关于依附理论的组成部分,学术界的观点不完全一致。一些学者根据不同的论点将依附理论分为“不发达的发展”论,“发展障碍”论和“依附性发展”论。这种分类法的缺陷在于把美国学者弗兰克的不发达理论和分析方法跟基本观点完全不同的拉美学者的依附理论归入一类,造成了弗兰克是依附理论创始人、拉美学者只是依附理论继承者的假象。另一种观点认为,依附理论可根据不同的学术机构分为“拉美经委会学派”和“社会经济研究中心学派”等。这种分类法同样不可取。因为,根据国外一些学者的观点,拉美经委会内部涌现出的依附论者也分属“结构主义”、“马克思主义”、“凯恩斯主义”等不同的学术流派。因此,较有说服力的还是,根据不同的分析方法将依附理论分成两个理论体系,即运用马 As for the components of attachment theory, the views of academia are not exactly the same. According to different arguments, some scholars divide dependency theory into “underdeveloped development” theory, “development obstacle” theory and “dependent development” theory. The disadvantage of this taxonomy lies in the fact that the under-developed theory and analysis of American scholar Frank is classified into a category by the Latin American scholar’s theory of dependence which fundamentally differs from the basic point of view, which results in Frank as the founder of dependency theory and Latin American scholars as dependents of theory The illusion. Another view is that dependency theory can be divided into “ECLAC schools” and “schools of socio-economic research schools” according to different academic institutions. This classification is equally undesirable. Because, according to some foreign scholars, the dependent adherents appearing in ECLAC also belong to different academic schools such as “structuralism”, “Marxism” and “Keynesianism.” Therefore, it is more convincing to divide the theory of attachment into two theoretical systems according to different analytical methods, that is,