ABSTRACT
In the development field , most mainstream development theories, irrespective of their differences in philosophical and ideological underpinnings, tend to focus largely on the economic sphere while overlooking the noneconomic domains (politics, culture, religion) or considering them to be secondary. This inclination toward economic reductionism could be observed in major conservative theoretical traditions, such as noninterventionist classical and neoclassical economic theories and interventionist Keynesian and post-Keynesian perspectives, which focus mostly on economic realities in advanced capitalist nations. Similar emphasis on the narrow economic dimension could be found in the reformist theories and approaches that emerged between the 1950s and 1970s, including unbalanced growth theory, vicious-circle theory, stages of growth theory, agriculture-first approach, and basic-needs approach, which attempt to address economic backwardness in developing countries (Haque, 1999). During this period, although certain modernization theories stressed political, cultural, and psychological factors (Appelbaum, 1973; Kim, 1984), in the ultimate analysis such factors were treated as causal variables related eventually to the realization of economic growth in these countries. What central concern inspires all these theories thus was often the issue of economic growth-the sources, causes, processes, obstacles, possibilities, and ends of such growth. Although the radical theoretical tradition of development theories covering various dependency and neo-Marxist analyses tried to explain issues such as dependency and underdevelopment, dependent development, class and the state, and articulation of the modes of production (Randall and Theobald, 1985; Simon and Ruccio , 1986), their primary emphasis remained on the economic sphere.
