Polarized Economic Development: Methodological Eclecticism of Research in the 1950–1980s

Abstract

The academic research of the 1950–1980s devoted to polarized development was characterized by methodological eclecticism. The set of generally accepted provisions (the ‘hard core’ of the theory) had not been formed in the framework of the original works of French researchers (primarily F. Perroux and J.-R. Boudeville). This problem of began to worsen due to the expansion of the number of involved researchers. One of the most notable innovations, which arose due to incorrect interpretations of the publications of the French pioneers, was the introduction of the term ‘growth center’, which greatly supplanted the original ‘pole’ terminology from the Anglo-Saxon works. In addition to the unjustified expansion of the list of terms, publications began to appear based on methodological guidelines that run counter to the ones of F. Perroux. In fact, the scientific direction has clearly fallen into the ‘fragmentation trap’. It also failed to form a set of more or less complete auxiliary theories that could form a ‘protective belt’ of the theory of polarized development. As a result, the original methodological basis (which can be characterized as heterodox) began to erode, including through studies using economic orthodoxy typical tools. The end result was a gradual decline in the interest of academic researchers in the original concept, and competing heterodox theories fell into the ‘centers of attention’

Keywords

• polarized development
• growth pole
• development pole
• growth center
• heterodoxy
• orthodoxy
• economic research methodology