Latin American structuralism, first promulgated in 1949 by the Argentine economist Raúl Prebisch, held that Latin American economies were characterized by heterogeneous technologies, structural unemployment, external disequilibrium, and secularly deteriorating terms of trade. The crisis of structuralism in the latter 1960s, following the exhaustion of “easy” import substitution, ultimately resulted in “neostructuralism” in 1990, a reformed version of the doctrine that emphasized greater equity in income distribution, expansion of export markets, aggressive pursuit of technological change, and continuous “learning by doing.” In the last two decades, CEPAL’s interest has focused on issues of inequality in the global region that is still the most unequal in the world.
CEPAL, Economic Development, and Inequality
Joseph L. Love is professor emeritus of history at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He was formerly director of the Lemann Institute of Brazilian Studies at the university, where he had previously been director of the Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies. In addition to having published some seventy journal articles and book chapters, he is the author of The Revolt of the Whip (2012); Crafting the Third World: Theorizing, Underdevelopment in Rumania and Brazil (1996); São Paulo in the Brazilian Federation, 1889–1937 (1980); and Rio Grande do Sul and Brazilian Regionalism, 1882–1930 (1971). He is also coeditor of several books, most recently Brazil under Lula: Economy, Society, and Politics under the Worker-President, with Werner Baer (2009).
Joseph L. Love; CEPAL, Economic Development, and Inequality. History of Political Economy 1 December 2018; 50 (S1): 152–171. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/00182702-7033908
Download citation file: