Background information
Different development theories have been invented by scholars in bid to unravel the mystery behind varied developments in the society. In their bid to come up with strong argument, scholars have employed different social scientific phenomena. One of the development theories that were established in early 1940s is modernization theory. This theory was developed in an attempt to describe the factors and process followed in realizing modernization within a nation of a society. The theory tries to identify and bring out some of the social elements that facilitates in modernizing the society (Bernstein 1971, pp. 123-148). It also gives an outline of the stages encountered during the modernization process. The theory can be said to have evolved through three phases.
The initial phase came in early 1950s through to 1960s and tried to explain the concept of modernization based on technological advancements and introduction of western way of living in other societies. Some of the assumptions made in this phase included that modernization was realized as a result of mass media which enhanced the advent of social and technical modernism. It was believed that mass media also brought about improvement in literacy level of the society which spurred development (Bill & Hannan 1983, p. 152). Through mass media, people are enlightened thus engaging their minds in coming up with novel ideas to facilitate in their development.
The second phase of modernization theory emerged as a critique of the critical theory. In this phase, the theory contradicted the issue of western influence in realization of modernity. Rather than seeing introduction of mass media as a tool for modernization, the theory saw is as a way of introducing western culture so as to enhance their dominance and economic imperialism. The present phase of modernization theory came in early 1990s. This is referred to as the late or post modernity theory. Unlike the other phases, this phase has tried to be neutral. It is neither against nor in favor of western influence in modernization (Bill & Hannan 1983, p. 161). Instead, the theory has dwelled more on identifying mysteries found in modernization process as well as describing the effect of modernization to both the society and individuals.
Context of modernization theory
The advent of modernization theory can be traced back to era of enlightenment. This is the period when philosophers became inquisitive of the trend in which the community around them was developing and changing with respect to living standards and health (Billet 2000, pp. 324-253). Some of the scholars attributed these changes to technological advancement. At this time, there was a strong belief that technology, scientific advancement and development knowledge would go a long way in helping the nations grow. These were perceived as the only tools that would lead to poverty eradication in the entire world. Consequently, numerous theories were established that explained the contribution of technology to modernization. It is these theories that triggered the need to identify how the different areas of development were related.
Initially, the process of modernization within a society was perceived to depend on numerous internal factors such as cultural practices of the respective society. By these time, there was limited advancement in technology thus was not considered as a factor for modernization (Cowen & Shenton 1996, p. 83). Today, the modernization theory has shifted its approach to focus on contributions made by technological advancements. Currently, the theory recognizes globalization as one of the factors that have led to modernization. It has led to introduction of universally accepted practices doing away with the initial cultural practices. There is a belief by theorists that with time, the whole world will embrace a single culture based on the look of the things.
There are two perspectives in which modernization can be viewed. These are modernization as an offensive or as a process. Media and political domain claims that is such advancements as novel data technology and desire to improve obsolete innovations that trigger the need for modernity. On the other hand, those who view modernization as an offensive claim that developments as well as unexploited opportunities brought about by development are molded and managed by people. Consequently, modernization can be considered to come about due to human activities and not technology (Cyril 1975, p. 105). As a result, it is possible for human to change the process to modernization and to criticize it. Theorists with this perspective call for the society to be open to changes aimed at facilitating in modernization. They also attribute reactionary forces to challenges experienced during modernization process.
Contributors
The idea of modernization theory was brought up by Marquis de Condoret. This was after realization that technological and economic advancement strongly contributed improvement in social life. This led to him asserting that there was a strongly relationship between social and economic development. Having established this, Marquis stated that society needed to come up with new inventions as well as improving on innovations of the time so as to be at par with the ever changing world (Leys 1996, pp. 19-32). He gave improvement in technology as the ultimate way through which people would be able to achieve modernization.
Emile Durkheim came up with the idea of functionalism to reinforce what was known with respect to modernization. This showed that the varied institutions found within the society depend on one another for growth and development. He led to the issue of division of labor in bid to strengthen social order and also to help the poor societies grow economically. Other contributors to this theory include Walt Rostow who tried to highlight some of the requirements a society must have for it to realize modernization. Apter, on the other hand felt that there was some relationship between modernization and good governance (Preston 1998, pp. 62-71). He concentrated on researching on the relationship between equality, good governance and modernization. It is David McClelland that introduced the issue of valuing and embracing innovation to modernization. He claimed that for a specific country or society to achieve modernization, it has to embrace the spirit of innovation, capitalism and triumphant.
Criticism of modernization theory
Despite the aforementioned theorists making an effort to come up with theories that explain the concept of modernization in the society, their arguments were made based on different assumptions which may not apply equally to all the societies or countries. There are different factors that may or may not lead to modernization that they drew limited attention to. One of the major faults made when coming up with modernization theory was blending modernization with Westernization. In this way, it implied that for a society to modernize, it had to do away with its past cultural practices and embrace western culture (Dijk 1993, pp. 384‑407). Most of those who came up with modernization theory used western culture as their unit of reference. Consequently, all societies that did not practice the culture were considered not to be modernized. This perspective leads to such societies being considered to be inferior despite them having equal or even more stable living standards with the Western countries. The reality is modernity has no any relationship with culture whatsoever (Giddens 1991, p. 214). A good example is Japan. For decades, Japan has been found to embrace its culture and avoid introduction of other cultures. The fact that Japan does not practice western culture has not hindered it from realizing modernity. It is one of the countries that have surpassed Western countries with respect to development. It has some of the most modern technologies and industries.
Generally, the theory has been seen to be ethnocentric with theorists put it that countries that do not embrace western culture are deemed to fail in their effort to achieve modernization. This is an indication that for all developing countries to realize modernity, they are obliged to emulate and copy development strategies used by western countries. Theorists deliberately admit that there are other alternatives to modernization rather than western culture (Preston 1996, p. 194). They have been proved wrong by countries such as China which throughout their modernization process, they have not used any western culture or emulated western development pattern. Its economy is in vibrant growth despite it not following western trends in its modernization process.
In trying to elaborate the process of modernization, theorists of modernization theory have undermine the role played traditional cultures and norms in enhancing social cohesion which is paramount for development. For them, they argue that third world countries ought to abandon their traditional way of doing things and embrace the western culture for them to be on the track to modernization. There is still a big gap between the developed and the developing countries (Schramm 1984, pp. 54-81). However, theorists have turned a blind eye to this trying to escape the reality on the ground. Rather than helping developing countries identify some of the factors that hinder endeavors to modernization. They have blatantly decided to defend western culture as the sole tool for modernization. This has led to the theory being Eurocentric. The fact that modernization began in Europe, it does not mean that these countries developed due to their culture. There are many other factors that lie behind their modernization. Theorists ought to have identified some of these factors and base their argument on them rather than dwelling on culture.
Even in the developed countries such as Europe, there are still some regions that have not modernized. This is despite them embracing the western culture.
These regions have given a clear indication that western culture does not play a vital role in realization of modernity. Theorists have ignored the wide gap with respect to modernization that is still evident within the countries. Rather than addressing such issues, modernization theory can be perceived as an avenue through which western scholars have used to sell their capitalist theories to other nations (Schuster 1998, para. 4). It has not addressed the uneven development witnessed in the western countries. They bring out a perception that modernity is good and that no good thing can be found without modernity. This is not the case as there is still violence in western countries despite them having been developed.
Another factor that theorists of modernization theory have ignored is the issue of ecological changes. Not all countries despite embracing western culture and having the requisite technology can modernize. The theory makes an assumption that countries need to have enough natural resources to modernize. This is not necessarily the case. There are countries with adequate technology but fail to modernize due to environmental factors. Apart from culture and technology, the environment of any region plays a significant role in enhancing development (Leroy & Jan 2000, p. 34). For instance, it is difficult for countries arid and semi-arid regions to effectively develop despite them being supplied with the necessary technology. This is because environmental conditions of such countries are not favorable for development of some natural resources which are vital for development.
Modernization entails different factors. Apart from culture, technology and education, the historical background of the region plays a significant role in achieving development. For instance, countries that were once under colonization or civil wars, it has been difficult for them to achieve modernization despite them having the required infrastructure. Civil wars have led to these countries being incapacitated economically and intellectually. For the countries to attain modernization, they are required to educate their labor force or source expertise from the developed countries. This has not been easy for them. Countries that were once under colonization; especially African countries find it hard to modernize. Some of the have the necessary resources but still suffer from neocolonialism (Scott 1995, pp. 114-134). Despite them being given the freedom, there are numerous conditions they have to abide by when it comes to development. This has made it hard for such countries to develop despite having the necessary technology. A good example is South Africa. The country has all infrastructures necessary for growth and development. However, the country is still struggling to develop due to its past historical background.
In realizing modernity, western countries did not depend on internal factors as theorists tries to put it. Most of the wealth was generated from their colonies in Africa and United States. Western countries siphoned most of the resources (minerals, raw materials and labor force) from their colonies. These led to them developing while their colonies remained weaker economically (Tipps 1973, pp. 199-212). It is with this respect that theorists have come up with dependency theory to counter what modernization theory tries to state. Generally, no man is an island and every state has to depend on others for development. No one country can fully satisfy itself with all the resources required for development. Consequently, states have not only to depend on technology and mass media but on other states for development.
Rather than being detrimental to modernization, cultures of developing countries act as a remedy to economic insecurity. Theorists have put it that most of the developing countries have failed to achieve modernity due to their cultures. A good example of how some cultures act as a counter to economic insecurity is one where some cultures advocate for family businesses (Tipps 1973, 213-226). Most of these businesses have been seen to succeed as every person running the business takes full responsibility. Every person has a role to play in the business implying that he or she is a shareholder. This factor has been assumed by compilers of modernization theory generalizing cultures in underdeveloped countries to be the reason behind the problem.
Modernization theory has failed to achieve its objective. Rather than being used to identify some of the factors that contribute to development, it has been used in world wide politics and social planning. The idea of westernization has made it hard for developing countries to look for ways of developing their economy from within. Despite the countries having the necessary technology and natural resources, they look upon western countries for help in achieving development (Bernstein 1971, p. 163). This has hampered growth in third world countries as leaders have been brainwashed to believing that only adaption of western culture can lead to their development.
Despite the shift to western cultures being seen as the sole way to modernization, it has not turned out to be real. Most of the countries that abandoned their initial cultural practices and adopted the western culture are yet to gain from the move. The rift between the developed and developing countries continues to intensify even after developing countries being deceived that they would attain development by abandoning their cultures and adopting those of the developed states (Billet 2000, p. 274). These countries agreed to destroy their traditional norms in the name of being assisted to attain modernity. To such countries, the move can only be termed as a shift from conventional forms of poverty to a more modern form of wretchedness. This is because their social life has not been found to improve despite them adopting some more recent ways of life.
There are other factors such as political stability of the state that contributes to modernization and have not been considered in modernization theory. Even if a state has the required resources or adopts western culture, it is deemed to fail in modernization if its political environment is poor. For instance, countries with corrupt system of governance see most of the resources aimed for development ending up into the pockets of a few leaders. It is this reason that leads to these countries witnessing uneven development (Leroy & Jan 2000, pp. 35-46). The few who have access to development resources continue developing while the rest society continues languishing in poverty.
Conclusion
Generally, the term modern refers to current. Hence, today’s societies can be said to be modernized despite them not exhibiting western cultures. There is need for theorists to come up with a clear definition of modernization rather than dwelling on cultural factors in gauging modernization of specific society or state. Modernization and development does not depend on cultural practices of the society. Instead, it depends on ecological and economic factors of the country. Theorists of modernization can be blamed for using their intellect in trying to sell out capitalist ideologies practiced by western countries in the name of modernization. Uneven development in western countries has been witnessed due to individualism encouraged by modernization. It is illogical to advocate for development while the developed are not helping the developing. This move would only intensify the gap between the developed and the developing countries as it has been witnessed. Numerous countries have proved theorists wrong that capitalism is the vehicle to development. States such as China and Japan have declined to abandon their culture for western culture. In spite of this, these countries have been found to develop to an extent that they have surpassed most of the western countries that are perceived to be modernized.
Reference List
Bernstein, H., 1971. Modernization theory and the sociological study of development. Journal of Development Studies, 3(2), pp. 123-148.
Bill, B. & Hannan, K., 1983. Modernization and revolution. New York: Routledge.
Billet, B., 2000. Modernization theory and economic development: discontent in the developing world. London: Praeger Publishers.
Cowen, M. P. & Shenton, R. W., 1996. Doctrines of Development. New York: Routledge. Web.
Cyril, B., 1975. The Modernization of Japan and Russia. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Dijk, J.A., 1993. Communication Networks and Modernization. Communication Research, 20(3), pp. 384‑407.
Giddens, A., 1991. Modernity and Self-identity; Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Leroy, P. & Jan, V. T., 2000. Political modernization theory and environmental politics. Environment and Global Modernity, 15(2), pp. 34-46.
Leys, C., 1996. The rise & fall of development theory. Indiana: Indiana University Press.
Preston, P. W., 1998. Rethinking Development. London: Routledge.
Preston, P.W., 1996. Development theory: an introduction. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Schramm, W., 1984. Mass Media and National Development, The role of information in developing countries. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Schuster, M., 1998. Modernization theory and dependencia: why did they fail? [Online]
Scott, C. V., 1995. Gender and development: Rethinking modernization and dependency theory. London: Rienner Publishers.
Tipps, D. C., 1973. Modernization Theory and the Comparative Study of Societies: A Critical Perspective. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 15, pp.199-226.