Stage-Specific Modernization

Abstract

The Greek philosopher Heraclitus said: one cannot step twice into the same river. There are different features in different stages of the process of human civilization and world modernization. In general, modernization in different phases has both generality and diversity, and the core theory of general modernization has somewhat different applicability in different phases.

Appendices

Summary

In the period from the eighteenth to the twenty-first century, modernization process can be divided into two stages, the first and second modernization, and the coordinated development of the twice modernization is integrated modernization. Different stages have different theories.

4.1.1 First Stage of Modernization, Also the First Modernization: Focus on Three Schools

Classical modernization theory (So 1990), born in the period between 1950s and 1960s, viewed modernization as a historical transition process from traditional agricultural society to modern industrial society. Modernity is a theoretical epitome of modernization outcome. There are nine characteristics and multiple models in modernization process. Classical modernization process took place both in pioneering societies and latecomers, with typical features including industrialization, urbanization, democratization, rationalization, social welfare, and popularization of compulsory education. Classical modernization theory has six branch theories and six schools of ideas.

Dependency theory (Seers 1981) emerged in 1960s, which attempted to illustrate the underdevelopment phenomena in periphery countries by dependent relationship between the core nations and periphery nations, and blame external causes for this underdevelopment. History has repeatedly proven that it is unlikely for different nations to advance ahead side by side, and both development and underdevelopment are inevitable in the course of modernization. Developed nations will be the modern countries and underdeveloped nations are not. Underdevelopment is an objective phenomenon in modernization process, and it is tenable to regard the theoretical explanations of underdevelopment as a branch theory of classical modernization theory.

World-systems theory (Wallerstein 1976) was a very influential development theory that emerged in 1970s. It attempted to dissect historical evolution of the world-system using variables such as dependence relations among core–semiperiphery–periphery areas, international division of labor, and class conflicts and aimed to decipher the world development history since sixteenth century. Modernization is a world movement, which will definitely stir changes in the world-system, and in turn, these changes will surely affect modernization of a nation. However, classical modernization theory itself lacks a systematic analysis at the world-system level. Considering that modernization will inevitably lead to changes in the world-system, it is acceptable to regard theoretical illustrations of the world-system in modernization process as a branch theory of classical modernization theory.

4.1.2 Second Stage of Modernization, Also the Second Modernization: Focus on Four Schools

Chinese scholar Chuanqi He (1998a, b, 1999) proposed the second modernization theory in the 1990s. It is not only a modernization theory in broad sense but also a civilization development theory, which has established effective relationships between modernization theory and civilization development theory. The general theory on the second modernization theory is discussed in Chap. 2 and its theoretical structure and stage theories in this chapter.

Second modernization theory as a civilization development theory is called civilization periodic transfer theory, according to which human civilization is an organic whole as well as an aggregation of the civilizations of the different nationalities and countries. Development of civilization follows a cyclical route, with accelerating development cycles and distinguished themes in each cycle. Periodic transfer includes the shifts of civilization direction, axis, and center (He 1999).

Second modernization theory as a modernization theory in broad sense is called twice modernization theory, according to which modernization is a kind of civilization changes and international competition since the industrial revolution in the eighteenth century; the frontier process of formation, development, transformation, and international interaction of modern civilization; a compound process of the innovation, selection, diffusion, and recession of civilization elements; and an international competition to catch up with, reach, and keep the world advanced level. Developed nations succeeded in achieving and keeping the world frontier while others remained as developing nations, but the two categories of nations are mobile. From the eighteenth century to the end of the twenty-first century, modernization process can be divided into two stages: the first and second modernization; moreover, there are new changes in the twenty-first century. This theory incorporates general theory, stage theories, level theories, and field theories, among which the first category is abstraction of the latter three categories, and the latter three are specific expressions of the general theory in/at different stages, levels, and fields. Together, these theories make up the theoretical edifice of general modernization theory.

Stage theory on modernization in broad sense includes first modernization theory, second modernization theory in narrow sense, and integrated modernization theory. Each stage theory incorporates general theory, level theories, field theories, and sector theories. First modernization theory is much the same as the classical modernization theory. The second modernization process has ten features: knowledgeablization, informatization, greening, innovation, globalization, decentralization, diversity, individualization, intelligentization, and lifelong learning.

Reflexive modernization theory was put forward in the 1980s by German scholar Beck (1986) who believed that modernization includes two phases: simple and reflexive modernization. Simple modernization is the transition from traditional agricultural to industrial society, while reflexive modernization refers to the transition from industrial to risk society, also the modernization of “modernization” or “remodernization.” The modernity of industrial society is general in nature, called the first modernity, while the modernity of risk society is reflexive, also referred to as the second modernity, with characteristics like riskiness, globalization, individualization, diversity, and diversification.

Postmodernization theory emerged in the 1970s–1980s, but it is a collection of ideas about postindustrial society, postmodernism, and postmodernization research rather than a complete theoretical system. American scholar Bell (1973) divides human social development into three phases: preindustrial society, industrial society, and postindustrial society. French scholar Lyotard (1984) believed that as the human society enters the so-called postindustrial era and culture enters the so-called postmodern era, knowledge will change the status. British scholar Crook et al. (1992) insisted that developed nations were going through a long and multidimensional postmodernization process. American scholar Inglehart (1997) maintained that the track of history was never linear and that the transition from traditional society to modern society is modernization while the transition from modern society to postmodern society is postmodernization. To be more specific, the changes occurred in industrial nations since 1970 represent postmodernization while those in developing nations stand for modernization. The transition from modernization to postmodernization involves penetrating changes in politics, economy, perceptions on sex and family, and religion, for example, shifts from materialism to postmaterialism, from modern value to postmodern value, and from survival value to happiness value.

Continuous modernization theory is an academic idea put forward by German sociologists in 1990s. German scholar Zapf (1999) believed that from semantic perspective, the concept of “modern society” shows more vitality than any concepts like postmaterial society, postindustrial society, information society, risk society, and perceptual society and that the modernization theories, after being “quenched” by conflict theories and innovation theories, is the appropriate theoretical model to illustrate the current and future developments of the world. The continuous modernization of modern society involves technological and social innovations, accommodation, generalization and differentiation of values, social change mechanism with high social status, as well as double messages of directions constancy and structure improvement.

4.1.3 Integrated Modernization Is a Path for Developing Nations. Focus Is on the Discussion of Three Relevant Theories

The integrated modernization theory, first put forward by Chinese scholar Chuanqi He (2003), is a path theory for the second modernization theory, which incorporates general theories, level theories, field theories, and sector theories. This theory is fit for developing nations who has not yet completed their first modernization process. It is quite possible that through a coordinated development of twice modernizations, these countries can catch up with the advanced level of second modernization that the developed nations have already achieved. The integrated modernization path parallels the second modernization route and at same time is a new one different from that of developed countries.

Integrated modernization is a double-transition process that involves the transition from agricultural to industrial civilization and from industrial to knowledge civilization, as well as the united action of two transitions and a continuous marching toward knowledge civilization. Integrated modernization includes elements such as new industrialization, new urbanization, knowledgeablization, informatization, democratization, social welfare, greening, ecologicalization, and globalization; the dropping proportion of agricultural civilization; the first rising then declining proportion of industrial civilization; and the growing proportion of knowledge civilization and ecological civilization. It consists of three stages: industrialization-dominated stage, knowledge-dominated stage, and stage of all-round knowledgeablization; the major features include diversity, comprehensiveness, complication, riskiness, and innovativeness.

In integrated modernization process, the first modernization is not required to be completed first, but instead the twice modernizations can be carried out in parallel. In areas without conflicts of the two modernizations, we should comply with the inherent logics of development, advance step by step, reduce the occurrence of mistakes, and accelerate growth. In areas where conflicts emerge, we should adopt three principles of precedence, that is, always give priority to adherence of the inherent logics of development, compliance of the basic principles of the second modernization, and satisfaction of the development needs of the second modernization.

Multiple modernities theory is a topic theory emerged in 1990s, which is a theoretical elaboration on diversity of modern cultures and institutions as well as the multiple-linear changes of culture. According to Israel scholar Eisenstadt (2003), first, modernity should be deemed as a unique civilization with distinct institutional and cultural characteristics; second, it is better to regard the history of modernity as a story of constant developing, shaping, building, and reconstructing the plural culture scheme of modernity, the unique modern institution patterns, and diverse self-conceptions of modern society—a story of multiple modernities; third, the diverse cultural schemes and institutional patterns of modernity are the results from the ongoing interactions of several factors; fourth, the essential core of modernity culture scheme involves the individual subjective activity and independence and highlights the expansion of personal freedom and institution freedom and broadening of spaces for individual activities, creativity, and independence; and fifth, the analysis of cultural diversity does not deny that the initial convergence theories of modernization and industrial society embody highly genuine elements. Multiple modernities are closely related to the route choice of integrated modernization made by developing countries.

Globalization theory stirred intensive attentions in the 1990s. So far, there is still no agreed definition of globalization. In a narrow sense, globalization is the global linking network of economic activities and extension of interdependence. In a broad sense, globalization is a complicated internationalization process that takes place in economic, political, cultural, social, and environmental domains. When the internationalization reaches a certain level, say, over 50% involvement rate of nations in this process, it is globalization in its true sense. Globalization is a historical process with growing international connections. The globalization theory is an aggregation of all theoretical interpretations of globalization phenomena. Given that modernization is a global process and globalization is an associated phenomenon of modernization, so it is acceptable to make globalization theory a topic-specific theory of modernization theories. In fact, the two theories are separately developed, with no direct relations.

Further Reading

• Beck U, Giddens A, Rush S (1994) Reflexive modernization: politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA (Trans. Zhao S. Beijing: Commercial Press, 2001)

• Bell D (1973) The coming of postindustrial society: a venture in social forecasting. Penguin, New York (Trans. Gao T, Wang H, Wei Z. Beijing: Xinhua Publishing House, 1997)

• Bendix R (1967) Tradition and modernity reconsidered. Comp Stud Soc Hist IX 3:292–346

• Black CE (ed) (1976) Comparative modernization: a reader. Free, New York (Trans. Yang Y, Chen Z. Shanghai: Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 1996)

• Crook S, Pakulski J, Waters M (1992) Post modernization: change in advanced society. Sage, London

• Eisenstadt SN (2003) Comparative civilizations and multiple modernities. Reflection on modernity. Brill, Leiden (Trans. Kuang X, Wang A. Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 2006)

• Frank AG (1978) Dependent accumulation and underdevelopment. Monthly Review, New York, NY (Trans. Gao T, Gao G. Nanjing: Yilin Publishing House, 1999)

• He C (1999) The second modernization: revelations for human civilization process. Higher Education, Beijing

• He C (2003) Oriental revitalization: three roads of modernization. Commercial, Beijing

• He C (2010) China modernization report outlook: 2001–2010. Peking University Press, Beijing

• Herd D et al (1999) Global transformations: politics, economics and culture. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA (Trans. Yang X et al. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2001)

• Inglehart R (1997) Modernization and postmodernization. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

• Luo R (1993) New approach to modernization. Peking University Press, Beijing

• Lyotard J-F (1984) The postmodern condition: a report on knowledge. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis [1979]

• OECD (1996) Science, technology and industry outlook. OECD, Paris

• RGCMS (Research Group for China Modernization Strategies et al) (2010) China modernization report 2010: World modernization outline 1700–2100. Peking University Press, Beijing

• Wallerstein IM (1974) The modern world-system I: capitalist agriculture and the origins of the European world-economy in the sixteenth century. Academic, New York (Trans. You L et al. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 1998)

• Yin B (2001) What is modernization: a study on concepts and paradigms. People’s Publishing House, Beijing

• Zapf W (1999) Modernisierung, Wohlfahrtsentwicklung und Transformation (Modernization and Social Transformation), 2nd edn. Sigma, Berlin (Trans. Chen L, Lu C. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2000)