The paper offers four propositions for discussion. First, it argues that instead of the oftenassumed convergence among nations, history shows us that divergence is a more appropriate way to conceptualize development trajectories; and that this is especially visible in the last century. Secondly, the paper suggests that “convergence†and “catch-up†are, from a Schumpeterian perspective, theoretically inadequate concepts as they frame development narratives similarly to the Rostovian idea of a linear path towards some sort of “development equilibriumâ€. Thirdly, we outline this schumpeterian framework, centered on the concept of leapfrogging through innovation and finance. The paper concludes by pointing out that macrofinancial coherence and “robust†economic governance (the role of the State playing a key role here) are essential dimensions – although scarcely researched of such alternative framework – for understanding development trajectories.
