In line with Benham and colonial economists, Röpke thus called for export-oriented traditional production. Instead of industrialization, he recommended diversifying the organizational structure of agricultural producers. Family farms should specialize in export crops without becoming fully dependent on market income. Röpke referred to Peter Bauer's work on rubber regulation in support of his argument. But he also called on the West to remove protective tariffs and on leaders in developing countries to promote land reform (Röpke 1953, 93). Röpke thus rejected contemporary critiques of traditional production (claiming a generally low productivity of agriculture). He suggested that this sector was more likely to absorb large parts of the growing population than any industrial alternatives. Ultimately, Röpke concluded, not much could be done to overcome the fundamental problem: the lack of capital (availability) due to the low propensity to save, the absence of capital markets, and the inadequate banking systems. Consequently, capital would necessarily have to come from the outside. He considered private investment (though beneficial) completely insufficient in terms of what would be needed. The crucial issue was the very condition under which development planning was supposed to occur: according to Röpke, private investment would be undermined by creating political conditions inimical to private investors. He did not trust the international rule of law due to the composition of prospective UN membership: Europe's vote was observed to be outnumbered soon by new developing countries, assisted by the "anti-imperialist screaming" of the Russian representatives of world communism (Röpke 1953, 104).

Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, loc. 1288