-9-


critical. None of the analysis which follows should be interpreted therefore

as a denial of the significance of such factors. Indeed, the paper may help

to redress what has been a past imbalance of overemphasis upon non-economic

explanations for resistance to change.


 I. The Responsiveness of Subsistence Farmers

 The earliest characterizations of subsistence or traditional farmers

described them as technologically backward, with deficient entrepreneurial

ability, and with limited aspirations. The influence of limited aspirations

is best summarized in the colonial stereotype of the "lazy natives" who refuse

to work for an income beyond what they require for their subsistence require-

ments [Black, 1953, p. 536]. Economists labeled such behaviour as the "back-

ward bending supply curve of labor." Although they pointed out the existence

of (backward bending labor supply curves in both developed and undeveloped

economies, the sophisticated theorizing about leisure income effects and the

utility of money was not terribly appealing when applied to primitive and

partially monetized societies. Other social scientists who were more culturally

sensitive and empathetic viewed any behaviour which superficially appeared

to constitute a denial of greater economic gain as merely instances where non-

economic variables dominated and swamped economic factors favorable to

economic maximization.

 Interestingly these early views of limited or negative peasant responses

to economic opportunity were held by many individuals who were witnesses to

or participated in instances of massive "response" by subsistence and peasant

farmers to improved economic opportunities, The colonial period in many of

today's developing nations offer considerable evidence of economic responsive-