You are on page 1of 19

Third World Quarterly, Vol 19, No 3, pp 339 348, 1998

Third World studies, development

studies and post-communist studies:
de nitions, distance and dynamism

ABSTRACT The collapse of state socialism in the USSR and Eastern Europe in
the late 1980s and early 1990s has had contrary impacts on Third W orld studies
and development studies. On the one hand, the disintegration of the former
Soviet bloc has made the spirit of `non-a lignment of the Third World no longer
relevant. On the other hand, the nature of post-communist transformation has
led many scholars to study transition in terms of development. This article will
examine the recent trend of decline in Third World studies and the penetration
of development studies into post-communist studies. It will argue that the
employment of development perspectives in transitology w ill widen our eld of
vision of post-communist transformation.

The emergence of the concept of the Third W orld in the 1950s called forth a
generation of political scientists, econom ists, sociologists, and scholars of
several other disciplines to investigate into the past, present and future of the
`new world that was largely unknow n to the W est before the 15th century. One
of the rst paradigm s employed in Third W orld studies was m odernisation
theory, which analyses social changes in terms of unilinear m ovem ent from
tradition to m odernity. Criticised as being Eurocentric, m odernisation theory
gradually gave way to development studies, which in principle droppe d the
assum ption of single destiny. 1 Yet, as the idea of developm ent is still a W estern
one, the notion of the Third W orld is preferred by those countries striving for a
non-W estern identity. In any case, Third W orld studies and developm ent studies
share similar basic academic concerns and research targets, and the difference
between the two elds is often ideological rather than real.
However, the collapse of state socialism in the USSR and Eastern Europe in
the late 1980s and early 1990s has had contrary impacts on Third World studies
and developm ent studies. On the one hand, the disintegration of the form er
Soviet bloc has made the spirit of `non-a lignm ent , `independence between
capitalism and socialism , and the `third way of the Third W orld no longer
relevant. Third W orld studies, along with the concept of the Third W orld itself,
are in crisis. On the other hand, the nature of post-com m unist transform ation has

Shu-Yun M a is Assistant Professor at the Department of Government and Public Administration, Chinese
University of Hong Kong, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong.

0143-6597/98/030339-20 $7.00 1998 Third World Quarterly 339


led m any to situate transition in developm ent perspectives. W hile post-com mu-
nist studies are still searching for an inheritance from the outdated com m unist
studies, 2 development studies have the potential of handling at least part of the
vast issues brough t up by post-com munist changes. In short, the end of socialism
has tended to impoverish Third W orld studies, but enrich development studies.
This article will examine in detail the above trend. After a brief review of our
standard perception of the form ation of the Third World, we will show how the
three-world taxonomy is in fact based on a set of inconsistent criteria. W e will
then address the issue of whether the form er Second W orld is (re)joining the
Third W orld or transiting to the less-developed world. This will be follow ed by
a discussion on the relevance of developm ent studies to post-com munist trans-
form ation. Our conclusion is that, although the post-comm unist countries in
Central and Eastern Europe may not welcome a developm ent m odel based on the
East Asian experience, the employm ent of developm ent perspectives in transitol-
ogy will widen our eld of vision of post-com munist transformation.

M aking of the Third W orld

A m ajor m ission of the Third W orld is to achieve an identity that is clearly
differentiable from the type of m odernity originated in Europe. Ironically,
how ever, the notion of the Third W orld is not itself an indigenous Third W orld
idea, but a European concept. The term `Third W orld originated from the
system of three estates, which is an early form of functional representation
com m only adopted in Europe in the Middle Ages and the early m odern period.
In France, there were three estates: lords spiritual, lords temporal and the `third
estate comprising the com mon people.3 In 1952 the French demographer Alfred
Sauvy coined the term `Third W orld to refer to the `third estate before the
French Revolution. It has econom ic (`poor ), political (`pow erless ), and social
(`marginalised ) connotations. 4 In the 1960s some scholars began to use the term
`T hird W orld to describe the conditions of `under developed or `developing
countries. It gained increasing currency in the early 1970s and has gradually
passed from academic circles into popular daily use. 5
In recent years, how ever, the notion of the Third W orld has been challenged.
Doubts have been cast about the current validity of the three-world taxonom y:
the Second W orld has disappeared follow ing the disintegration of the Soviet
bloc; the newly industrialising countries have left, or are about to leave, the
Third World; the NorthSouth gap has narrow ed signi cantly; the idea of Third
W orld solidarity has been eroded by persistent nationalism; and the condition of
internal colonialism has blurred the bounda ry between the First W orld and the
Third W orld. 6 On the other hand, the concept of the Third W orld has been
defended on the basis that the NorthSouth gap is in fact widening rather than
narrow ing; 7 that the Third W orld continues to be a pow erful international actor
in a num ber of arenas; 8 that the term Third W orld remains `m anageable,
functional, and forceful ;9 and that the Third W orld is still a distinct group
clearly identi able by its `tenuous, imperm anent, fragm ented political culture.10
Before presenting our view on this debate, we need brie y to review our
standard perception of how the Third W orld is form ed. This is essential to our


later argum ent about the outdatedness of the idea of the Third W orld. The
follow ing account on the m aking of the Third W orld will be based on L S
Stavraino s de nitive work Global Rift: The Third W orld Comes of Age.11
Basically this is a dependency interpretation of the history of the Third W orld.
The central thesis of the dependency school is that the `under developm ent of
the Third W orld is the result of the econom ic exploitation of the `periphery by
the `centre , rather than of any internal impedim ents to m odernisation and
development. 12 According to this perspective, the Third W orld is seen as a
com plex historicalpolitical produc t of the global expansion of European capital-
ism. The whole process began in the early 15th century with the emergence of
com m ercial capitalism in W estern Europe. This advanced mode of produc tion
established the econom ic and thus political and m ilitary primacy of W estern
Europe over other parts of the world. Capitalism emphasised trade; but given the
unequal pow er structure, m uch of the trade was conducted on unequal terms.
Stavrianos thus de ned Third World as `those countries or regions that partici-
pated on unequal terms in what eventually becam e the global m arket econ-
om y .13
The Third World, in the sense de ned above, was born in Eastern Europe in
the 15th century. Being adjacent to W estern Europe, Eastern Europe was the rst
to face the challenge of capitalist trade. At the outset, the two parts of the
continent were at similar starting points of developm ent. However, during the
16th and 17th centuries W estern Europe grew rapidly into a produc er of
m anufactured goods, whereas Eastern Europe remained a supplier of raw
m aterials. Through unequal exchanges Eastern Europe was gradually captured
by Western Europe as an econom ic appendage. Initially, the capitalist system
was unable to stretch into Russia thanks to the existence of a vast and seemingly
ever expandable eastern territory. Flat terrains, navigable rivers, and the lack of
strong local resistance allowed Russia to extend into Siberia, transform ing the
country from an East European nation into a cross-continent, relatively self-
suf cient empire with regional specialisation and inter-regional trade. A m assive
industrialisation drive was launched in the 18th century, under the leadership of
Peter the Great. Nevertheless, these factors did not save Russia from the eventual
fate of m embership of the Third W orld. After its defeat in the Crim ean W ar
(185456), Russia was forced to open up the country to W estern capitalism. Key
sectors of the national econom y fell into foreign hands, and agricultural re-
sources were exported on unfavo urable terms.
Latin America was brough t into the Third World by the Spanish and
Portugu ese conquest at the end of the 15th century. The long isolation of the
Am erican Indians from other parts of the world m ade them biologically,
technologically and psychologically too weak to resist European colonisation.
The large, relatively docile Indian labour force was used to m ine gold and silver;
they also worked on haciendas to provid e the m ining comm unities with wheat,
corn and m eat. In the coastal areas where the Indian population was sparse,
African slaves were imported to plant single cash crops such as sugar, tobacco
and cotton, m ainly for export to Europe. During the 17th century bullion output
declined, and the importance of haciendas diminished accordingly. Plantations
thus became the m ainstay of the Latin American econom y. The m onocultural


nature of the plantations prevented the emergence of local horizontal linkages,

m aking Latin Am erica a dependent econom y of Europe. In contrast, the m uch
poorer natural endow m ent in Anglo-A m erica forced the British and French
settlers to develop broad-b ased, well integrated and thus self-generating econom -
ies. As a result, the originally rich Latin America becam e part of the poor Third
W orld, whereas the initially poor Anglo-Am erica grew into the leader of the
developed world.
Unlike the Am erican Indians, the African people had a long history of
interaction with the peoples, cultures and technologies of Europe and Asia. This
reduced the vulnerability of the African people to external threat. Moreover the
Europeans were discouraged from entering Africa by the inaccessible geograph-
ical conditions, hot and hum id climate, tropical diseases, and the lack of readily
available sources of wealth in the hinterland. Consequently, when North and
South America were opened up and colonised, Africa could still keep the
Europeans out of the continent. However, instead of penetrating the interior for
wealth, the Europeans found it pro table to capture slaves along the African
coast and sell them to the New W orld. W ith the grow th of sugar plantations in
Latin Am erica in the 17th century, the trans-A tlantic slave trade prosper ed. A
slave trade existed in Africa long before the arrival of the Europeans but the
internationalisation of this business had the impact of subordi nating dom estic
slave trade to the emerging global capitalist econom y, thereby obstructing the
emergence of local horizontal econom ic ties. During the early 19th century, the
slave trade was gradually replaced by exports of W est African resources, such
as palm oil, groundn uts, ivory and cotton. Grow ing con ict between European
and local traders, and the balance-of-power among the European pow ers resulted
in a scramble for African lands. By 1914 the entire continent had been
partitioned (except for Ethiopia and Liberia).
In the Middle East the Ottoman Empire was originally strong and self-
suf cient. But its proxim ity to Europe m ade it the rst Asian civilisation to face
a challenge from the W est. A decline relative to the W est began in the 17th
century, two centuries before similar process occurred in China and Japan.
Internally, the primacy of religious af liation over national allegiance prevented
the Ottoman Empire from achieving political integration comparable to that of
W estern Europe s nation-state system. The Empire also lagged behind the West
in terms of science, technology and produc tivity. Externally, changing the
AsiaEurope trade route from one which went throug h the Middle East to one
which went round the Cape damaged the econom ies of the Ottom an Em pire.
Trade with W estern Europe was dom inated by Levantine com panies, the large
joint-stock com panies organised by the French, English and Dutch to exploit the
resources of the Ottoman Em pire. The Levantine companies paid for the
foodstuffs and raw materials they obtained from the Middle East in part with the
bullion that owed into Europe from the New W orld, a process which transm it-
ted in ation from the W est to the Middle East. In the 19th century, the W estern
pow ers annexed the Ottoman Em pire s land in North Africa and established
colonies in this area. The rem aining territories, which escaped partition only
because of disagreement among the European invaders, becam e quasi-colonies
econom ically controlled by Western capital.


Asia was the last entrant to the Third World. W hen other parts of the globe
were integrated one after another into W estern capitalism, Asia rem ained
external to the system. Trade between Asia and Europe was limited, as the West
produc ed little of interest to Asians, while Asian goods were too expensive for
European buyers. But Asia s independence ended with the British colonisation
of India in the 19th century. European consum ers who form erly could not afford
Indian goods now exchanged jute, cotton, hides and oilseeds for tea. Millions of
Indian coolies were shipped to work in plantations and m ines in Southeast Asia,
Fiji, East Africa and the Caribbean. More importantly, Indian opium was traded
for Chinese tea. W hen China refused to take in opium , the British resorted to
m ilitary force, leading to the defeat of China in the Opium War of 183942.
Although subsequent struggles among the European pow ers saved China from
outright conquest and direct foreign rule, the country was forced to accept a
series of unequal treaties which subjected China to the world capitalist system .
Treaty ports were opened; coolies were exported; spheres of in uence were
established; and native industries were ruined. W hile the European pow ers
approached Asia from the west, the USA intruded from the east. The Treaty of
Kanagawa (1854) opened up Japan to the Am ericans and similar pacts were
signed subsequently with other Western pow ers. However, for a num ber of
reasons the preoccupation of the W estern pow ers with the Crim ean W ar and
the Indian Mutiny; a high degree of cultural and racial hom ogeneity; the
tradition of borrow ing from foreign experience; internal social tensions that
produc ed forces of change; and outstanding leadership Japan became the only
part of the world that was able to maintain political and econom ic independence
from the W est. By the end of the 19th century, instead of becoming a Third
W orld country, Japan had emerged as an imperialist power.
In brief, from the 15th to the 19th century, the global expansion of capitalism
from Europe created a Third W orld that included Eastern Europe and Russia,
Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and Asia (except Japan). Decolonisation,
which began in the 19th century in Latin America and after the Second W orld
W ar in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, gave rise to a num ber of new states.
However, political independence was not follow ed by econom ic independence,
as indicated by the devastating impact of the Great Depression of the 1930s on
Latin Am erica, the Western control of oil produc tion in the Middle East until the
1970s, the specialisation in exportable cash crops at the expense of traditional
food produc tion in Africa, and the strong presence of multinationals in m any
Asian countries. On the other hand, the emergence of the socialist bloc and its
separation from the capitalist world econom y detached Russia and Eastern
Europe from the Third W orld. `T he Third W orld , then, com prises at present the
follow ing portions of the globe: all of Latin America, all of Africa except South
Africa, and all of Asia except Japan and Israel.14

Two-dim ensionalisation of the concept of the Third World

As m entioned at the beginning of the last section, the concept of the Third W orld
originated from the term `third estate . The num eric meaning of the `third estate
(com mon people) was that it was next to the ` rst estate (lords spiritual) and


`second estate (lords temporal). However, when the term `third estate was
m odi ed into Third World, the word `third becam e an adjective without
num eric meaning. In other words, the original notion of the Third W orld is not
based upon the prior existence of the First and Second W orld. However, as the
word `third inevitably leads to num eric association, people encountering the
term are naturally induced to ask what the other two worlds are. It is this
question that the dependency approach fails to answer. As evident in Stavrianos
work sum m arised above, in the dependency framework there are only two
worlds, the centre and the periphery. In a strict num eric sense, therefore, there
is no such thing as the Third W orld in the dependency analysis.
Dependency theory is predom inantly a study of econom ic relations. If econ-
om ic relations is substituted for degree of econom ic developm ent as the criterion
of classi cation, a greater num ber of worlds can be identi ed. But this m ay lead
to the other extreme of having too m any worlds. For exam ple, the W orld Bank s
classi cation of countries into `low-incom e , `lower-middle-income , `upper -
m iddle-income and `high-income econom ies suggests the existence of four
worlds. 15 Also working from an econom ic standard, Newsweek m agazine pro-
posed the category of the Fourth W orld, referring to `the worst econom ic
hardship cases ; and Time added the Fifth W orld to designate `the globe s true
basket cases . 16 More recently, it has been suggested that the world be classi ed
into seven categories based m ainly on changes in per capita incom e. 17 This kind
of exercise can result in endless and meaningless multiplications of worlds and
in this case, the concept of worlds m ay better be replaced by a `purely linear list
of countries ranked in order of level of developm ent . 18
Yet, among the various taxonomies, the notion of the Third W orld has been
m ost popular. This has been the result of the addition of a political dimension
to the econom ic criterion, thanks to the emergence of com munist regim es. The
Russian Revolution in 1917 and the socialist transform ation in Eastern Europe
after the Second W orld W ar represented efforts to achieve rapid industrialisation
without resort to capitalism. The initial success seemed to suggest the viability
of socialism as an alternative path of development. 19 This was follow ed by the
Cold W ar, characterised by political, m ilitary and ideological confro ntation
between the socialist camp and the capitalist camp. The clear division between
the two camps gave rise to the notion of the First W orld, referring to the
advanced capitalist countries led by the USA, in contrast with the Second W orld
consisting of the Soviet bloc countries. 20 In such an antagonistic atmosphere,
those countries which wanted to keep a neutral position between the capitalist
camp and the socialist camp were attracted by the notion of the Third W orld,
which implied the possibility of a third way. In this m anner, to the concept of
the Third W orld was added the m eaning of non-alignm ent.21
The term Third W orld in its current usage, then, can only be understood from
two dim ensions: the econom ic and the political. The econom ic dimension
divides countries into centre and periphery and the political dimension into the
capitalist camp, the socialist camp and the non-aligned countries. These two
dim ensions form the m atrix show n in Table 1. 22
In the econom ic dimension, we follow Stavrianos dependency division of the
world into centre and periphery. However, in addition to the capitalist centre


Economic and political dimensions of the three worlds

Political Economic

Centre Periphery

Capitalist camp 1. North Am erica 4. Southern Europe

Western Europe

Socialist camp 2. Soviet Union 5. Eastern Europe

Non-Aligned countries 3. Nil 6. Asia (except Japan), Latin
Am erica, the Middle East
(except Israel), Africa (except
South Africa)

com prising North America and W estern Europe, we add the socialist centre
represented by the Soviet Union and the corresponding periphery consisting of
Eastern Europe. This is to recognise the `socialist dependency of Eastern
Europe on the Soviet Union. 23 In the political dimension, the division of
capitalist camp, socialist camp and non-aligned refers to the presence or absence
of a form al political alliance, but not to the nature of the socio-econom ic system .
Hence socialist countries like China and Ethiopia are not included in the socialist
camp, but are classi ed as non-aligned. The term `non-a ligned came from the
Non-Aligned Movem ent initiated in the 1960s by a group of countries striving
for political and military neutrality between the capitalist camp and the socialist
camp. Although the Non-A ligned Movement itself might be regarded as a
`non-m ilitary, anti-colonial, alliance , it did not form any form al political
alliance. 24
In terms of Table 1, the First W orld is represented by cells 1 and 4, the
Second World by cells 2 and 5, and the Third W orld by cell 6. Cell 3 is empty,
as basically no developed country has joined the Non-A ligned Movement. 25
W hat Table 1 shows is that the three-world taxonomy is in fact based on a set
of inconsistent, two-dim ensional criteria. The difference between the First W orld
(cells 1 and 4) and the Second W orld (cells 2 and 5) is political; but the
developed part of the First W orld (cell 1) and the developed part of the Second
W orld (cell 2) is lumped together to make an economic contrast with the Third
W orld (cell 6). Between the political and econom ic criteria, the form er often has
primacy over the latter. Thus Eastern European countries (cell 5) have been
included in the Second W orld for political reasons, although their econom ic
dependency on the Soviet Union should classify them as part of the Third W orld.
Similarly, by the late-15th century Southern European countries (cell 4) had
declined to the status of Third W orld econom ies; 26 yet they are regarded as part
of the First W orld because of their political alliance with the W est. According
to this three-world taxonom y, the First W orld produc ed the most output with the
least land and labour, as shown in Table 2.
As m entioned above, according to the dependency school s interpretation, the
Third W orld as a historical produc t was form ed between the 15th and 19th
century, before the form ation of the First and Second W orld in the cold war


Relative economic, geographic and demographic size of the three

Share in world gross Share in Share in world

national product (% ) world area (% ) population (% )

First World 63 23 15
Second World 19 26 33
Third World 18 51 52

Source: Rod Hague, Martin Harrop & Shaun Breslin, Comparative Government and
Politics: An Introduction, London: Macmillan, 1992, pp. 4546.
Note: According to the source, the First World consists of around 30 economically
advanced liberal democracies; the Second World around 30 industrialized communist party
states and the Third World a large number of less-developed countries. This is thus only
a rough approximation of our three-world taxonomy.

period, implying that the concept of the Third World can exist independently of
the First and Second W orld. It is only throug h the two-dim ensionalisation of the
concept of the Third W orld that the First, Second and Third W orld were given
num eric sense. But this process involves changing and inconsistent criteria.

The Second W orld: joining the Third W orld or transiting to the less
developed world?
The dom ino-type collapse of socialist regim es in Eastern Europe that began in
1989 precipitated the Soviet bloc into a collapse and the dissolution of the
W arsaw Treaty Organization on 1 July 1991 m arked the of cial end of the
Second W orld. 27 For Third W orld countries, this m eant the loss of a socialist
alternative in terms of development m odel, political support and econom ic
assistance. Moreover, W estern interest in them is expected to dim inish with the
decline of their strategic importance. 28 From an academic point of view, perhaps
the m ost signi cant impact is an identity crisis for the Third W orld.
As discussed in the last section, if the term Third W orld is to m ake any
num eric sense, it m ust be based on a two-dim ensional taxonom y with the
political criterion given prim acy over the econom ic criterion. Now with the
disintegration of the socialist bloc, it is no longer meaningful to speak of a
capitalist camp and a non-aligned group. The political dim ension of the
concept of the Third W orld thus collapses and, as mentioned above, the
econom ic dim ension alone is not adequate to give full num eric m eaning to
the term Third W orld. In this sense, the Third W orld has disappeared. This
reinforces the argum ents against the current validity of the notion of the Third
W orld summ arised at the beginning of the rst section.
Our view favour s abandoning the notion of the Third W orld. From the very
beginning, the term has been problem atic as it misleads people over questions
such as what the three worlds are. Conventional dependency analysis can nam e
only two worlds, whereas econom ic developm ent approach suggests arbitrary
num bers of worlds. The current conception of the Third W orld is based on


shifting two-dimensional (economic and political) criteria. The problem of

inconsistency aside, the disappearance of the political dim ension in the post-cold
war period makes the Third W orld no longer identi able. Although originally the
concept of the Third W orld does not imply the existence of two other worlds,
the term itself inevitably leads to questions about its num eric m eaning.
More importantly, the Third W orld has disappeared not just as a category of
countries, but also as an idea. Third W orldism , if it is to m ean the goal to `chart
a political and econom ic path between the liberal capitalism of the First W orld
and the state socialism of the Second W orld ; 29 is no longer relevant in the
post-cold war era. Third Worldism `as a critique of an unequal world, a
progra m m e for econom ic development and justice, a type of national reform ism
dedicated to the creation of new societies and a new world 30 is also dead, as
revolutionary romanticism has proved unsustainable.
To abandon the notion of the Third W orld does not m ean that the Third W orld
conditions of being `poor, pow erless and marginalised have disappeared from
the globe. Poverty and injustice continue to prevail on our planet. More
importantly, the collapse of state socialism in the USSR and Eastern Europe has
draw n the form er Second W orld countries into the Third W orld arena. This has
led to the argum ent that `while East Asia m ay be leaving the Third W orld
m uch of the form er Soviet Bloc can be said to have (re)joined it;31 or that `it
m ight be better to look to third world countries for Russia s likely destiny .32
However, such a characterisation of the conditions of the form er Soviet bloc
countries is wrong if we stick to the political criterion of the Third W orld, as
none of the form er Second W orld countries have `(re)joined the Non-A ligned
Movem ent of the Third W orld. To the contrary, m any of them have been seeking
political as well as an econom ic alliance with the First W orld. The statement that
som e m embers of the form er Second World have `(re)joined the Third W orld
m akes sense only if it refers to the decline in the level of developm ent of
post-comm unist countries. But this situation can better be conceptualised in
terms of `de-developm ent , rather than as (re)joining the Third W orld.
Table 3 show s changes in the Human Development Index ( HDI ) of countries
undergoing post-com m unist transform ation. Though not a perfect design, the HDI
constructed by the United Nations Development Program m e contains m easure-
m ents for different aspects of developm ent, including incom e, health and
education. From 199094, the HDI droppe d throug hout the entire form er Second
W orld (except in Poland and Rom ania), re ecting a general decline in the level
of developm ent in the region. Nine countries (Armenia, Bulgaria, Estonia,
Georgia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Russian Federation and Ukraine) even
fell from the category of `high hum an development to `m edium hum an
development . They provid e clear cases of `de-developm ent . In Russia, the
`centre of the form er Second W orld, the HDI droppe d by 8.1% . A closer look
at the trade, consum ption and welfare conditions of the country led Petras &
Vieux to the conclusion that Russia is in `transition to underd evelopm ent .33
Focusing on the brain drain problem , Kuznetsov found that Russia is on the
verge of `becom ing a developing country .34
In short, we nd it more approp riate to describe changes in Russia and Eastern
Europe as a transition to the less developed world, rather than as a switch from


T ABL E 3.
Human Development Index

1990 1994 Change (% )

High human development:

Arm enia 0.831 Fell to medium human development
Belarus 0.861 0.806 2 6.4
Bulgaria 0.854 Fell to medium human development
2 2.2
Czechoslovakia 0.892 0.872
Estonia 0.872 Fell to medium human development
Georgia 0.829 Fell to medium human development
Hungary 0.887 0.857 2 3.4
Kazakhstan 0.802 Fell to medium human development
Latvia 0.868 Fell to medium human development
Lithuania 0.881 Fell to medium human development
Poland 0.831 0.834 0.4
Russian Federation 0.862 Fell to medium human development
Ukraine 0.844 Fell to medium human development
Medium human development:
Albania 0.699 0.655 2 6.3
Arm enia Fell from high human 0.651 2 21.7
Azerbaijan 0.770 0.636 2 17.4
Bulgaria Fell from high human 0.780 2 8.7
Estonia Fell from high human 0.776 2 ll.0
Georgia Fell from high human 0.637 2 23.2
Kazakhstan Fell from high human 0.709 2 12.0
Kyrgzstan 0.689 0.635 2 7.8
Latvia Fell from high human 0.711 2 18.1
Lithuania Fell from high human 0.762 2 13.5
Moldova 0.758 0.612 2 19.3
Romania 0.709 0.748 5.5
Russian Federation Fell from high human 0.792 2 8.1
Tajikistan 0.657 0.580 2 11.7
Turkmenistan 0.746 0.723 2 3.1
Ukraine Fell from high human 0.689 2 18.4
Uzbekistan 0.695 0.662 2 4.7

Source: United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report, Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1993, 1994, 1997.
The data on Czechoslovakia covered only the period from 199092, because by the end of 1992 the country had
broken up into the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

the Second to the Third World. To be sure, the concept of developm ent is
controversial. It rests on a belief in hum an progre ss; 35 it tends to be Eurocen-
tric;36 and the term `less developed carries negative connotations. 37 However,


disagreements over the idea of developm ent could be dealt with by recognising
indigenous development m odels, 38 and by adding new content to the m eaning of
development. 39 Comparing the notion of developm ent with that of the Third
W orld, the form er has the advantage that it avoids all the num eric confusions of
the latter. Moreover, we have a variety of quantitative indicators per capita
gross national produc t, hum an development index, physical quality of life index,
index of social progre ss and socioeconom ic developm ent index 40 to m easure
and rank different levels of development, whereas the notion of the Third W orld
provid es only a broad categorisation of countries. Finally, by including depen-
dency as a feature of underd evelopm ent, the concept of developm ent is able to
incorporate the centreperiphery dim ension of the Third W orld emphasised by
the dependency school.

Relevance of development studies to post-com munist studies

Post-com m unist countries are com mitted to developm ent, but not to reviving the
ailing Third W orldism . What then is the relationship between development
studies and post-com munist studies? What insight do developm ent studies have
for post-com m unist transform ation? Can post-com m unist studies be incorporated
into developm ent studies? Samuel Huntington identi ed ve m ajor goals of
development: econom ic growth, equity, dem ocracy, political order and stability,
and national autonom y. 41 Are these not also the goals of post-com m unist
transform ation? To achieve these goals, form er Second W orld countries has been
engaged in different form s and degrees of liberalisation, stabilisation, privatisa-
tion and democratisation. These are also com m on them es of reform in the
developing world. Such comm onalities have led to a trend of analysing post-
com m unist issues in the eld of developm ent studies. The present author s
survey of four m ajor journals in developm ent studies (Journal of Developing
Societies, Journal of Development Studies, Third W orld Quarterly and W orld
Development) from 198996 found at least 21 pieces on post-com m unist
transform ation. Issues discussed range from the Arm enianAzerbaijani con ict,
pastoralism in post-socialist Mongolia, m ass privatisation in the Czech and
Slovak Republics, local governm ent reform in Poland, to statemarketcivil
institutions in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Republics. 42 Apart from journal
articles, chapters on post-com munist transition have appeared in books shelved
under developm ent studies. 43
The publication of the W orld Development Report 1966 perhaps m arked the
m ost of cial attempt to include post-com m unist transformation into development
studies. This annual text of the W orld Bank, which `de ne[s] the conventional
paradigm of development ,44 is highly in uential in the setting of development
agenda. The 1996 report, entitled From Plan to M arket, is devoted `to the
transition of countries with centrally planned econom ies to a market orien-
tation .45 According to this report

The long-term goal of transition is the sam e as that of economic reforms elsewhere:
to build a thriving market econom y capable of deliverin g long-term growth in living
standards. What distinguishes transition from reforms in other countries is the


system ic change involved: reform must penetrate to the fundamental rules of the
game, to the institution s that shape behavior and guide organizations. This makes
it a profound social transition as well as an economic one. Similar changes have
been needed in many other countries and the transition experience is therefore of
interest to them as well. But most of their reform programs pale in comparison to
the scale and intensity of the transition from plan to market. 46
Most of the world s economies, at one tim e or another, have lifted price controls,
opened trade, or privatized state enterprises with varying degrees of success. But
as noted above, transition is differen t. It is not simply the adoption or modi cation
of a few policies or program s but a passage from one mode of economic
organization to a thoroughly differen t one. The underlying habits and rules of an
economic system are often so pervasive and ingrained that they are taken for
granted. 47

In other words, in the World Bank s view, post-com m unist transform ation is
different from the reform s in the developing world only in the intensity but not
the nature of the change. Post-comm unist transition is regarded as a highly
com plicated development issue. Does this m ean that form er socialist countries in
general nd it more dif cult than developing countries to achieve developm ent?
Anne Krueger found that, in terms of starting incom e levels, social indicators,
savings rates and hum an capital stock, post-com munist countries in Eastern
Europe are in a more advantageous position than m ost m iddle-income develop-
ing countries. 48 But, on the other hand, the East European countries lack the
com m ercial codes, laws of contract, clear proper ty rights arrangements and
entrepreneurial tradition that are essential for developm ent As such, post-
com m unist countries have to face the unique problem of creating those institu-
tions and incentives.
A World Bank researcher, Mary Shirley, also noted that, unlike Latin
Am erican countries, post-com m unist econom ies in Eastern Europe lack a large
private sector and functioning nancial systems that are essential for successful
privatisations. 49 Nevertheless, she found that both Eastern Europe and Latin
Am erica share similar problem s such as poorly perform ing state enterprises,
varied comm itment to privatisation, technical dif culties and adverse macroeco-
nom ic conditions. There are therefore, important lessons from Latin Am erica
that are relevant to post-comm unist transform ation.
Focusing on the political dimension, Joan Nelson observed some important
parallels between Eastern Europe and developing countries: com m itment to
fundam ental changes because of the failure of limited reform s; disagreements
over the design, speed and sequencing of reform ; nationalistic sentiment against
econom ic and political liberalisation; and the existence of organised opposition
but absence of organised support for reform . However, there are problem s that
seems to be m ore serious in Eastern Europe than in developing countries: the
presence of a larger public sector; a lower degree of tolerance towards inequality
and insecurity; opposition from the more organised labour; greater reliance on
state agencies and of cials to reform the state itself (the so-called `orthodox
paradox of reform in developing countries); and a lack of the features that
produc ed strong centralised executive authority in developing countries. Overall,
Nelson concluded that, notw ithstanding important contrasts between the settings


of reform in post-com m unist Eastern Europe and the developing world, there are
`striking parallels in the issues confro nting the two groups of countries.
Therefore, `[developing] countries] experience may enrich understanding and
thereby contribute to Eastern Europe efforts to design ways to cope with the
inherent tensions of the [economic and political] transition .50 From a different
angle but in a similar tone, Roger Markw ick wrote: `many parallels can be
draw n between the political problem s facing erstwhile Soviet republics and those
in the [developing world] attempting to m ake the transition from authoritarian
regimes . 51
In short, there is a growing trend of incorporating post-comm unist transform -
ation into developm ent studies. De Kadt et al. have m ade perhaps the most
explicit statement in this regard. In de ning the issues for developmentalists in
the 1990s, they noted that:
The boundaries of developm ent studies have become more blurred. Greater atten-
tion is now being paid to the global changes that are affecting the world as a
whole If the study of structura l adjustmen t in Africa has taught us certain lessons
about the way state institution s adjust (or do not adjust!) to policy changes in
situations that require a major transform ation, then those lessons may well be of
relevance to what is occurring in Eastern Europe today, and vice versa. 52

In m ost attempts to link post-com munist studies with developm ent studies,
differences between form er Second W orld countries and developing countries
are noted. But suf cient similarities are found to justify use of development
perspectives to analyse post-comm unist changes. The next question, then, is
what developm ent m odel is m ost relevant to post-comm unist countries? W hat is
the central m essage that developm ent studies has for post-comm unist leaders?

Conclusion: an Asian model for post-com m unist transform ation ?

Notwithstanding the recent Asian nancial crisis, among the less developed
countries, it is those in East AsiaJapan, South Korea, Taiwan which have
achieved the most remarkable developm ent in the postwar period. This has given
rise to the notion of an East Asian model which highlights such features as high
saving and investm ent rates, attention to education, an emphasis on exports and,
above all, pervasive state intervention.53 Ha-Joon Chang exam ined the appli-
cability of the East Asian developm ent m odel to post-com munist countries and
concluded that, although some institutions in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are
idiosyncratic, this should not lead us to the conclusion that the East Asian
development experience is strictly non-transferable.54 Following the notion of an
East Asian developm ental state. 55 Chang argued that the m ost important lesson
that post-com munist countries could draw from East Asia was the important role
played by the state. The real issue is thus not to destroy the central planning
legacy in the form er socialist countries, but to modify it to produc e effective
state intervention. This is in direct contrast to the W estern neoliberal prescrip-
tion, which emphasises the importance of a minimal state and a maxim al m arket.
W ithin the context of post-comm unist transform ation, there is also an `Asian
approach that has been regarded as m ore successful than the method of changes


adopted in Russia and Eastern Europe. Compared to the `big bang reform s
(consisting of rapid liberalisation, stringent stabilisation and wholesale privatisa-
tion) in the form er Soviet bloc countries, changes in transitional econom ies in
Asia (including China, Mongolia, the Lao PDR, Burm a and Vietnam) have been
m uch m ore gradual and evolutionary. Although there are m any important
differences between transitional econom ies in Asia and Europe in terms of initial
conditions and external circum stances, advocates of the Asian approach hold that
the Asian transition experiences contain valuable lessons for post-com m unist
transform ation worldw ide. 56
However, although the East Asian m odel has been popular among developing
countries and an Asian approach is emerging in the context of post-com m unist
transform ation, the current m ood in Eastern Europe is to `return to Europe ,
rather than to learn from Asia. As Chang observed, `m ost studies on the reform
in Eastern Europe seem to accept that [Anglo-S axon capitalism] is the best of all
possible m odels, and discuss how best to transform the Eastern European
econom ies into (highly idealised versions of) Anglo-S axon capitalism. Of those
studies which try to draw lessons from experience of non-A nglo-S axon coun-
tries, only a m inority look at the East Asian experience . 57 Apart from the
aspiration for a European identity, such an atmosphere also re ects a strategic
consideration for East European countries. For them, to `return to Europe to
join such important W est European organisations as the European Union the
Council of Europe, NATO and the European Conference on Security and Cooper-
ation is a m eans to guarantee their security.58 The situation in Russia is more
com plicated. After the disintegration of the form er Soviet Union, `the European
or Western orientation of the early days of Russian independence has been
replaced by a grow ing awareness that Russia is not merely the eastern part of
Europe, but also the northern and western part of Asia . 59 For national security
and unity reasons, the Russian state needs to m aintain a careful balance between
the country s European and Asian identity. Any development policy that claims
to `return to Europe or to learn from Asia m ay jeopardise this effort.
The Eastern European countries resistance to the East Asian development
m odel and the Asian transition approach is rem iniscent of developing countries
rejection of the Eurocentric developm ent form ula. Before long, the W est was
accused of imposing its own history and value onto the less developed world;
now East Asia has its own development lessons to offer. Nevertheless, at present
it is still the West that has the upper hand in the export of development
prescription. Through international lending agencies such as the W orld Bank and
International Monetary Fund, the W est has been attempting to translate the
neoliberal doctrine into actual policies in both the developing world and
post-comm unist world, resulting in similar econom ic liberalisations in the two
worlds. In this sense, `the parallels [between developing countries and post-com -
m unist countries] re ect shared pressures from the larger international setting .60
In any event, the employm ent of developm ent perspectives in post-com m unist
studies widens our eld of vision of post-comm unist transformation. Just as in
its earlier contribution in breaking the belief that tradition would move along a
single path to reach modernity, developm ent studies tells us that post-com m unist
transform ation m ay take different form s towards different directions. The very


basic idea of developm ent suggests that there is no end of history. It is too early
to say whether developm ent studies and post-com m unist studies will converge or
not; but it is now time for transitologists to m ake m ore reference to development
studies, and for developm entalists to pay greater attention to post-com m unist
transform ation.

Robert C Bartlett, `On the decline of contemporary political development studies , Review of Politics, 58,
1996, pp 272278.
For an effort in this direction, see Frederic J Fleron, Jr & Erik P Hoffm ann (eds), Post-Communist Studies
and Political Science: M ethodology and Empirical Theory in Sovietology, Boulder, CO: Westview Press,
R J W Evans, `Estates , in Vernon Bogdanor (ed), The Blackwell Encyclopaidia of Political Science, Oxford:
Blackwell, 1991, p 297.
Ted C Lewellen, Dependency and Development: An Introduction to the Third W orld, W estport, CT: Bergin
& Garvey, 1995, p 3.
Leslie Wolf-Phillips, `Why Third World ?: origin, de nition and usage , Third W orld Quarterly, 9(4),
1987, pp 13111327.
Mark T Berger, `The end of the Third World ? , Third W orld Quarterly, 15(2), 1994, pp 257275; Nigel
Harris, The End of the Third W orld: Newly Industrializing Countries and the Decline of an Ideology,
London: Penguin, 1987; and Vicky Randall, `Third World: rejected or rediscovered? , Third W orld
Quarterly, 13(4), 1992, pp 727730.
Robin Broad & Christina Melhorn Landi, `Wither the NorthSouth gap? , Third W orld Quarterly, 17(1),
1996, pp 717.
Hans-Henrik Holm, `The end of the Third W orld? , Journal of Peace Research, 27(1), 1990, pp l7.
Allen H Merriam, `What does Third World mean? , in Jim Norwine & Alfonso Gonzales (eds), The Third
W orld: States of M ind and Being, Boston, MA: Unwin Hym an, 1988, pp 1522.
Mehran Kamrava, `Political culture and a new de nition of the Third World , Third W orld Quarterly, 16(4),
1995, pp 691701.
L S Stavrianos, Global Rift: The Third W orld Comes of Age, New York: William Morrow, 1981.
There is a vast literature on dependency theory; a recent comprehensive survey can be found in Robert A
Packenham, The Dependency M ovement: Scholarship and Politics in Development Studies, Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1992.
Stavrianos, Global Rift, pp 3132.
Ibid, p 34. South Africa and Israel are not included in the Third World as these white-settler economies
enjoy special connections with the `centre . Ibid, pp 755790.
Wolf-Philips, `Why Third World ? , pp 13131314.
Merriam, `What does Third World mean? , pp 1718.
The seven categories are: the industrialized First World: the newly industrialising Third World countries: the
major surplus oil producers: Third World countries with growing per capita income: Third World countries
with constant per capita income; Third World countries with declining per capita income; and transitional
economies. See Karl P Magyar, `Classifying the international political economy: a Third World proto-the-
ory , Third W orld Quarterly, 16(4), 1995, pp 703716.
Peter W orsley, The Three W orlds: Culture and W orld Development, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson,
1984, p 321 (emphasis in the original).
It should be noted that according to the world-system theory of the dependency school, there is only a
capitalist world, and the emergence of the socialist system did not change this situation. As the world-system
theorist Wallerstein argued, the socialist countries do not constitute a separable world, and there is still only
a single world-system. The communist state is merely a `collective capitalist rm as long as it remains a
participant in the market of the capitalist world-economy . Immanuel Wallerstein, The Capitalist W orld-
Economy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979, pp 6869.
Paul Cammack, David Pool & William Tordoff, Third W orld Politics: A Comparative Introduction,
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins, 1993; Lewellen, Dependency and Development, p 4; Tony Spybey, Social
Change, Development and Dependency: M odernity, Colonialism and the Development of the W est,
Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992, pp 143157 and Worsley, The Three W orlds, p 308.
Cammack et al, pp 56; Lewellen, Dependency and Development, p 3; and Stavrianos, p 33.


Worsely, The Three W orlds, pp 310, 312 used similar economicpolitical matrices to illustrate different
meanings of the Third World. But the factor of non-alignment is absent in his framework.
Cal Clark & Donna Bahry, `Dependent development: a socialist variant , International Studies Quarterly,
27(3), 1983, pp 271293. Apart from this external dependency, a kind of socialist internal dependency has
also been found in the relationship between the Asian republics in the Soviet Union and the Soviet centre.
See Gregory Gleason, `The political economy of dependency under socialism: the Asian republics in the
USSR , Studies in Comparative Communism, 24(4), 1991, pp 335353.
Peter Willetts, The Non-Aligned M ovement: The Origins of a Third W orld Alliance, London: Frances Pinter,
1978, pp 224225.
France under de Gaulle may be considered as a marginal case of cell 3 in Table 1 as the French president
attempted to pursue a foreign policy that was independent of the USA. In 1968 de Gaulle was invited to
attend a Non-Aligned Movement meeting. But he did not respond, and later moved his neutral position
towards renewed adhesion to NATO , see Jean Lacouture, De Gaulle: the Ruler 1945 1970, New York: WW
Norton, 1992, pp 411412.
Stavrianos, Global Lift, pp 8687.
For an overview of the fall of communism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, see Minton F
Goldman, Revolution and Change in Central and Eastern Europe, Arm onk, ME : Sharpe, 1997; and for a
brief history of the W arsaw Treaty Organization, see Raymond L Garthoff, `Warsaw Treaty Organization ,
in Joel Krieger, (ed), The Oxford Companion to Politics of the W orld, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp
For the impact of the collapse of socialism on the Third World, see Fred Halliday, `The Third World and
the end of the Cold War , in Barbara Stallings (ed), Global Change, Regional Response: The New
International Context of Development, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, pp 3366; Franz J
Hinkelammert, `The crisis of socialism and the Third World , M onthly Review, 45, 1993, pp 105 114; Colin
Legum, `The Post-communist Third W orld: focus on Africa , Problems of Communism, 41(12), 1992, pp
195206; Shahid M Shahidullah, `The Third World after the Cold War: global imperatives and local
pecularities , Journal of Developing Societies, 12, 1996, pp 119135; Carlos M Vilas, `Is socialism still an
alternative for the Third W orld? , M onthly Review, 42, 1990, pp 93109; Mark Webber, `The Third World
and the dissolution of the USSR , Third W orld Quarterly, 13(4), 1993, pp 691712. See also the special
issue of Third W orld Quarterly, 13(2), 1992, devoted to `rethinking socialism .
Berger, `The end of the Third W orld ? , p 259.
Harris, The End of the Third W orld, p 200.
Berger, `The end of the Third W orld ? , p 257.
Michael Burawoy, `From Sovietology to comparative political economy , in Daniel Orlovsky (ed), Beyond
Soviet Studies, Washington, DC: The Woodrow Wilson Center Press, l995, pp 72102, see p 90.
James Petras & Steve Vieux, `Russia: the transition to underdevelopment , Journal of Contemporary Asia,
25(1), 1995, pp 109118.
Evgenii Kuznetsov, `Is Russia becoming a developing country? Brain drain and allocation of talent in the
post-socialist transition , Communist Economies & Economic Transform ation, 7(4), 1995, pp 485497.
P W Preston, Theories of Development, London: Routledge, 1982, pp 1820.
John Brohman, `Universalism, eurocentrism and ideological bias in development studies: from modernis-
ation to neoliberalism , Third W orld Quarterly, 16(1), 1995, pp 121140; and Jan Nederveen Pieterse, `The
development of development theory: towards critical globalism , Review of International Political Economy,
3(4), 1996, pp 541564, see pp 543547.
Merriam, `What does Third World mean? , p 19.
Howard J Wiarda, `Toward a nonethnocentric theory of development: alternative conceptions from the Third
World , Journal of Developing Areas, 17, 1983, pp 433452.
Barbara Ingham, `The meaning of development: interactions between `New and `Old Ideas , W orld
Development, 21(11), 1993, pp l8031821.
David Drakakis-Sm ith, `Hum an development indicators , in Tim Unwin (ed), Atlas of W orld Development,
New York: John W iley, 1994, pp 3438.
Samuel P Huntington, `The goals of development , in Myron Weiner & Samuel P Huntington (eds),
Understanding Political Development, Boston, MA: Little Brown, 1987, pp 331.
The 21 articles found were John B Allcock, `In praise of chauvinism : rhetorics of nationalism in Yugoslav
politics , Third W orld Quarterly, 10(4), 1989, pp 208222; Michael Burawoy, `The state and economic
involution: Russia through a China lens , W orld Development, 24(6), 1996, pp 11051117; Klaus Deininger,
`Collective agricultural production: a solution for transition economies? , W orld Development, 23(8), 1995,
pp 13171334; Tamara Dragadze, `The Arm enianAzerbaijani con ict: structure and sentiment , Third
W orld Quarterly, 11, 1989, pp 5571; Andre Gunder Frank, `Revolution in Eastern Europe: lessons for
democratic social movements (and socialists? , Third W orld Quarterly, 12(2), 1990, pp 3652; Kiaras
Gharabaghi, `Development strategies for Central Asia in the 1990s: in search of alternatives , Third W orld
Quarterly, 15(1), 1994, pp 103119; James F Hicks & Bartlomiej Kaminski, `Local government reform and


transition from communism: the case of Poland , Journal of Developing Societies, 11(1), 1995, pp 120;
Jude Howell, `Coping with transition: insights from Kyrgyzstan , Third W orld Quarterly, 17(1), 1996, pp
5368; Ross Levine & David Scott, `Old debts and new beginnings: a policy choice in transitional socialist
economies , W orld Development, 21(3), 1993, pp 319330; Nick Manning, `TH Marshall & Jurgen
Habermas, `Citizenship and transition in Eastern Europe , W orld Development, 21(8), 1993, pp l3131328;
Robin Mearns, `Community, collective action and common grazing: the case of post-socialist Mongolia ,
Journal of Development Studies, 32(3), 1996, pp 297339; Gordon C Rausser & S R Johnson, `Statemar-
ketcivil institutions: the case of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Republics , W orld Development, 21(4),
1993, pp 675689; Nemat Sha k, `Making a market: mass privatization in the Czech and Slovak Republics ,
W orld Development, 23(7), 1995, pp 11431156; Mary Shirley, `Privatization in Latin Am erica: lessons for
transitional Europe , W orld Development, 22(9), 1994, pp l3131323; Guy Standing, `Employment restruc-
turing in Russian industry , W orld Development, 22(2), 1994a, pp 253260; Guy Standing, `Labour market
implications of Privatization in Russian industry in 1992 , W orld Development, 22(2), 1994, pp 261270;
Guy Standing, `The changing position of wom en in Russian industry: prospects of marginalization , W orld
Deve1opment, 22(2), 1994, pp 271283; Andres Solimano, `The post-socialist transitions in comparative
perspective: policy issues and recent experience , W orld Development, 21(1), 1993, pp 18231835; Valerii
Tishkov, `Glasnost and the nationalities within the Soviet Union , Third W orld Quarterly, 11, 1989, pp
191207; S David Young, `Going to market: economic organization and transformation in a Hungarian
rm , W orld Development, 12(6), 1993, pp 883899; and Ryszard Zukowski, `Stabilization and recession in
a transitional economy: the case of Poland , W orld Development, 21(7), 1993, pp 11631178. Articles on
China are not included in this list, because before post-communist transition began in Eastern Europe, China
had already been studied as a developing country.
Examples include Ru diger Dornbusch, Stablilization, Debt, and Reform: Policy Analysis for Developing
Countries, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993; M aya Koteva, `Trade policy reform in Central and
Eastern Europe: early experience and lessons , in Oliver Morrissey & Frances Stewart (eds), Economic and
Political Reform in Developing Countries, London: St Martin s Press, 1995, pp 3957; and David Seddon,
`Reform and popular protest in Eastern Europe , in Oliver Morrissey & Frances Stewart (eds), Economic and
Political Reform in Developing Countries, London: St Martin s Press, 1995, pp 1138.
Broad and Landi, `Wither the NorthSouth gap? , p 8.
World Bank, W orld Development Report 1996: From Plan to M arket, Washington DC; Oxford University
Press, 1996, p. iii.
Ibid, p 1.
Ibid, p 3.
Anne Krueger, `Appendix: policy reform in Eastern Europe , in Krueger, Economic Policy Reform in
Developing Countries, Oxford: Blackwell, 1992, pp 162176.
Shirley, `Privatization in Latin Am erica .
Joan M Nelson, `The politics of economic transformation: is Third World experience relevant in Eastern
Europe? , W orld Politics, 45(3), 1993, pp 433463, see p. 463,
Roger D Markwick, `A discipline in transition? From Sovietology to transitology , Journal of Communist
Studies and Transition Politics, 12(3), 1996, pp 255276, see p 272. In both Nelson s and Markwick s
articles, the term `Third World was used to refer to Asian, African and Latin Am erican countries. To be
consistent with our line of argument, we have changed it into `developing countries . This does not
constitute any distortion of Nelson s and M arkwick s analyses.
Emanuel de Kadt, Zoe Mars & Gordon White, `State and development into the 1990s: the issues for
researchers , in Claude Auroi (ed), The Role of the State in Development Processes, London: Frank Cass,
1992, pp 185200, see p 187.
There is a blooming literature on the East Asian development model. It includes Alice Am sden (ed), special
section on `The World Bank s East Asian miracle: economic growth and public policy , W orld Development,
22(4), 1994, pp 615670; Peter L Berger & Hsin-Huang Michael Hsiao (eds), In Search of an East Asian
Development M odel, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 1988; William R Cline, `Can the East Asian model
of development be generalized? . W orld Development, 10(2), 1982, pp 8190; Frederic C Deyo (ed), The
Political Economy of the New Asian Industrialism, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987; Paul W
Kuznets, `An East Asian model of economic development: Japan, Taiwan and South Korea , Economic
Development and Cultural Change, 36, 1988, supplement, pp S1143; and Gustav Ranis, `Can the East
Asian model of development be generalized? , W orld Development, 13(4), 1985, pp 543545.
Ha-Joon Chang, `Return to Europe? Is there anything for Eastern Europe to learn from East Asia? , in
Ha-Joon Chang & Peter Nolan (eds), The Transform ation of the Communist Economies: Against the
M ainstream, London: St Martin s Press, 1995, pp 382399.
For discussion of the developmental state in East Asia, see M Douglass, `The developmental state and the
newly industrialised economies of Asia , Environment and Planning A, 26, 1994, pp 543566; Richard
Grabowski, `The successful developmental state: where does it come from? , W orld Development, 22(2),
1994, pp 413422; Chalmers A Johnson, Japan, W ho Governs? The Rise of the Developmental State, New


York: Norton, 1995; Ziya Onis, `The logic of the developmental state , Comparative Politics, 24, 1991, pp
l09126; and Ding-Xin Zhao, `State power and patterns of late development: resolving the crisis of the
sociology of development , Sociology, 28, 1994, pp 211229.
Pradumna B Rana & Naved Hamid (eds), From Centrally Planned to M arket Economies: The Asian
Approach, Vol 1, An Overview; Vol 2, People s Republic of China and M ongolia and Vol 3, Lao PDR,
M yanmar, and Viet Nam (Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1995, 1996).
Chang, `Return to Europe? , p 387.
Robert Weiner, Change in Eastern Europe, Westport, CT: Praeger, 1994, pp 153154.
S Neil MacFarlance, `Russian conceptions of Europe , Post-Soviet Affairs, 10(3), 1994, pp 234269, see
p 235.
Nelson, `The politics of economic transformation , p 447.

Religion State & Society

Dr Philip Walters, Keston Research, Oxford, UK
Religion, State & Society is a unique source of information and analysis for
individuals and institutions involved in a wide variety of ways with communist and
formerly communist countries. It is still the only English-language academic
publication devoted to issues of church, state and society in these countries.
Responding to the new situation in Russia and Eastern Europe, the journal explores
its conviction that the experiences of religious communities in their encounter with
comm unism will be central to the evolution of the new Europe and of the Western
world in general in the next century. Tackling social, cultural, ethnic, political and
ecclesiological problems is in future going to be a cooperative effort, in a way
hitherto impossible, involving the religious communities of both East and West.
Religious communities in Western Europe, the USA, Australasia and Latin America
will have much to learn from the way in which their counterparts in the East have
tackled such problems in the past, and vice versa
Volume 26, 1998, 4 issues. ISSN 0963-7494.
Carfax Publishing Limited
P O B ox 25 Abingdon Oxfordshire OX 14 3UE UK
Tel: +44 (0 )123 5 521154 Fax: +44 (0)1 235 401550
E-mail: W W W: http://ww