Rural poverty

Rural poverty in the modern era operates on somewhat different dynamics than ciass-based urban poverty, although social science analyses since the 'rediscovery ' of poverty in the 1960s have often tended to conflate the two. Marxism, unlike other contemporary theories of poverty tends to write off the rural problem without further examination. (Marx referred to "the idiocy of rural life.")

The Dyson Thesis: Technology and Rural Poverty

In 2007, the retired Princeton University physicist Freeman Dyson put forth an interesting and innovative interpretation of rural poverty world wide that ties the problem and a possible solution to different technologies. Writing with the contemporary slums of cities through the world, and impoverished rural regions with which they are associated by urban migration, Dyson notes:

Rural poverty is one of the great evils of the modern world. The lack of jobs and economic opportunities in villages drives millions of people to migrate from villages into over-crowded cities. The continuing migration causes immense social and environmental problems in the major cities of poor countries. The effects of poverty are most visible in the cities, but the causes of poverty lie mostly in the villages. What the world needs is a technology that directly attacks the problem of rural poverty by creating wealth and jobs in the villages. A technology that creates industries and careers in the villages would give the villagers a practical alternative to migration. It would give them a chance to survive and prosper without uprooting themselves.

He places this perspective in the larger view of world urban history and archeology and what he terms the differences between gray and green technology:

The shifting balance of wealth and population between villages and cities is one of the main themes of human history over the last ten thousand years. The shift from villages to cities is strongly coupled with a shift from one kind of technology to another. I find it convenient to call the two kinds of technology green and gray. The adjective ‘green’ has been appropriated and abused by various political movements, especially in Europe, so I need to explain clearly what I have in mind when I speak of green and gray. Green technology is based on biology, gray technology is based on physics and chemistry.

Green technology, Dyson asserts, was basic to the agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago in the domestication of plants and animals, the invention of agriculture, breeding of livestock, and household production of such items as clothing, cheese, wine, etc. Gray technology arrived later in the forging of bronze and metals, wheels, paved roads, ships, war chariots, swords, and eventually guns & bombs. About 5000 years ago, gray technology gave birth to cities and also transformed agriculture gradually with steel plows, and by the 20th century farm implements and equipment that resulted in the transfer of rural wealth from farm-based households to urban-based corporations.

Taking a cue from the environmental movement Dyson concludes that perhaps a shift away from gray technologies back toward green, biologically based technology would also contribute to ending the problem of rural poverty worldwide.

(Dyson's comments quoted here from a New York Review of Books essay, were part of the Page-Barbous lectures he delivered in 2004.)

References

Dyson, Freeman. 2007. Our biotech future. New York Review of Books, July 19, 2007, 4-7.