The Modernization Theory Paradigm and Its Discontents: Reviewing the Contribution and Fallings of the Modernization Theory to Social and Political Research

Article
Open Access
by Leonid L. Kyianytsia1
1 I.F. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (Kyiv, Ukraine)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.29202/up/8/5
Received: 15 April 2021 / Accepted: 16 May 2021 / Published: 29 May 2021

View Full-Text Review Reports Cite This Paper

Abstract

This article is an attempt to critically consider the modernization paradigm of the study of social and socio-political processes in a manner that would allow one to clarify the respective paradigm ‘s contribution to understanding and analysing the processes of global social, economic and political development. The article argues that an insufficient objectivity and deterministic nature of the modernization theory should lead one to consider the need for a major revision of the assumptions as to linear and deterministic development of the state and society as adopted from the classical statement of the modernization theory. The author provides both an overview of the unfolding of the modernization theory in its classical version, by paying due attention to interconnections between the socio-economic and the socio-political dimensions of the latter, and a review of major critiques issued against the modernization theory as well as the challenges faced by more contemporary attempts to revive it (e.g., the «end of history» thesis or the post-modernization theory). Overall, the author comes to a conclusion that the modernization theory paradigm should be at the very least majorly revised if the viability of its claims in the contemporary social environment may be upheld in a convincing manner.

Keywords: modernization theory, development theory, post-modernization, «end of history,» critique

References

Apter, David E. (1965) The politics of modernization. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Bendix, Reinhard (1967) Tradition and modernity reconsidered. Comparative Studies in Society and History, No. 9(3): 292-346.

Eisenstadt, Shmuel N. (2003) Comparative civilizations and multiple modernities: A collection of essays. Leiden: Brill.

Eisenstadt, Shmuel N. (ed.) (2002) Multiple modernities. London and New York: Routledge.

Gilman, Nils (2003) Mandarins of the Future: Modernization Theory in Cold War America. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Fisun, Oleksandr (2006) Democracy, neopatrimonialism and global transformations. Kharkiv: National Institute for Strategic Studies.

Gorbatenko, Volodymyr (1999) Strategy of the modernization of society: Ukraine and the world at the turn of millennium. Kyiv: Akademia.

Hagen, Everett E. (1962) On the theory of social change. Homewood, Illinois: Dorsey.

He, Chuanqi (2012) Modernization science: The principles and methods of national advancement. Berlin: Springer.

Hoselitz, Bert F. (ed.) (1965). Theories of economic growth. New York: The Free Press.

Inglehart, Ronald (1997) Modernization and post-modernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Lerner, Daniel (1958) The passing of traditional society: modernizing the Middle East. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press.

Martinelli, Alberto (2004) Global modernization: Rethinking the project of modernity. London: Sage Publications.

Mulcahy, Kevin V. (1995) Walt Rostow as National Security Adviser, 1966-69. Presidential Studies Quarterly, No. 25(2): 223-236.

Organski, Abramo Fimo Kenneth (1965) The stages of political development. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Parsons, Talcott (1985) Talcott Parsons on institutions and social evolution: Selected writings. Edited by Leon H. Mayhew. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Peet, Richard and Elaine Hartwick (2009) Theories of development: Contentions, Arguments, alternatives. New York: The Guilford Press.

Pye, Lucian W., and Sydney Verba (1965) Political culture and political development. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Rokkan, Stein (1970) The growth and structuring of mass politics in Western Europe: Reflections of possible models of explanation. Scandinavian Political Studies, Vol. 5, No. A5: 65-83.

Romaniuk, Oleksandr (2007) «The end of transitology» or the crisis of its initial paradigm? Political Management, No 2: 3-15.

Rostow, Walt Whitman (1960) The stages of economic growth: A non-Communist manifesto. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Roxborough, Ian (1988) Modernization theory revisited. A review article. Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 30, No. 4: 753-761.

Sztompka, Piotr (2000) The ambivalence of social change: Triumph or trauma? Polish Sociological Review, No. 131: 275-290.

Tausch, Arno (2015) Hofstede, Inglehart and beyond. New directions in empirical global value research. Munich Personal RePEc Archive. Available online: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/64282/

Tiryakian, Edward A. (1991) Modernisation: exhumetur in pace (Rethinking macrosociology in the 1990s). International Sociology, Vol. 6, No. 2: 165-180.

Weil, Shalva (2010) On multiple modernities, civilizations and ancient Judaism: Interview with Prof. S. N. Eisenstadt. European Societies, Vol. 12, No. 4: 451-465.

Yakushik, Valentin (1991) The State of a Transitional Type: Problems of Theory. Available online: http://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/handle/123456789/1088

Yakushik, Valentin (1993) Political system and political regime. Post-Communist Ukraine: Contradictions and prospects for socio-political development. Political Thought, No. 1: 117-120. Available online: https://www.academia.edu/676552/

Share and Cite

Kyianytsia, Leonid L. (2021) The Modernization Theory Paradigm and Its Discontents: Reviewing the Contribution and Fallings of the Modernization Theory to Social and Political Research. Ukrainian Policymaker, Volume 8, 41-50. https://doi.org/10.29202/up/8/5
Back to the list of Articles