Contact Us
linkedin
twitter
  • ABOUT SSL
    • History
    • Contributors
  • DISCIPLINES
    • Anthropology
    • Economics
    • History
    • Philosophy
    • Political Science
    • Social Psychology
    • Sociology
  • SPECIAL COLLECTIONS
    • Evolving Values for a Capitalist World
    • Frontier Issues in Economic Thought
    • Galbraith Series
    • Global History
  • NEWSLETTER

The Persistence of Subsistence and the Limits to Development Studies: The Challenge of Tanzania

  1. Home
  2. >>
  3. Economics
  4. >>
  5. Globalization
  6. >>
  7. Globalization: Negative Development Impacts
  8. >>
  9. The Persistence of Subsistence...
The Persistence of Subsistence and the Limits to Development Studies: The Challenge of Tanzania
Author(s)Waters, Tony
AbstractThere are two general approaches to assessing what is known as ‘development’. First, there are classical accounts focusing on Europe’s development during the industrial revolution. They describe how urban areas expanded at the expense of the social and economic resources of the rural areas, disrupting an independent subsistence peasantry. The second (more common) approach to development focuses on the modern Third World. This approach assumes that, as with Europe, the entire Third World is dependent on the modern capitalist system. Discussion is typically reduced to comparisons between world systems theory and neoclassical economics. The Tanzanian government has used standard policies grounded in neoclassical and world-system assumptions since independence. But both policies failed to produce the predicted economic growth. This article argues that both policies failed because the Tanzanian peasantry, like the early modern European peasantry, is not dependent on the operation of world capitalism for basic subsistence. In fact, as studies have shown, rural Tanzania is only weakly incorporated into the capitalist world system, and in consequence has not been an easy target for what world-system theorists call ‘peripheral integration’. What makes Tanzania different is the fact that the rural peasantry do not use market mechanisms in the distribution of the ‘means of production’, especially arable land for swidden agriculture, or, for that matter, labor or cattle.
IssueNo4
Pages614-652
ArticleAccess to Article
SourceAfrica: Journal of the International African Institute
VolumeNo70
PubDateFall2000
ISBN_ISSN0001-9720

Globalization

  • Communications and Transportation
  • Culture and Consumption
  • Economic Assistance
  • Economic Transitions
  • Evaluation and Assessment of Globalization
  • Financial Globalization
  • Food and Agriculture
  • Foreign Direct Investment
  • Global Environmental Issues
  • Global Governance
  • Global Neoliberal Regime
  • Global Trade
  • Globalization and Human Capital
  • Globalization and Women
  • Globalization: Negative Development Impacts
  • Globalization: Positive Development Impacts
  • Inequality
  • Multilateral Institutions: Bretton Woods System
  • Multilateral Institutions: Other
  • Regulation and Deregulation
  • Transnational Corporations


Boston University | ECI | Contact Us

Copyright Notification: The Social Science Library (SSL) is for distribution in a defined set of countries. The complete list may be found here. Free distribution within these countries is encouraged, but copyright law forbids distribution outside of these countries.