Epistemics of Development Economics: Toward a Methodological Critique and Unity (Contributions in Economics & Economic History)

The effective use of development economic theories in practice is limited, the authors contend, by the lack of explicit criterion for judging their scientific content. The directional progress of critical research and teaching is also constrained by this deficiency. This study advances a meta-theory designed to assist in evaluating the scientific validity of theories in economic development and how these theories can be improved to assist social practice. Using this model, the study then examines existing theories, dividing them into explanatory and prescriptive theories. The explanatory theories include the stage-based theories of Marx, Schumpeter, and Rostow, and factor-based theories, including capital-based, human-capital-based, and technology-based theories. The prescriptive theories include explanatory-theory-based prescriptions, interventionist prescriptive theories, and theories of economic planning.

In conclusion, the authors contend that modern analysis of development economics is plagued with logical ills, misleading notions, and a weak theoretical structure that lacks scientific appeal. Most of the theories, except for those of Marx and Schumpeter, neglect an analysis of the mechanism of change.

Dompere set out to revise Ejaz's doctoral dissertation (Howard U., 1987) but ended up producing an entirely new work using Ejaz's as a foundation. He constructs a metatheory of the theories used in both the analysis of and prescriptions for economic development. He begins by reviewing the problems and methods of evaluating scientific theories, including extensive discussions of Karl Marx and Joseph Schumpeter; then focuses on explanatory and factor-based theories of economic development, and the relationship between prescription theories and the development process. He finishes with conclusions and suggestions.
Annotation c. Book News, Inc., Portland, OR (booknews.com)

Examines the theories of development economics and their contribution to economic knowledge, concluding that modern analysis of development economics has a weak theoretical structure.

The effective use of development economic theories in practice is limited, the authors contend, by the lack of explicit criterion for judging their scientific content. The directional progress of critical research and teaching is also constrained by this deficiency. This study advances a meta-theory designed to assist in evaluating the scientific validity of theories in economic development and how these theories can be improved to assist social practice. Using this model, the study then examines existing theories, dividing them into explanatory and prescriptive theories. The explanatory theories include the stage-based theories of Marx, Schumpeter, and Rostow, and factor-based theories, including capital-based, human-capital-based, and technology-based theories. The prescriptive theories include explanatory-theory-based prescriptions, interventionist prescriptive theories, and theories of economic planning. In conclusion, the authors contend that modern analysis of development economics is plagued with logical ills, misleading notions, and a weak theoretical structure that lacks scientific appeal. Most of the theories, except for those of Marx and Schumpeter, neglect an analysis of the mechanism of change.

Includes bibliographical references (p. [181]-189) and indexes.

MANZUR EJAZ is a health economist with the government of the District of Columbia and works with the World Bank on various development projects.

Foreword

Preface

Introduction

Survey of Literature

On Criterion for Evaluating Scientific Theories: Problems and Methods

Explanatory Theories in Economic Development

Factor-Based Theories

Prescriptive Theories and the Development Process

Conclusions and Suggestions

References

Index