Andre Gunder Frank's 'development of underdevelopment' is a seminal concept within dependency theory, challenging conventional modernization theories that viewed underdevelopment as an original state or a result of internal deficiencies. Frank argued that underdevelopment in the Global South is not a natural condition but a direct consequence of its historical integration into the global capitalist system, which actively underdevelops these regions.

Core Argument: Frank posited that the developed capitalist countries (the 'metropolis' or 'core') exploit the underdeveloped countries (the 'satellites' or 'periphery'), extracting their resources and surplus value. This exploitation is not a historical accident but a structural feature of global capitalism. He argued that the satellites are not merely lagging behind but are actively prevented from achieving genuine development because their economies are structured to serve the interests of the metropolis. This relationship creates a chain of exploitation, from the global metropolis down to national, regional, and local satellites within the underdeveloped countries themselves.

Key Tenets:

1. Historical Exploitation: Frank emphasized the role of colonialism and neo-colonialism in establishing and perpetuating this exploitative relationship, integrating peripheral economies into a global system designed to benefit the core.
2. Metropolis-Satellite Chain: He described a hierarchical structure where surplus is extracted from the periphery and accumulated in the core. This applies not only internationally but also within countries, where urban centers (national metropolises) exploit rural areas (national satellites).
3. Lack of Autonomy: Peripheral countries are denied autonomous development. Their economic structures (e.g., reliance on raw material exports, limited industrialization) are shaped by the demands of the core, hindering their ability to diversify and industrialize.
4. Internal Comprador Elites: Frank argued that local elites in satellite countries often act as 'compradors,' collaborating with the metropolitan powers to facilitate exploitation, thereby perpetuating underdevelopment.

Critique of Frank's Theory: While highly influential for shifting the focus from internal factors to global structural inequalities, Frank's theory has faced several criticisms:

1. Economic Determinism: Critics argue that Frank's theory is overly deterministic, attributing almost all problems of underdevelopment to external economic exploitation. It tends to neglect internal factors such as political instability, corruption, poor governance, cultural barriers, and inefficient resource management, which also significantly contribute to underdevelopment.
2. Lack of Agency: The theory often portrays peripheral countries as passive victims, with little agency to shape their own destinies. This overlooks instances of internal resistance, social movements, and policy choices that can influence development trajectories.
3. Empirical Challenges: The rise of the East Asian 'Tiger' economies (e.g., South Korea, Taiwan) challenged Frank's thesis. These countries developed rapidly by integrating into the global capitalist system, albeit strategically, demonstrating that integration does not always lead to underdevelopment. This suggests that the nature of integration and state policies play a crucial role.
4. Simplistic Dichotomy: The metropolis-satellite model can be overly simplistic, failing to capture the complex and varied relationships between different countries and regions. It doesn't adequately account for semi-peripheral countries or the nuances of global economic interdependence.
5. Policy Implications: Frank's theory implicitly suggests 'delinking' from the global capitalist system as a solution. However, this approach has often proven difficult to implement and, in some cases, has led to economic isolation and stagnation rather than development.

Despite these criticisms, Frank's 'development of underdevelopment' remains a powerful framework for understanding historical injustices, structural inequalities, and the enduring challenges faced by many developing nations in a globalized world. It compelled scholars to consider the historical and systemic dimensions of global inequality.