Modernization Theory, Then and Now

Abstract

Contrary to the pronouncements of Wallerstein, Alexander and others, modernization theory is far from dead. Publications on modernization theory have increased in num ber during each successive five-year period since 1970.1 distinguish between modern ization theory "then" -its formative period from 1949 to 1979, and "now" the period since the 1990s. Two main things have happened to the theory. First, some research findings in diverse sub-fields continue to vary with, and be explained by, societies' level of modernization, thereby confirming the original modernization paradigm. Second, when other researchers discovered anomalies that could not be explained within the original theory, they did not abandon the theory. Instead, they creatively extended it in new directions that could account for the anomalies, using such concepts as reflexive modernization, risk society, first and second modernity, ecological modernization, evo lutionary theory, values modernization, multiple modernities, and global modernity.

Effects of Modernization and Globalization of Values Change in the Arab World

“…This transformation of attitudes is culminated in moving away from absolutist, traditional, and patriarchal norms, ideals, and beliefs to more relative, tolerant, and egalitarian views of the self, society, political order, and culture. While this prescription is said to be probabilistic rather than deterministic, modernization theory still holds that improvements in income, education, institutionalization, technological advancement, empowerment of females, and greater levels of industrialization, urbanization and population densities are associated with predictable political and cultural changes across societies (Marsh, 2014;Bordoloi & Doss, 2017).…”

“…At the core of modernization theory lays its basic principle: the replacement of traditional values with a set of modern values due to significant changes in the economy and society at a given time and place. Lerner (1958), Weiner (1966), Tipps (1973), Arat (1988), Marsh (2014), and Bordoloi and Doss (2017) suggested that the lack of economic development, persistence of traditional cultural traits, existence of traditional institutions have led to the underdevelopment of many developing nations. Such perspectives viewed Western modes of capitalism as an inevitable way of achieving modernity; therefore, developing countries should reject their traditional systems and replace them with modern economic, social and cultural institutions if they desired to modernize.…”

“…This paradigm has undergone great criticism due to its victimization logic. It viewed underdeveloped countries as active agents that reject modern values and institutions, therefore suffering from underdevelopment (Marsh, 2014). Many social scientists have declared modernization as a moot model for cultural change since it neglects the significant influence of external forces such as colonialism, neo-colonialism, globalization, world hegemony and other forms of state international dominance (Weiner, 1966;Lerner, 1958).…”

“…Despite the great criticisms levelled against modernization theory, its central claim that economic development generates predictable cultural, social, and political values changes still enjoys theoretical and empirical popularity across the social and behavioral sciences (Marsh, 2014). Cross-national studies indicate that economic development pushes societal change in a relatively unified prescribed manner.…”

Values in Life Domains in a Cross-National Perspective

“…Attempts to understand the variation in basic value orientations often refer to modernization theory. The central claim of this theory is that socioeconomic development goes hand in hand with coherent and-to some extent-predictable societal changes (Marsh 2014). A second common element is that less developed societies acquire characteristics that are common to more developed societies (e. g., Lerner 1968, p. 386).…”