverty that “runs
from low income productivity and then back to real
income.
In his own contribution, Richard Eastern line
attributed underdevelopment to the eliminate, over
population and lack of motivation on the part of the
population.
Other scholars still blame the situation on radical
grounds, peasants conservation, and strong attachments
to tribal customs such as extended family and hand fame
system.
In view of the fact bourgeois scholars attribute
underdevelopment to internal factors, this has influenced
how they defined it. According to them it can be defined
as a natural state of social, psychological, political land
economic backwardness occasioned by natural and
internal milieu. This definition leads the liberal scholars
to postulate that the way out of this backwardness is
through modernization. That is “Europeanization” or
“Americanization” of the economy in order to stimulate
growth and progress.
Underdevelopment: The Marxist Perspective
To the radical scholars, it is untrue that
underdevelopment connotes backwardness, primituity or
lack of underdevelopment. This is because every people
have developed in one way or the other and to a greater
or lesser extent.
Equally untrue is the assertion that it is a natural
process to the radical man –made process and a
manifestation of a long period of economic and political
relationship between these countries and the advanced
industrialized parts of the world.
Quite unlike the bourgeois scholars who claimed
that capitalism played no part in the creation of
underdevelopment but natural and internal factors; the
radical scholars think differently. The thesis of
dependency theorists is that underdevelopment is caused
by capitalism which guarantees exploitation. This
position has been supported not only empirically but
logical and factual presentation of concrete evidence. For
instance, while supporting the view that
underdevelopment is caused by the interplay between
internal structures; Gunder Frank asserted:
Underdevelopment is not simply non-development, but is a unique type of socio-economic
structure brought about by the integration of society concerned into the sphere of the advanced capitalist countries.
It is the view of the radical scholars that it is the
same process that fosters development in the
industrialized parts of the world which fools development
and generates underdevelopment as third world
countries. Put in another way, the integration of third
world countries into the main stream of world capitalism
has enhanced the rate of development in the third world.
This position has been beautifully articulated by Osvaldo
Sunkel when he observes;
We postulate that development and underdevelopment are the two faces, of the same
universal process, and what its geographic expression is translated into two great
polarizations on the one hand one polaziration of the world between industrial,
advanced developed and metropolitan countries and underdeveloped, backward, poor,
peripheral and dependent countries and on the other hand, polarization within
countries in terms of space, backward, primitive, marginal and activities.
Similar views have been expressed by other eminent
scholars of the Marxist persuasion. The most forceful
among them are Kay, Jaguaribe, Celso, Rodney, Frank,
Dos Santos, and Cotten. They have argued though with
different emphasis that the foreign penetration is the
causes of underdevelopment.
Arising from this premises, they contended that
underdevelopment is the state of backwardness,
retardations and economic distortion counsel by
exploration and plunder of the economies of the
developing areas as the result of their integration into
world capitalism.
This perception of underdevelopment has
constrained Rodney to assert that;
A second and even more indispensable component of modern underdevelopment is that
it expresses a particular relationship of exploitation, namely; exploitation of one country to another.
All of the countries named “underdeveloping is exploited by the other and underdevelopment
with which the world is now preoccupied is a product of capitalism.
From our discussion so far on the concept of
underdevelopment, we have seen that the term has been
used and defined differently by both the liberal and
radical scholars. The way these scholars defined it is
apparently influenced by what they think causes
underdevelopment while the liberal views on
underdevelopment is that, it is an original and natural
situation, the Marxist scholars are of the view that it is
an artificial process caused by the exploitation of one
country by another. Our knowledge of underdevelopment
should place us on a vintage pedestal to understand the
concept of the “third world” or “dependency”.
The concept of “dependency” coined by a Brazilian
sociologist Fernando Hennighe Caidoso, helps to link
both and political analysis that is, it links those who are
beneficiaries of development with those who make
decisions. Dependency simply stated that crucial
economic decisions are made not by the countries that
are being “developed” but by foreigners whose interests
are carefully safeguarded foreigners use their economic
power to buy political power in the countries that they
penetrate. This could mean political pressures, the
imperialist monopolies or even military intervention. This
collusion between aliara economic and political power
distorts both the economy and the policy of the
dependent countries. Out of this situation is the
emergence of political alliances between foreign
bourgeois. The process is now complete because first all
the metropolis exploits the colonies, so does the domestic
colonial bourgeois class exploit the rest of the population.
The term “dependency” is shrouded in the definitive
ambiguity. This explains why there are many definitions
for the term. In its earliest conception dependency, as
noted by Ian Roxborough, was defined as “the observers
side of a theory of imperialism” implicit in this formation
is the notion that imperialism has two faces.
The first represents the colonial powers, while the
others represent the “imperialized” or dependent
countries in this sense, theories of dependency were
believed to have the potentials of explaining the social
and economic process which occurred in the
“imperialized” or dependent countries.
The above perception of dependency must have
been influenced by the postulation of V.I. Lenin on
imperialism. As the first scholar to have used the term
“dependency” Lenin contended that capitalism
imperialism is a manifestation of the struggle among the
colonial powers for economic and political denomination,
as well as division the world. He observed that;
Not only are there to main groups of countries, those owning colonies and the colonies
themselves, but also diverse forms of dependent countries which politically are formally
independent but infact enmeshed in the net of financial and diplomatic dependency.
Lenin’s observation merely captures the nature of
dependency as a logical manifestation of imperialism. It
does not give adequate insight for an in-depth
operationalization of the concept; various definitions have
been made as there are some scholars.
In his contribution, P. O. Brien articulated the view
that “dependent countries are the one which lacks the
capacity for autonomous growth and they lack this
because their structures are dependent ones.
This position seems to tally with Bill Warren, who
contends that;
Dependency represents the complex socio-economic relationship that bind the advanced capitalist countries of the “center”
(the United States of America, Japan, Western Europe) and the Latin America countries of the
“periphery” such that the movements and structures of the former decisively determine those of the latter in a fashion somehow
detrimental to the economic progress of the Latin American societies.
The definition of dependency Dos Santos is the most
incisive and concise. It encapsulates the central ideas of
most radical scholar in the area.
According to Dos Santos, dependency means;
A situation in which the economy of certain countries is conditioned by the development
and expansion of another economy to which the former is subjected.
The relation of inter dependence between these and world trade,
assumes the form of dependence when some countries (the dominant ones) can do this only as reflection of the expansion,
which can have either a positive or negative effect on their immediate development.
Dos Santos position was expanded by Osvaldo
Sunkel as he maintained that;
Foreign factors are seen not as external but as intrinsic to the system, with manifold and some times hidden or subtle political, financial, economic, technical and cultural effects inside the underdevelopment country. Thus
this concept of “dependency” links the post – war evolution of capitalism
internationally to the discriminatory nature of the local process of Development,
as well know it. Access to the means and benefits of development is selective rather than spreading them,
the process lends to ensure a self reinforcing accumulation of privilege for special groups
as well as the continued existence of a marginal class.
Ian Rox Borough has reduced other usages of the
term “Dependency” into two basic approaches namely;
Dependency as a relationship or as a conditioning for
factors which alters the internal functioning elements of
the dependent social formation. Regardless of how one
sees dependency, in essence, it implies a kind of parasitic
relationship that exists between the highly industrialized
countries, and the less developed ones in a manner that
ensures the continuous advancement of the former to the
detriment of the latter. An example could bedrawn from
the Nigeria’s oil and gas sector, here we see how we take
out variable time and money to export our natural
resources to be refined in the developed or industrialized
countries; and after being refined in these places, it is
imported back to the home nation, were it is being
distributed and sold at a higher price, irrespective of the
fact that the old is naturally gotten from this country. As
a result, we now pay higher to get what naturally belongs
to us, thereby depriving us the privilege to enjoy our
natural resources. Now it is noted we use our natural
resources to maximize the economy and suffer or rather
pay tighter to get what is ours.
Dependency as noted earlier states that crucial
economic decisions are made not by the countries that
are being “developed” but by foreigners whose interest
are carefully safeguarded, foreigners use their economic
power to buy political power in the country that they
penetrate. Instances could be drawn from the IMF, SAP,
World Bank etc. The western world adopted this strategy
which appeared as a means to develop most African
states and Nigeria in particular, thereby learning Nigeria
and most African states indebted to these Europe nations
and as of which the debts owned by these developing
nations, increases as times goes by and becomes a reary
tasks for the developing nations as a result of their
incapability to pay backs the idea now leaves Nigeria and
Africa unable to attain autonomous growth because their
structures are dependent ones.
Dependency can be seen or defined as an
explanation of the economic development of a state in
terms of the external influences, political economic and
cultural on national development.

1.5 Significance of the Study
The significance of this study cannot be over
emphasized because it is of great importance and adds to
the existing knowledge towards the concept (Dependency
and underdevelopment). As such the ongoing analysis
becomes of great importance to these who particularly
seek to understand why Africa or Nigeria is dependent on
the western world. Also of high value of today’s
government of Nigeria, which tries to eradicate the
concept of dependency and underdevelopment from the
Nigeria, socio-economic and political system
This study is finally important to Nigeria and Africa
as a whole because it explores and attempts to bring
possible solution on how Nigeria could attain a
sustainable development, inspite of her dependent
nature.

1.6 Theoretical Framework
This study considers dependency theory most
appropriate as the frame work of analysis. Dependency
theory is a body of social science theories, both from
developed and developing nations that creates a world
view which suggests that poor underdeveloped states of
the periphery are exploited by wealthy developed nations
of the center in order to sustain economic growth and
remain wealthy.
For example, these European stats of the world,
issued out loans to most African states for development
exercise, and these African states, have been made to
service these debts from time to time irrespective of the
fact that most African stated are unable to pay up these
debts.
Now it is seen that even the amount paid on debt
servicing for a number of years, has even exceeded the
debt owned by these African states. This is an example of
what these European, or rather what the theory of
dependency explains by suggesting that the poor
underdeveloped nations of the periphery are exploited by
the wealthy developed nations of the center in order to
sustain economic growth and remain wealthy.
Dependency theory developed in the late 1950’s
under the guidance of the Director of the United Nations
Economic commission for Latin America Raul Presbisch.
Presbisch and his colleagues were troubled by the fact
that the economic growth in advanced industrialized
countries did not necessarily lead to the growth of the
poorer countries. Indeed, their studies suggested that
economic activity in the rural countries often led to
serous economic problem in the poorer countries. Such
as possibility was not predicted by neo classified theory,
which lead assumed that economic growth was beneficial
to all even if the benefits were not equally shared.
Presebisch’s initial explanation for the phenomenon
was very straight forward, poor countries exported
primary commodities to the right countries that then
manufactured products out of those commodities and
sold them back to the poor countries. The value added by
manufacturing a usable product always cost more than
their primary products used to create those products. For
instance, in the oil and gas sector in Nigeria, it is
observed that we export our oil to these westerns, for
refinery and after it is being refined, we also take out
variable time and money to import back this oil, and at
the end of the day, the cost of exportation and
importation of these products, becomes so high but no
profit is realized after the transaction. This now boils
down to the increment of fuel price in Nigeria, workers go
on strike etc. Therefore poorer countries would never be
earning enough from their export earnings to pay for
their exports.
Presbisch’s solution was similarly straight forward
poorer countries should embark on program of import
substitution so that they need not purchase the
manufactured product from the richer countries. The
poorer countries would still sell their primary product on
the world market but their foreign exchange reserves
world not be used to purchase their manufacturers from
abroad.
Three issues made this policy difficult to flow. The
first is that the internal markets of the poorer countries
were not large enough to support the economies of scale
used by the richer countries to keep their prices low.
The second issue concerned the political will of the
poorer countries as to whether a transformation from
being primary product producers was possible or
desirable.
The final issue revolved around the extent to which
the poorer countries actually had control of their primary
products, particularly in the area of selling those
products aboard.
These obstacles to the import substitute policy led
others to think a little more creatively and his toxically at
the relationship between rich and poor countries.
At this point, dependency theory was viewed as a
possible way of explaining the persistent poverty of the
poorer countries. The traditional neo-classical approach
said vertically nothing on this question except to assert
that the poorer countries were late in coming to solid
economic practices and then as soon as they learned the
techniques of modern economies, then the poverty will
begin to subside. However Marxist theorists of viewed the
persistent poverty as a consequence of capitalists
exploitation. And e new body of thought, called the “word
system approach” argued that the poverty was a direct
consequence of the evolution of the international political
economy into a fairly rigid division of labour, which
favoured the rich and penalized the poor.
Understanding Dependency Theory
The debates among the liberal reforms (prebisch).
The Marxist (Andre Gunder Frank) and the world system
theorists (Waller Stein) was rigorous and intellectually
quite challenging. There are still points of serious
disagreement among the various strains of dependency
theories and it is a mistake to think that there is only one
unified theory of dependency.
Nonetheless, there are some core propositions
which seems to underline the analysis of most
dependency theorists.
Dependency can be defined as an explanation of the
economic development of a state in terms of the external
influences, political economic and cultural on national
development policies.
Dependency also is a historical condition which
shapes a certain structure of the world economy such
that it favours some countries to the detriment of others
and limit the development possibility of the sub-ordinate
economies, a situation include the economy of a certain
group of countries is conditional by the development and
expansion of another economy to which their own is
subjected an example of this could be traced from the
colonial history. These European came to Africa,
introduced us to cash crops, which led us to the
moneterization policy, and at this level things started
being difficult, and people work so hard to get money this
time. This monetarization policy now led to debt crisis as
a result of the inability to meet up to this standards, and
the debt crisis issue, now resulted to brain drain and
poverty in Africa and also the level of our
underdevelopment. Now with this example, it is noted
that dependency is a historical condition that shapes a
certain structure of the world economy that if favours
some countries to the detriment of others and limits the
development possibilities of the sub-ordinate economies.
There are three common features of these definition,
which most dependency theorists share, first,
dependency characterizes the international system as
comprised of two sets of states, variously described as
dominant, dependent, center/periphery or
metropolitan/satellite.
The dominant states are the advanced
industrialized nations in the organization of economic co
operation and development (OECD). The dependent
states are those states of Latin America, Africa, Asia
which have low per capital GNP’s and which rely heavily
on the export of a simple commodity for foreign exchange
earnings.
Second, both definitions have in common the
assumption that the external forces are of singular
importance to the economic activities within the
dependent states. These external factors includes
multinational corporations, international commodity
markets, foreign assistance, communications and any
other means by which the advanced industrialized
countries can represent their economic interests abroad.
Third, the definition of dependency all indicate that
the relations between dominant and dependent states are
dynamic because the interaction between the two sets of
states tend to not only reinforce but also intensify the
unequal patterns. More over dependency is a very deep
seated historical process, rooted in the
internationalization of capitalism.
As such, dependency theory here explains the
present underdeveloped states of many nations in the
world by examining the patterns of interactions among
nations and by arguing that inequality among nation is
an intrinsic part of those interactions.

1.6.1 Method of Data Collection
The method of data collection in this research work
is the secondary mode of data collection, first as stated in
the research proposal. The secondary mode of Data
collection here implies visiting of libraries, extraction of
information from journals, newspapers and books.

1.6.2 Method of Data Analysis
Since the method of data collection was the
secondary mode of data collection, or rather the non
reactive method of data collection, the method of data
analysis here, is the qualitative method of data analysis.
It is more explanatory in nature.

1.7 Hypotheses
1. There is a strong link between dependency and
underdevelopment in Africa.
2. Foreign aid appears to be responsible for the
underdevelopment of Africa.
3. Accountability and transparent leadership are
capable of a gendering development in Nigeria.

1.8 Scope and Limitations of the Study
The scope of this study centers around the
dependency status of Africa, particularly, how the
dependency status endangers the economic development
of most African states. The scope of this study also
emphasis on how a sustainable development can be
attained inspite of the dependent nature of Africans and
particularly Nigeria.
Limitations
Too many factors stood as limitations to this
research study, insufficient finance, was one major
problem faced during this research work. This study also
suffered the problem of data collection and management.

1.9 Operationalization of Concepts
In this study, some political concepts will be
adopted or rather applied in relation to the study and
they includes as follows
Oligarchy: Government by the few, the logically exclusive
categories of government by one, the few or the many
that have been widely deployed, but the terminology has
varied for example, aristocracy, is a form of government
by the few, Aristotle distinguished between rules who
govern in their own interests (Oligarchy). Sociologists
have made claims about a necessary connection between
organization and oligarchy.
Hegemony: When social class, exits power over others
beyond that accounted for by coercion or law, it may be
described as meaning hegemonic, drawing on the Greek
word “hegemony” meaning chieftaincies. Thus she
bourgeois was regarded as hegemonic within capitalists
society by gramsic, who believed their power depended on
the permeation by bourgeois values of all organ of the
society.
Elite: Privileged minority, a small group of people within
a larger group who have more power, social standard,
wealth or talent then the rest of the group restricting
powers and privileges in a society to a member of one
small favoured group, and the belief that this
arrangement is justified by their support.