Development theory: convergence, catch-up or leapfrogging? A schumpeterian approach

Abstract

The present note offers three propositions for discussion. a) it argues that instead of the suggested convergence among nations which constitutes the title of this session, divergence is a more appropriate way to conceptualize development trajectories; and that this is especially true for the last three decades; b) it suggests that ―convergence‖ and ―catch-up‖ are rather loose ways (or concepts) to frame development narratives and, in fact, that they are more akin to the Rostovian idea of a linear path of development towards development equilibrium – equilibrium imposed on history – rather than to the framework of continuous, structural, cumulative change and creative destruction, which should be the proper domain for development theory; c) finally, a Schumpeterian approach, centered in the concept of leapfrogging trough innovation, is outlined as a more promising way to address both development theory and the historical trajectories observed since the industrial revolution in Britain.