Abstract
This is Part I of a two-part study on paradigms used to study marketing and economic development. In this part, a systematic examination of the three paradigms (modernization, institutional, and radical) most commonly used in analyzing marketing and economic development is undertaken. Criteria for evaluating efficacy of the paradigms are drawn from the marketing and economic development literature. An analysis of the three paradigms based on six evaluative criteria suggest that the institutional approach has key advantages and that the other two paradigms have significant deficiencies. In Part II, each paradigm is used to frame the study of a developing economy to verify the conceptual results of Part L
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
