Economic structuralism theory is an extremely useful theory in the definition of global political and economic structures. This theory dictates that the global political structure is determined by the global economic structure. The theory has been connected to a saying that fiscally developed nations set political rules, which they expect the developing countries follow in the foot step to getting developed. This statement is true since the developed countries have always had the intention of dominating the rest of the world. This happens in various ways while each of the activity that is witnessed has unique influence. There are both positive and negative impacts of economic structuralism to the globe.
The globe is divided between the rich who are the core and the poor who are the periphery. However, there still exists the semi-periphery group, which entails developing countries. Although, the interactions between the countries benefit all of them, the core reaps exclusively in terms of power dominance. They look for an environment where their power will dominate the globe. The cores are massively involved in the formation of rules that govern the periphery. The main set of rules that they use in the domination of the periphery is that of economic stability. They ensure that the rules set concerning global trade directly influence business between the core and the periphery (Düppe, 2011). For example, the United States of America and the United Kingdom have been of extensive significance to Africa in economic matters. However, this has been motivated by the existence of an agreement between the core nations with the periphery which is Africa. The agreement is mainly detailed with political and economic rules of the United States as well as of the United Kingdom. This defines the defense for allegations that this theory supports capitalism.
The core nations understand that, in developing countries, democracy has not yet been settled. Therefore, they are out to snatch power from the hands of the few in the society and impact the entire society with the governance. Therefore, they fuel exclusive challenges towards the abolishment of certain principles of governance in the developing countries so that they may have direct control of the economy of the given nation. For example, the fall of Libya governance by Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 was attributed to by the government of the United States. This was a technique to end the controversial barrier to economic partnership between the two nations. Libya is extremely rich in terms of oil, which is a major economic commodity.
The core nations cooperate exclusively well with the aim of maintaining exploitation of the periphery. They usually play a critical role in maintaining low prices for raw materials, and markets exposed to finished goods among periphery nations. At this point, these nations have realized that economic power is the core form of power over the periphery (Jansen, 1983). There is a belief that the rest of measures of power result from the core-periphery relationship.
In the current world, it may also be observed that the scramble for the less developed countries has begun. The main target is Africa since it s a continent believed to possess massive untapped resources. Nations like the United States, China, and the United Kingdom are out for exclusive control of the economy. They have faced the countries with favorable contracts in infrastructure development, which will bind the periphery countries in debt for a long time. The core nations will take advantage of this to advance their economic interests (Düppe, 2011).
The other element through which economic structuralism theory affirms the role of developed nations among the less developed is based on the imposition of the element of import substitution. This is a strategy by developed economies to block the less developed or developing countries in importation, as well as self production of certain things. This is a major blow to the economic development of various nations in the world. Since developing nations cannot produce their own goods, they are faced with exclusive challenge of obtaining the goods needed by the citizens. In this case, they will be forced to turn to the developed nations for assistance. The developed nations may also cut off their trade with the worldwide economy. This will block its exports to developing countries as well as imports of finished goods. For example, this took place in Mexico between 1950 and 1990 (Jansen, 1983).
Also, the developed nations have ensured that their citizens are equipped with the best forms of education in the world. Education systems are politically influenced, and they play an extremely critical role in the economic development of a society. In return, they ensure that the developing nations do not formulate education systems that will enable them fetch exclusively significant economic education. Citizens in the less developed nations will remain inclined to a common way of doing things while in the developed nations, capacity building is enhanced and all citizens remain economically viable. Governments from the developed nations send their citizens to the developing nations for exploitation of the available opportunities (Düppe, 2011). This is influenced by the favorable platform prepared by law government movement from one developed nation to an undeveloped nation targeted for a given advantage that it entails.
However, exclusive analysis of the issue needs to be understood clearly. This is because there are massive demerits as well as merits that go with the political influence of the developed nations on developing nations with proper economic intentions.
One of the positive influences that the economic theory has caused to the parties concerned is that developing countries benefit from economic prowess of the developed nations. In trade, there will be exchange of ideas which is extremely fundamental for development (Jansen, 1983). When ideas flood a given market, there is a bit of assurance on economic performance. There will be chances for growth in the country as it will be possible to use the economic resources available in the nation.
Development will also be witnessed in the developing nations. This will occur through improved infrastructure in developing countries. Infrastructures have a direct influence to how businesses take place in a country. It is one of the main ingredients for development. With improved infrastructure in terms of seaports, airports and modern roads, the economy of the given country must grow (Jansen, 1983).
However, there are some disadvantages that go with economic structuralism. One of the main disadvantages is that small domestic economies experience less pressure, which causes inefficiencies. This is following the incapability of the population to support numerous competitors. Also, lack of pressure eludes the element of comparative advantage (Granovetter, 1985).
The other disadvantage is that domestic economies experience problems of economies of scale. This is influenced by lack of adequate information that would support industries with extremely high costs for start ups. For example, setting automobiles, purchasing planes as well as installation of technology becomes extremely hard (Granovetter, 1985).
Therefore, economic structuralism remains a critical force in the global economy. Developed nations have used exclusive political influences in challenging the economic performance of developing nations. This theory has been supportive in the definition of capitalism in the world. Although, the theory is attached to various negative influences, there are massive positive elements that go with the theory.
References
Düppe, T. (2011). The making of the economy: a phenomenology of economic science. Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action And Social Structure: The Problem Of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481.
Jansen, K. (1983). Monetarism, economic crisis, and the Third World. London, England: F. Cass ; .
