Development and Dependence: The Emerging Regional Division of Labour in Latin America

Author(s):  
S. Sideri
1992 ◽  
Vol 24 (S1) ◽  
pp. 163-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Cortés Conde

In 1949 Raúl Prebisch, an Argentine economist, published a study for the United Nations’ Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA), in which he attributed the failure to reach sustained economic growth in Latin America to the international division of labour. Based on research carried out by ECLA on the terms of trade between manufactures and primary goods, he concluded that – contrary to expectations – they moved against primary products. If prices decline as productivity increases (in competitive markets), industrial goods, where the technological improvements had been more significant, should have declined in price more than agricultural goods. The empirical results of the study showed the opposite.1 If the Latin American countries therefore wanted to benefit from technological progress, they should move towards industrialisation. Almost at the same time, based on the same empirical study, Hans Singer not only argued that the gains from trade had not been distributed equally, but also that foreign investments in the export sector were not part of the domestic economy, but represented an enclave belonging to the countries of the centre which received its benefits.2 Singer advanced an argument that became popular later on; he noted the existence in the underdeveloped countries of a dual economy with two sectors each with different productivity and segmented markets: a modern sector linked to the central countries and a traditional sector linked to the rest of the economy. Also, from the critics of the classical theory of trade, another argument was put forward: the different income elasticities of demand for manufactures and agricultural goods (Engels’ law) suggested that expenditure on agricultural goods would decline in relative terms as incomes rose, hurting the terms of trade for primary products.3


2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 713
Author(s):  
Verónica Gómez Urrutia

En el presente artículo se analiza lo relativo al llamado “trabajo de cuidado” (carework) atendiendo a su valoración social como contribución a la manutención de la comunidad política. Este tipo de trabajo, históricamente realizado por mujeres, supone la división del trabajo en “productivo” y “reproductivo” y la invisibilización de este último como parte de las condiciones que aseguran la cohesión y el bienestar de una sociedad. En este contexto se plantean argumentos a favor de vincular el concepto de cuidado –con sus impli­caciones de género– con el de ciudadanía, de manera que el trabajo de cuidado se conceptúe como parte de los deberes de los ciudadanos hacia la comunidad política, pero también como un derecho que se garantice a quienes están en situación de vulnerabilidad.AbstractThis paper analyses some of the issues posed by carework from the perspective of its contri­bution to the maintenance and survival of political communities. Carework –which has been historically performed mainly by women- presupposes the sexual division of labour into “productive” and “reproductive”, and the exclusion of the later from the conditions that are considered as necessary to ensure society’s cohesion and welfare. The paper proposes arguments in favour of linking the concept of care (with its gendered implications) with the concept of citizenship, so as to conceptualise carework as part of the political duties of men and women towards their communities, but also as a right that can be guaranteed to anybody in situation of temporary or permanent vulnerability.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document