Paper short abstract:

This paper unpacks the different strands and concepts within what we call the "dependency school," in order to clarify what the internal debates have been, what its intellectual origins are, and on what grounds it has been delegitimized. We propose a repackaging that retains its core strengths.

Paper long abstract:

Confusion about what constitutes "dependency theory" and to what extent it has been discredited as a framework abounds. This paper unpacks the different strands and concepts within what we call the "dependency school," in order to clarify what the internal debates have been, what its intellectual origins are, and on what grounds it has been delegitimized. A dividing line is drawn between the structuralist and neo-Marxist strands of the dependency school, although there is variety within each strand and even some overlap between them. We assess the validity of external critiques of the dependency school and what a revised form of dependency theory might look like that retains its core strengths, while addressing some of the valid critiques that have been directed towards it.