Development economics emerged as a branch of economics due to concerns after World War II about the low standard of living in so many countries in Latin America,[5] Africa, Asia, and Eastern Europe. These studies sought to understand, among other things, how economic and social development could be achieved as quickly as possible, why the process of industrial growth and development that had been seen in Western Europe, the US and Japan had not spread to other nations or regions, a process that was previously believed to happen "naturally". These questions became urgent due to the decolonization process in the context of the Cold War. Almost from the beginning, two main approaches were noted: the currents that could be called "revolutionary" (also called ECLAC models and developmentalism that were inspired by Marxist perceptions (such as dependency theory and world system theory) and the currents that could be called economic engineering or "traditional economics" (in the sense of being the approach that was accepted in Western universities).

The first approaches of the latter to a theory of Development Economics assumed that the economies of the least developed countries, the LDCs, (acronym in English for least developed countries), were so different from the developed countries that basic economics could not explain the behavior of the economies of the latter. Such approaches produced some interesting and even elegant models, but they failed to explain the reality of no growth, slow growth, or growth and retreat found in the LDC. Slowly, the intellectual focus was fixed on the study of which basic functions of the economy are also found in the LDCs. This clarified the study area from approaches that sometimes bordered on racism or ethnocentrism, allowing the creation of more effective models. Traditional economics, however, still could not reconcile the weak and failed growth model.

Meanwhile, revolutionary approaches offered a good explanatory framework for such delay or failure in development. However, they suffered from the problem of not offering an efficient program of action, given that where they were put into practice they did not achieve the expected levels of development. It can be argued, however, that the main problem for these approaches was political: their proposals were not generally acceptable to developed countries, in the sense of being generally associated with "anti-capitalist" policies. Consequently, these approaches were destroyed by a political process.

All of the above, plus other socioeconomic factors, gave rise to the search for a new approach as a practical guide for government action in relation to this problem starting in the 1970s. This new demand took shape in the so-called Washington Consensus; However, this did not stop academic interest. These days, the field of economic development studies is still a growing field, seeking to review basic economic models and construct new models to explain the behavior of developing economies. In addition, a broader understanding is sought, including other disciplines to explain this economic phenomenon.

In addition to the macroeconomic and microeconomic aspects traditionally studied, development economists included the study of two new branches of science: Mesoeconomics and Metaeconomics. At the macroeconomic level, there have been important advances in explaining the growth of production, thanks to the combination of supply and demand approaches, as in the studies of Klein[6]​ and Guisan (coordinator),[7]​ among others. This type of study takes into account the effects of investment, foreign trade and other factors, as well as the interrelationships between various variables. An interesting overview of global economic development is presented in Maddison (2001).[8]​.

Furthermore, it has been shown that human capital (especially through education) generally has an important positive influence on the growth of per capita production, according to the contributions of various authors analyzed in the document by Neira and Guisán (2002),[9]​ and in other studies. In this sense, the pioneering work of Denison (1967)[10]​ and more recent studies due to Barro and Lee and other authors stand out.

Other issues of great interest for the knowledge of economic development are those related to the role of social capital "Social capital (sociology)") (quality of institutions, degree of social trust and in the government, freedom for the development of business and social initiatives, among other factors). Among the pioneering works in this sense, those of several economic historians such as Nobel Prize winner Douglass North stand out.

Development economics emerged as a branch of economics due to concerns after World War II about the low standard of living in so many countries in Latin America,[5] Africa, Asia, and Eastern Europe. These studies sought to understand, among other things, how economic and social development could be achieved as quickly as possible, why the process of industrial growth and development that had been seen in Western Europe, the US and Japan had not spread to other nations or regions, a process that was previously believed to happen "naturally". These questions became urgent due to the decolonization process in the context of the Cold War. Almost from the beginning, two main approaches were noted: the currents that could be called "revolutionary" (also called ECLAC models and developmentalism that were inspired by Marxist perceptions (such as dependency theory and world system theory) and the currents that could be called economic engineering or "traditional economics" (in the sense of being the approach that was accepted in Western universities).

The first approaches of the latter to a theory of Development Economics assumed that the economies of the least developed countries, the LDCs, (acronym in English for least developed countries), were so different from the developed countries that basic economics could not explain the behavior of the economies of the latter. Such approaches produced some interesting and even elegant models, but they failed to explain the reality of no growth, slow growth, or growth and retreat found in the LDC. Slowly, the intellectual focus was fixed on the study of which basic functions of the economy are also found in the LDCs. This clarified the study area from approaches that sometimes bordered on racism or ethnocentrism, allowing the creation of more effective models. Traditional economics, however, still could not reconcile the weak and failed growth model.

Meanwhile, revolutionary approaches offered a good explanatory framework for such delay or failure in development. However, they suffered from the problem of not offering an efficient program of action, given that where they were put into practice they did not achieve the expected levels of development. It can be argued, however, that the main problem for these approaches was political: their proposals were not generally acceptable to developed countries, in the sense of being generally associated with "anti-capitalist" policies. Consequently, these approaches were destroyed by a political process.

All of the above, plus other socioeconomic factors, gave rise to the search for a new approach as a practical guide for government action in relation to this problem starting in the 1970s. This new demand took shape in the so-called Washington Consensus; However, this did not stop academic interest. These days, the field of economic development studies is still a growing field, seeking to review basic economic models and construct new models to explain the behavior of developing economies. In addition, a broader understanding is sought, including other disciplines to explain this economic phenomenon.

In addition to the macroeconomic and microeconomic aspects traditionally studied, development economists included the study of two new branches of science: Mesoeconomics and Metaeconomics. At the macroeconomic level, there have been important advances in explaining the growth of production, thanks to the combination of supply and demand approaches, as in the studies of Klein[6]​ and Guisan (coordinator),[7]​ among others. This type of study takes into account the effects of investment, foreign trade and other factors, as well as the interrelationships between various variables. An interesting overview of global economic development is presented in Maddison (2001).[8]​.

Furthermore, it has been shown that human capital (especially through education) generally has an important positive influence on the growth of per capita production, according to the contributions of various authors analyzed in the document by Neira and Guisán (2002),[9]​ and in other studies. In this sense, the pioneering work of Denison (1967)[10]​ and more recent studies due to Barro and Lee and other authors stand out.

Other issues of great interest for the knowledge of economic development are those related to the role of social capital "Social capital (sociology)") (quality of institutions, degree of social trust and in the government, freedom for the development of business and social initiatives, among other factors). Among the pioneering works in this sense, those of several economic historians such as Nobel Prize winner Douglass North stand out.