{"title":"The Achievement Motive in Economic Growth","authors":"D. Mcclelland","doi":"10.4324/9780429311208-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429311208-6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":358818,"journal":{"name":"The Gap between Rich and Poor","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125584175","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The end of World War II marked the beginning of fundamental transformations in world affairs. The defeat of the Axis powers and the devastating toll which the war had exacted on Britain and the European allies propelled the United States into a position of economic and military preeminence. However, the United States' power did not go unchallenged. The Soviet Union was able to influence the accession of power of socialist regimes throughout Eastern Europe and Chinese Communists defeated their Western-backed adversaries to gain control of the most populous nation on earth. These events called for an urgent strategy to revitalize the economies of the Western nations. With massive U.S. public and private economic investment, Western Europe and Japan soon recovered from the ravages of war. But World War II ushered in another important change whose global implications would not be felt for some years to come. The weakening of the European powers and the logic of a war effort aimed at preserving self-determination, marked the final collapse of the vast colonial empires of the nineteenth century and the establishment of a multiplicity of states each claiming sovereign and independent status. The "new nations" soon drew the attention of U.S. policymakers concerned with the claim that Marxism presented the best and most logical road to full incorporation into the modem world. They also captured the attention and imagination of U.S. scholars who in the pursuit of knowledge, as well as the desire to influence government policy, began to produce a vast literature on the "developing" nations. For many economists the solution was another Marshall plan designed for the Third World. But other social scientists argued that fundamental differences between the devel
{"title":"Modernization and Dependency: Alternative Perspectives in the Study of Latin American Underdevelopment","authors":"J. Samuel Valenzuela, A. Valenzuela","doi":"10.4324/9780429048319-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429048319-2","url":null,"abstract":"The end of World War II marked the beginning of fundamental transformations in world affairs. The defeat of the Axis powers and the devastating toll which the war had exacted on Britain and the European allies propelled the United States into a position of economic and military preeminence. However, the United States' power did not go unchallenged. The Soviet Union was able to influence the accession of power of socialist regimes throughout Eastern Europe and Chinese Communists defeated their Western-backed adversaries to gain control of the most populous nation on earth. These events called for an urgent strategy to revitalize the economies of the Western nations. With massive U.S. public and private economic investment, Western Europe and Japan soon recovered from the ravages of war. But World War II ushered in another important change whose global implications would not be felt for some years to come. The weakening of the European powers and the logic of a war effort aimed at preserving self-determination, marked the final collapse of the vast colonial empires of the nineteenth century and the establishment of a multiplicity of states each claiming sovereign and independent status. The \"new nations\" soon drew the attention of U.S. policymakers concerned with the claim that Marxism presented the best and most logical road to full incorporation into the modem world. They also captured the attention and imagination of U.S. scholars who in the pursuit of knowledge, as well as the desire to influence government policy, began to produce a vast literature on the \"developing\" nations. For many economists the solution was another Marshall plan designed for the Third World. But other social scientists argued that fundamental differences between the devel","PeriodicalId":358818,"journal":{"name":"The Gap between Rich and Poor","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1978-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128201599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Inter-country di/Jerences in income inequality have usually been explained by developmental models which posit that income inequality decreases as a consequence of economic growth. Recent research, however, points to the inadequacy of such models. This paper develops an alternative model which explains inter-country differences in inequality as a consequence of the relation of states to the world-economy. This model posits that inter-country differences in inequality are partially a result of the degree of economic dominance and influence that states, and the economic actors wit hin them, exercise in the world-economy. Three mechanisms of this economic dominance and influence are identified: state strength, direct foreign financial control and dependence on external markets. A cross-sectional regression analysis shows that indicators of these three mechanisms do have the hypothesized effects on the degree of inequality within countries. The results suggest the importance of considering the position of states within the world-economy as a cause of inter-country differences in inequality.
{"title":"The World-Economy and the Distribution of Income Within States: A Cross-National Study","authors":"R. Rubinson","doi":"10.2307/2094841","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/2094841","url":null,"abstract":"Inter-country di/Jerences in income inequality have usually been explained by developmental models which posit that income inequality decreases as a consequence of economic growth. Recent research, however, points to the inadequacy of such models. This paper develops an alternative model which explains inter-country differences in inequality as a consequence of the relation of states to the world-economy. This model posits that inter-country differences in inequality are partially a result of the degree of economic dominance and influence that states, and the economic actors wit hin them, exercise in the world-economy. Three mechanisms of this economic dominance and influence are identified: state strength, direct foreign financial control and dependence on external markets. A cross-sectional regression analysis shows that indicators of these three mechanisms do have the hypothesized effects on the degree of inequality within countries. The results suggest the importance of considering the position of states within the world-economy as a cause of inter-country differences in inequality.","PeriodicalId":358818,"journal":{"name":"The Gap between Rich and Poor","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1976-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116316220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The process of industrialization engenders increasing income inequality as the labor force shifts from low-income agriculture to the high income sectors. On more advanced levels of development inequality starts decreasing and industrialized countries are again characterized by low inequality due to the smaller weight of agriculture in production (and income generation).
{"title":"Economic Growth and Income Inequality","authors":"S. Kuznets","doi":"10.4324/9780429311208-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429311208-4","url":null,"abstract":"The process of industrialization engenders increasing income inequality as the labor force shifts from low-income agriculture to the high income sectors. On more advanced levels of development inequality starts decreasing and industrialized countries are again characterized by low inequality due to the smaller weight of agriculture in production (and income generation).","PeriodicalId":358818,"journal":{"name":"The Gap between Rich and Poor","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121945807","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.4324/9780429311208-22
G. Fields
Excerpt] Income distribution is only one indicator of economic well-being useful in gauging improvements in the economic position of the poor; change in income distribution, appropriately conceived and measured, is as good a criterion as any for assessing progress toward the alleviation of poverty. Income is intimately bound up with a family's command over economic resources. Rising modern-sector employment or reduced infant mortality might be suggestive of improvements in the economic position of the poor; gains in real income among low-income groups provide direct evidence that poverty is being alleviated. This chapter answers the following questions: What are the strengths and limitations of alternative income concepts? "Greater equality of income distribution" implies an increase in the incomes of the poor in developing countries relative to the income of the nonpoor. Relative-inequality measures dominate the existing literature on income distribution and economic development. What are the main lessons from these studies? Is it desirable to use relative income measures to assess the welfare of the poor and progress of public policies in meeting objectives of equity? Are indicators based on absolute incomes and poverty possibly more appropriate? Are reliable and accurate data available, on a regular basis, to measure the various indicators? What recommendations, taking into account cost and other considerations, can be made on the reporting of recommended indicators?
{"title":"Assessing Progress Toward Greater Equality of Income Distribution","authors":"G. Fields","doi":"10.4324/9780429311208-22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429311208-22","url":null,"abstract":"Excerpt] Income distribution is only one indicator of economic well-being useful in gauging improvements in the economic position of the poor; change in income distribution, appropriately conceived and measured, is as good a criterion as any for assessing progress toward the alleviation of poverty. Income is intimately bound up with a family's command over economic resources. Rising modern-sector employment or reduced infant mortality might be suggestive of improvements in the economic position of the poor; gains in real income among low-income groups provide direct evidence that poverty is being alleviated. This chapter answers the following questions: What are the strengths and limitations of alternative income concepts? \"Greater equality of income distribution\" implies an increase in the incomes of the poor in developing countries relative to the income of the nonpoor. Relative-inequality measures dominate the existing literature on income distribution and economic development. What are the main lessons from these studies? Is it desirable to use relative income measures to assess the welfare of the poor and progress of public policies in meeting objectives of equity? Are indicators based on absolute incomes and poverty possibly more appropriate? Are reliable and accurate data available, on a regular basis, to measure the various indicators? What recommendations, taking into account cost and other considerations, can be made on the reporting of recommended indicators?","PeriodicalId":358818,"journal":{"name":"The Gap between Rich and Poor","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133748257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：