IGNOU BSOG 173 FREE Solved Assignment 2022-23 PDF : BSOG 173 Solved Assignment 2022 , BSOG 173 Solved Assignment 2022-23, BSOG 173 Assignment 2022-23, BSOG 173 Assignment, IGNOU Assignments 2022-23- Gandhi National Open University had recently uploaded the assignments of the present session for MEG Programme for the year 2022-23. Students are recommended to download their Assignments from this webpage itself.
1. Explain the intellectual sources of the world systems theory.
Ans. World-system theory is a macrosociological perspective that seeks to explain the dynamics of the “capitalist world economy” as a “total social system”. Its first major articulation, and classic example of this approach, is associated with Immanuel Wallerstein, who in 1974 published what is regarded as a seminal paper, The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis. In 1976 Wallerstein published The Modern World System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. This is Wallerstein’s landmark contribution to sociological and historical thought and it triggered numerous reactions, and inspired many others to build on his ideas. Because of the main concepts and intellectual building blocks of world-system theory –which will be outlined later–, it has had a major impact and perhaps its more warm reception in the developing world.
Where is world-system theory positioned in the intellectual world. It falls at the same time, into the fields of historical sociology and economic history. In addition, because of its emphasis on development and unequal opportunities across nations, it has been embraced by development theorists and practitioners. This combination makes them world-system project both a political and an intellectual endeavor. Wallerstein’s approach is one of praxis, in which theory and practice are closely interrelated, and the objective of intellectual activity is to create knowledge that uncovers hidden structures and allows oneself to act upon the world and change it. “Man’s ability to participate intelligently in the evolution of his own system is dependent on his ability to perceive the whole” World-system research is largely qualitative, although early on Wallerstein rejected the distinction between nomothetic and idiographic methodologies to understand the world.
For Wallerstein, there is an objective world which can be quantitatively understood, but it is, no matter for how long it has existed, a product of history. But to the most part, his methods are associated with history and with interpretive sociology. His work is methodologically somewhere in between Marx and Weber, both of whom were important inspirations for his own work.
World-system theory has been closely associated with Immanuel Wallerstein, and
understanding the intellectual context in which this body of knowledge is positioned, means also understanding Wallerstein, so let us begin by talking about him.
Immanuel Wallerstein was born in 1930 in New York, where he grew up and did all his studies. He entered Columbia University, where he obtained his BS, MA and PhD degrees. He remained a faculty member in Columbia’s Department of Sociology from 1958 to 1971. His passage through Columbia occurred at a time when cosmopolitanism and rebelliousness stood in sharp contrast to the genteel established liberalism of Harvard and Yale. His primary mentor was C. Wright Mills, from whom, according to Gold frank, Wallerstein learned his historical sensitivity, his ambition to understand macro-structures, and his rejection of both liberalism and, to a lesser degree, Marxism. While being a faculty Member at Columbia, Wallerstein got interested in Africa and along the way, he spent time in Paris. In Paris he was exposed to two major intellectual influences, the Annales group of historians, and also to what by the time were radical political ideas. Paris was the center for political and intellectual radicalism among Africans, Asians and Latin Americans, and the locus of the major challenges to Anglo American liberalism and empiricism. In Africa he did field work that exposed him to the Third World, and he wrote his dissertation on the processes of national formation in West Africa. Here, Gold frank tells us, he started to build his world view of “creative self destruction”, of rise and demise. His exposure to the third world had a great impact on his work. In his introduction to The Modern World System, Wallerstein, in a revealing statement, says that “In general, in a deep conflict, the eyes of the downtrodden are more acute about the reality of the present. For it is in their interest to perceive correctly in order to expose the hypocrisies of the rulers. They have less interest in ideological deflection.
For Wallerstein, “a world-system is a social system, one that has boundaries, structures, member groups, rules of legitimation, and coherence. Its life is made up of the conflicting forces which hold it together by tension and tear it apart as each group seeks eternally to remold it to its advantate. It has the characteristics of an organism, in that is has a lifespan over which its characteristics change in some respects and remain stable in others Life within it is largely self-contained, and the dynamics of its development are largely internal”. A world-system is what Wallerstein terms a “worldeconomy”, integrated through the market rather than a political center, in which two or more regions are interdependent with respect to necessities like food, fuel, and protection, and two or more polities compete for domination without the emergence of one single center forever.
Ans. Approaches to development may be discerned on the basis of two criteria,
- Centralization versus decentralization of development schemes and resources, and unit of development,
- The focus of development – individual, group, village, etc.
The first criterion is given rise to two approaches, namely, development from the top and development from the bottom. The second criterion gives rise to the three approaches -–sectoral development, areas development, and target group development. Let us now review briefly the five approaches
1-Development from the top
The approach of development from the top envisages the planning and execution, of development schemes by the central or apex bodies of administration. In other words, the central organizations decide the nature and direction of the plan, formulate projects and impose them on the people. For instance, the ministers and high officials sitting in the capital, make the development plans for rural people without fully realizing their problems.
Implicit in this approach is the assumption that the people who need development are incapable of understanding their needs, of devising development schemes, and of executing them on their own. Hence the need for experts and outside agencies. in fact, this assumption is baseless. The elite at the top has a vested interest in making such assumptions. Their major interest is to hold control on resources and mobilize them for their own benefits. The people accept the development schemes because they have neither sufficient resources of their own nor any control on the resources of the community. As a result, most of the schemes imposed from the top fail to yield the desired results.
This happens in most of cases. A large part of the funds of development schemes is eaten up in one way or the other, by the experts and executive personnel deputed or employed by the sponsors of the scheme, be it own government or any foreign agency. The major drawback of this approach is that it fails to involve the beneficiaries, in the development process. Instead, it generates a feeling of alienation among them. For these reasons, this approach has been characterized by a higher degree of centralization and bureaucratization.
2-Development from bottom
The exponents of the second approach of development from the bottom, on the contrary, believe the fairness of intentions and abilities of the people who need development. They are given an opportunity to articulate their problems as well as the ways to solve them. They are trained and made capably and are prepared for self-help. Utilisations of resources for development schemes is decided, by the concerned people themselves or by their representatives at the local level. Thus, there is a greater decentralization of plans and higher participation of people.
While the planners realize the importance of development from the bottom and claim that they adopt this approach, in practice, they often adopt the approach of development from the top. The result is the ineffectiveness of the development schemes.
on the basis of ‘unit’ of development, as mentioned earlier, three approaches are envisaged,. sectoral development, area development and target group development. The sectoral development approach refers to the formulation and execution of schemes for the development, of a particular sector of the economy like agriculture or industry. For instance, the Indian planners thought of developing industries just after the Independence. Therefore they made plans to develop technology or borrow it from other countries. Stress was laid on technological education. Many institutes and colleges were established, independently or in collaboration with other countries, such as the United States of America, Russia, and England.
All regions are not equally developed. Some are more affluent than others. The underdevelopment of regions is due to the lack of infrastructural development-roads, railways, electrification, etc. or due to the problems of floods and drought. When schemes are devised for the infrastructural development of an area or region, we call it area development approach. The Command Area Development Scheme, introduced in India in 1974 for the development of irrigation resources in certain regions, illustrates this approach..
5-Target group development
The target group approach has its focus on a particular category of people, such as small farmers, women and farm laborers. Schemes, such as the Small Farmers Development Agency (SFDA) and reservation of seats in schools and colleges, and in employment for scheduled castes, exemplify the target group approach. There is another approach to development, which has its focus on the overall development of the people residing in a locality – village or town. This is known as a community development approach. This approach lays stress on the development of education, health facilities, economic and social activities, and other infrastructural facilities.
3. What is urbanism? How is it different from urbanization.
Ans. Urban areas are created through Urbanization and are categorized by urban morphology as cities, towns, conurbations, or suburbs. In Urbanism, the term contrast to rural areas such as villages and hamlets and in urban sociology or urban anthropology it contrast with natural environment.
The terms Urbanization and Urbanism are old and complex terms that differently describe the city-based processes by studying the way cities grow and the social problems that arise from the people living in cities respectively. Cities are the most important packages of the built environment for the living. They have social, political, economic, and more complex layers by which we human beings accentuate our daily routine.
Governments and planners should give serious attention and consideration to the de-growth and growth of this living miniature. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. says ‘the axis of the earth sticks out visibly through the center of every town or city’ when describing the focal impact and influence of cities on humanity. Moreover, John F. Kennedy says ‘we will neglect our cities to our peril, for in neglecting them we neglect the nation’ when clueing the potential of cities and their macro-scale role in state-building, nation-building, and betterment of livelihoods. Here below, I will put a brief description of Urbanization and Urbanism and what they really mean.
Urbanization means an increase in the proportion of people living in urban areas compared to rural areas. An urban area is a built-up area such as a town or city. A rural area is an area of countryside. As a country industrializes, the number of people living in urban areas tends to increase. It is the growth of cities, brought about by a population shift from rural areas and small communities to large ones, and the change from a largely agricultural economy to an industrial one.
The statement is fairly descriptive of pre and post scenarios of what we call urbanization, which is also defined by other scholars as a process of city formation and city growth by involving the way social activities locate themselves in space and according to interdependent processes of societal development and change.
Urbanization is featured by the fast Growth in Urban Population, the large Increase in big towns, and the regional Disparities in it. The phenomenon of urbanization is directly related to industrialization, modernization, and the sociological process of rationalization.
Urbanization (or urbanisation) refers to the population shift from rural to urban areas, the corresponding decrease in the proportion of people living in rural areas, and the ways in which societies adapt to this change. It is predominantly the process by which towns and cities are formed and become larger as more people begin living and working in central areas.
Although the two concepts are sometimes used interchangeably, urbanization should be distinguished from urban growth. Urbanization refers to the proportion of the total national population living in areas classified as urban, whereas urban growth strictly refers to the absolute number of people living in those areas. It is predicted that by 2050 about 64% of the developing world and 86% of the developed world will be urbanized. That is equivalent to approximately 3 billion urbanites by 2050, much of which will occur in Africa and Asia. Notably, the United Nations has also recently projected that nearly all global population growth from 2017 to 2030 will be by cities, with about 1.1 billion new urbanites over the next 10 years.
Urbanization is relevant to a range of disciplines, including urban planning, geography, sociology, architecture, economics, education, statistics and public health.
The phenomenon has been closely linked to modernization, industrialization, and the sociological process of rationalization. Urbanization can be seen as a specific condition at a set time (e.g. the proportion of total population or area in cities or towns), or as an increase in that condition over time. Therefore, urbanization can be quantified either in terms of the level of urban development relative to the overall population, or as the rate at which the urban proportion of the population is increasing. Urbanization creates enormous social, economic and environmental changes, which provide an opportunity for sustainability with the “potential to use resources more efficiently, to create more sustainable land use and to protect the biodiversity of natural ecosystems.” Developing urban resilience and urban sustainability in the face of increased urbanization is at the center of international policy in Sustainable Development Goal 11 “Sustainable cities and communities.”
Urbanization is not merely a modern phenomenon, but a rapid and historic transformation of human social roots on a global scale, whereby predominantly rural culture is being rapidly replaced by predominantly urban culture. The first major change in settlement patterns was the accumulation of hunter-gatherers into villages many thousand years ago. Village culture is characterized by common bloodlines, intimate relationships, and communal behaviour, whereas urban culture is characterized by distant bloodlines, unfamiliar relations, and competitive behaviour. This unprecedented movement of people is forecast to continue and intensify during the next few decades, mushrooming cities to sizes unthinkable only a century ago. As a result, the world urban population growth curve has up till recently followed a quadratic-hyperbolic pattern.
Urbanism is the study of how inhabitants of urban areas, such as towns and cities, interact with the built environment. It is a direct component of disciplines such as urban planning, which is the profession focusing on the physical design and management of urban structures and urban sociology which is the academic field the study of urban life and culture.
Many architects, planners, geographers, and sociologists investigate the way people live in densely populated urban areas. There is a wide variety of different theories and approaches to the study of urbanism. However, in some contexts internationally, urbanism is synonymous with urban planning, and urbanist refers to an urban planner.
The term urbanism originated in the late nineteenth century with the Spanish engineer-architect Ildefons Cerda, whose intent was to create an autonomous activity focused on the spatial organization of the city. Urbanism’s emergence in the early 20th century was associated with the rise of centralized manufacturing, mixed-use neighborhoods, social organizations and networks, and what has been described as “the convergence between political, social and economic citizenship”.
Urbanism can be understood as place making and the creation of place identity at a citywide level, however as early as 1938 Louis Wirth wrote that it is necessary to stop ‘identifying urbanism with the physical entity of the city’, go ‘beyond an arbitrary boundary line’ and consider how ‘technological developments in transportation and communication have enormously extended the urban mode of living beyond the confines of the city itself.
4. Describe Paul Baran’s dependency theory of development?
Ans. First formulated by American economist Paul Baran (1910-1964), dependency theory proposes that, where a developing country for the most part specializes in producing one good (usually agricultural) for export, an exploitative relationship develops in which its financial and economic resources are controlled by the local elite and the international economy.
Dependency theory originates with two papers published in 1949 – one by Hans Singer, one by Raúl Prebisch – in which the authors observe that the terms of trade for underdeveloped countries relative to the developed countries had deteriorated over time: the underdeveloped countries were able to purchase fewer and fewer manufactured goods from the developed countries in exchange for a given quantity of their raw materials exports. This idea is known as the Prebisch–Singer thesis. Prebisch, an Argentine economist at the United Nations Commission for Latin America (UNCLA), went on to conclude that the underdeveloped nations must employ some degree of protectionism in trade if they were to enter a self-sustaining development path. He argued that import-substitution industrialisation (ISI), not a trade-and-export orientation, was the best strategy for underdeveloped countries. The theory was developed from a Marxian perspective by Paul A. Baran in 1957 with the publication of his The Political Economy of Growth. Dependency theory shares many points with earlier, Marxist, theories of imperialism by Rosa Luxemburg and Vladimir Lenin, and has attracted continued interest from Marxists. Some authors identify two main streams in dependency theory: the Latin American Structuralist, typified by the work of Prebisch, Celso Furtado, and Aníbal Pinto at the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC, or, in Spanish, CEPAL); and the American Marxist, developed by Paul A. Baran, Paul Sweezy, and Andre Gunder Frank.
Baran placed surplus extraction and capital accumulation at the center of his analysis. Development depends on a population’s producing more than it needs for bare subsistence (a surplus). Further, some of that surplus must be used for capital accumulation – the purchase of new means of production – if development is to occur; spending the surplus on things like luxury consumption does not produce development. Baran noted two predominant kinds of economic activity in poor countries. In the older of the two, plantation agriculture, which originated in colonial times, most of the surplus goes to the landowners, who use it to emulate the consumption patterns of wealthy people in the developed world; much of it thus goes to purchase foreign-produced luxury items –automobiles, clothes, etc. – and little is accumulated for investing in development. The more recent kind of economic activity in the periphery is industry—but of a particular kind. It is usually carried out by foreigners, although often in conjunction with local interests. It is often under special tariff protection or other government concessions. The surplus from this production mostly goes to two places: part of it is sent back to the foreign shareholders as profit; the other part is spent on conspicuous consumption in a similar fashion to that of the plantation aristocracy. Again, little is used for development. Baran thought that political revolution was necessary to break this pattern.
In the 1960s, members of the Latin American Structuralist school argued that there is more latitude in the system than the Marxists believed. They argued that it allows for partial development or “dependent development”–development, but still under the control of outside decision makers. They cited the partly successful attempts at industrialisation in Latin America around that time (Argentina, Brazil, Mexico) as evidence for this hypothesis. They were led to the position that dependency is not a relation between commodity exporters and industrialised countries, but between countries with different degrees of industrialisation. In their approach, there is a distinction made between the economic and political spheres: economically, one may be developed or underdeveloped; but even if (somewhat) economically developed, one may be politically autonomous or dependent. More recently, Guillermo O’Donnell has argued that constraints placed on development by neoliberalism were lifted by the military coups in Latin America that came to promote development in authoritarian guise.
The importance of multinational corporations and state promotion of technology were emphasised by the Latin American Structuralists.
Fajnzybler has made a distinction between systemic or authentic competitiveness, which is the ability to compete based on higher productivity, and spurious competitiveness, which is based on low wages.
The third-world debt crisis of the 1980s and continued stagnation in Africa and Latin America in the 1990s caused some doubt as to the feasibility or desirability of “dependent development”.
The sine qua non of the dependency relationship is not the difference in technological sophistication, as traditional dependency theorists believe, but rather the difference in financial strength between core and peripheral countries–particularly the inability of peripheral countries to borrow in their own currency. He believes that the hegemonic position of the United States is very strong because of the importance of its financial markets and because it controls the international reserve currency – the US dollar. He believes that the end of the Bretton Woods international financial agreements in the early 1970s considerably strengthened the United States’ position because it removed some constraints on their financial actions.
“Standard” dependency theory differs from Marxism, in arguing against internationalism and any hope of progress in less developed nations towards industrialization and a liberating revolution. Theotonio dos Santos described a “new dependency”, which focused on both the internal and external relations of less-developed countries of the periphery, derived from a Marxian analysis. Former Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso (in office 1995–2002) wrote extensively on dependency theory while in political exile during the 1960s, arguing that it was an approach to studying the economic disparities between the centre and periphery. Cardoso summarized his version of dependency theory as follows:
- there is a financial and technological penetration by the developed capitalist centers of the countries of the periphery and semi-periphery;
- this produces an unbalanced economic structure both within the peripheral societies and between them and the centers;
- this leads to limitations on self-sustained growth in the periphery;
- this favors the appearance of specific patterns of class relations;
these require modifications in the role of the state to guarantee both the functioning of the economy and the political articulation of a society, which contains, within itself, foci of inarticulateness and structural imbalance.
The analysis of development patterns in the 1990s and beyond is complicated by the fact that capitalism develops not smoothly, but with very strong and self-repeating ups and downs, called cycles. Relevant results are given in studies by Joshua Goldstein, Volker Bornschier, and Luigi Scandella.
Ans. Achieving sustainable development will require people to behave in certain ways, and because psychology is the study of human behavior, the judicious application of the principles discovered by psychologists can help make sustainable development a reality. Psychologists have described numerous ways in which behaviors can be elicited and maintained, and just as such principles have been applied to social issues ranging from Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) the reduction of racism to the prevention of disease, they can be applied to achieving sustainable development. Psychology is traditionally defined as the study of human thought, feeling, and behavior; however, because sustainable development is an outcome, the result of behavior, this article focuses on how psychological science can be used to maintain and elicit desirable behaviors. Psychologists study the human condition from a wide variety of perspectives ranging from the biological to the near sociological. These different perspectives have been combined into what has been called a bio-psycho-social approach which recognizes the importance of biological predispositions, individual psychological variables, and social factors as influences on human thought, feeling, and behavior. Although this article focuses on the individual and social components of this approach as it pertains to sustainable development, it does so with the recognition that biological factors can play roles in such processes. The diversity of influences on human behavior is also an important part of contemporary work in public health and epidemiology, and the present analysis shares much with this work. For example, combating a disease such as AIDS requires eliciting and maintaining certain individual behaviors such as safe-sex practices. Nevertheless, although the behavior of individuals is the immediate cause of the spread of the disease, the focus of efforts to control AIDS runs the gamut from those targeted at the local level to those targeted at the national or even international level. Similarly, if sustainable development is viewed as a collective result of individual behaviors, interventions must be targeted at broader levels than the individual despite the fact that the individual is the immediate cause of such behaviors. Another characteristic the present analysis shares with a public health approach is an emphasis on prevention. Just as it is easier to prevent heart disease than it is to cure it, it is easier to establish behaviors conducive to sustainable development than it is to change behaviors that make sustainable development less likely. Therefore, the present analysis also concerns how behaviors develop and how they are maintained. Developing, eliciting, and maintaining the behaviors promoting sustainable development can be discussed in terms of a vast array of factors. The theoretical basis of the present analysis is research in social and personality psychology, broadly defined. This theoretical basis is complemented by more applied research in consumer, community, and organizational psychology. The present analysis describes those factors that research and theory suggest are the most important, with the understanding that this description is not exhaustive. As you decide how to apply the principles described herein, keep in mind the fact that causal relationships in the social sciences tend to be more probabilistic than in some other disciplines. For example, for most purposes, one can predict quite accurately what will happen when certain chemicals are combined, whereas how a particular attitude change intervention effects an individual may be difficult to predict precisely. Nevertheless, reasonably accurate predictions can be made when interventions are targeted toward many people or when the impacts of numerous interventions are being evaluated. Furthermore, because policy makers and practitioners are typically concerned with such broad influences, a probabilistic model of causality poses no serious problems. The similarities between the cultural contexts within which psychological principles have been studied and those in which they are to be applied also need to be considered. The vast majority of psychological research has been conducted in industrialized Western countries and describes the behavior of people in these countries. Psychologists have become increasingly sensitive to this limitation and have begun to examine the implications this cultural context has for the generaliz ability of the conclusions they draw. To date, such cross-cultural research has suggested that many of the principles found in studies of westerners may also apply to members of other cultures. Nonetheless, readers need to be cautious as they consider how the psychological dynamics described herein might be applied to non-Western societies. Although many principles may be consistent across diverse cultures, how they manifest themselves may vary considerably.
IGNOU BSOG 173 FREE Solved Assignment 2022-23 PDF get here all ignou solved assignment 2022-23 , ignou guess paper , ignou help books and ignou exam related material. We help students to get their assignment done with our handwritten services, you can access our all material and services through WhatsApp also , 8130208920