The Prebisch Thesis: A Theory of Industrialism for Latin America

1962 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles A. Frankenhoff
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
World Economy ◽  
Growth Theory ◽  
United Nations Economic Commission ◽  
American Experience ◽  
The Core ◽  
Economic Commission ◽  
The Family ◽  
Executive Secretary

“Historically the spread of technical progress has been uneven,” declared Dr. Raúl Prebisch, Executive Secretary of the United Nations’ Economic Commission for Latin America, “and this has contributed to the division of the World economy into industrial centers and peripheral countries engaged in primary production, with differences in income growth.” This division of the family of nations into relatively-developed “centers” and the developing “periphery” lies at the core of the Prebisch theory of industrialism for Latin America.The Prebisch “thesis”, already twelve years old, has grown out of the Latin-American experience and is gaining an increasing acceptance among Latin-American economists. The effort of this paper will be to lay open the elements of the Prebisch analysis uncritically at its several stages of development. But first it will be useful to review briefly the earlier development of economic growth theory in Latin America.

Export-Led Growth in Latin America: 1870–1930

1992 ◽  
Vol 24 (S1) ◽  
pp. 163-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Cortés Conde
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Division Of Labour ◽  
Terms Of Trade ◽  
United Nations Economic Commission ◽  
Export Sector ◽  
Segmented Markets ◽  
Primary Products ◽  
Economic Commission ◽  
Technological Improvements

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

scholarly journals A new approach to access to environmental information and protection of environmental rights.

2020 ◽  
pp. 261-271
Author(s):  
Hurova Anna ◽  
Lustosa Maryna ◽  
Mongrolle Zhulien
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
United Nations Economic Commission ◽  
Environmental Rights ◽  
European Continent ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Economic Commission ◽  
Aarhus Convention ◽  
The Caribbean

The Aarhus Convention concerning the right of information, participation and access to the justice in the environmental field was adopted in 25 June 1998, and came into effect in 30 October 2001 as part of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE-UN) is open for the adherence for every State even if not located in the European continent. However, in Mars 4, 2018, the Escazú Convention was adopted as a part of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), enshrining the same procedurals rights that Aarhus. The objective of this article is to understand why Latin-American states have chosen to create their own regional convention, even if they could have joined the Aarhus Convention concerning the same rights? The approach used to the making of this article was the bibliographic research et the interpretation of legislation and the conventions. In conclusion there’s two hypotheses justify the adoption of a certain convention, the Escazú Convention could be the answer of the Latin American towards the effectiveness of the Aarhus Convention, for instance minimization of effective realization of judicial protection of environmental rights and also, the Escazú Convention is the translation of the specific conception of environmental protection in Latin America. Also, the study found that States of Latin American and the Caribbean, through preservation of indigenous peoples, are able to transform the concept of sustainable development into so-called "continued development" and "good life" concepts. These concepts are not based on the balance of environmental and economic interests, but on the predominance of the first one. The practical implementation of these ideological foundations must go a long way to being effective, but clear wording of individual legal personality of people in fragile environmental situations, which is expressed in particular at the international level, in our opinion, already, forms the basis for further changes towards saving the planet for future generations.

scholarly journals FURTADO VS. PREBISCH: A LATIN AMERICAN CONTROVERSY

2018 ◽  
Vol 77 (306) ◽  
pp. 74
Author(s):  
Pedro Cezar Dutra Fonseca ◽  
Ivan Colangelo Salomão
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Development Process ◽  
The State ◽  
Economic Commission ◽  
Executive Secretary ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
The 1950S ◽  
America Latina

<p align="center"><strong>ABSTRACT</strong></p><p>The second half of the 1950s saw a conflict between Raúl Prebisch —the Executive Secretary of Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)— and Celso Furtado, who was one of the most respected economists in the institution. The conflict is little explored in the literature and, somehow, it has become taboo within the institution itself, since it motivated Furtado’s abandonment of ECLAC in 1957. By investigating two official documents they prepared to subsidize the Argentinian and the Mexican governments, the current study highlights the main differences regarding anti-inflation and external insertion policies and, taking a broader view, the role played by the State in leading the development process.</p><p align="center"> </p><p align="center">FURTADO VS. PREBISCH: UNA CONTROVERSIA LATINOAMERICANA</p><p align="center"><strong>RESUMEN</strong></p>En la segunda mitad de la década de 1950 se registró un conflicto entre Raúl Prebisch, el Secretario Ejecutivo de la Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), y Celso Furtado, uno de los economistas más respetados de la institución. El conflicto está poco explorado en la literatura y se ha convertido en un tabú dentro de la propia institución, ya que motivó el abandono de la CEPAL por parte de Furtado en 1957. Al investigar dos documentos oficiales que ellos prepararon para subsidiar a los gobiernos de Argentina y México, el presente artículo destaca las principales diferencias respecto a las políticas de combate a la inflación y de inserción externa y, a partir de una visión más amplia, el papel desempeñado por el Estado en la conducción del proceso de desarrollo.

Data and Methodology

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillermo Cruces ◽  
Gary S. Fields ◽  
David Jaume ◽  
Mariana Viollaz
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Household Surveys ◽  
Social Expenditure ◽  
United Nations Economic Commission ◽  
Development Indicators ◽  
Economic Commission ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Macroeconomic Indicators ◽  
Latin American Countries

This study is based on microeconomic data from more than 150 household surveys, five million households, and eighteen million persons contained in the SEDLAC—Socio-Economic Database for Latin America and the Caribbean. These data cover the following sixteen Latin American countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Based on these household surveys and the SEDLAC harmonization methodology, the study constructs comparable time series for a wide range of labour market, poverty, and income inequality indicators. It also employs aggregate macroeconomic indicators from two sources: the World Bank’s World Development Indicators and the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean’s database on social expenditure.

For Different Audiences, Different Arguments: Economic Rhetoric at the Beginning of the Latin American School

2002 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Maria Bianchi
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Latin American ◽  
World War ◽  
United Nations Economic Commission ◽  
Economic Commission ◽  
Development Policies ◽  
Economic Rhetoric ◽  
Latin American Economic

This paper consists of a rhetorical interpretation of two essays published fifty years ago, at the beginning of the so-called “Latin American economic school.” Both were written by the Argentinean economist Raúl Prebisch (1901–1986), who was then working at the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA). As the most prominent Latin American economist, Prebisch fostered the construction of a theoretical framework that heavily influenced Latin American development policies after World War II.

scholarly journals Gender Inequality in Latin America: A Multidimensional Analysis Based on ECLAC Indicators

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (23) ◽  
pp. 13140
Author(s):  
Edith Medina-Hernández ◽  
María José Fernández-Gómez ◽  
Inmaculada Barrera-Mellado
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Gender Equality ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Multidimensional Analysis ◽  
United Nations Economic Commission ◽  
Multivariate Technique ◽  
Economic Commission ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Sustainable Societies ◽  
Determinant Factor

This article analyzes the behavior of gender indicators on the economic, physical, and decision-making autonomy of Latin-American women, based on data compiled and published in 2020 by the Gender Equality Observatory of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), for 17 countries. Using the HJ-Biplot multivariate technique, it is concluded that the three evaluated areas interact with each other, in such a way that they cannot be interpreted in isolation because their relationships and interdependencies explain the differences in the participation of men and women in the socioeconomic and political environment of the nations in the region. Additionally, it is concluded that in countries such as Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Bolivia, and Ecuador, greater public policy actions are required to seek the economic empowerment of women; while in Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia, laws are necessary to regulate violence against women. It is necessary to continue promoting gender equality in the region as a determinant factor in methodological frameworks and transformational policies to enable moving towards the construction of sustainable societies and economies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document