Globalising the classical foundations of IPE thought

Helleiner, Eric

doi:10.1590/s0102-85292015000300007

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3. Hobson (2013) and Helleiner (2015) an approach adopted by Colgan (2016). We did not opt for this method to define the journal space, simply because journal articles are not always the dominant kind of publication in syllabi, especially for undergraduates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The networks and niches of international political economy

Seabrooke

Young

2017

Review of International Political Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyze the organizational logics of how social clustering operates within International Political Economy (IPE). Using a variety of new data on IPE publishing, teaching, and conference attendance, we use network analysis and community detection to understand social clustering within the field. We find that when it comes to publishing and intellectual engagement, IPE is highly pluralistic and driven by a logic of 'niche proliferation'. Teaching IPE, however, is characterized by a 'reduction to polarity' that emphasizes a dualism in ontological and epistemological frames. In the face of competitive exclusion pressures, intellectual communities regenerate themselves by constructing niches while simultaneously nodding to a common tradition.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The networks and niches of international political economy

Seabrooke

Young

2017

Review of International Political Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Economic nationalism is generally seen to place the nation as the unit of focus (the nation's needs, interests and identity) and, consequently, sees the possibility for a different path of progress and development for each nation. (List, 1856;Helleiner, 2002Helleiner, , 2015 Universalism, or the argument for universalist processes of development, places the individual at the centre of society, instead of the nation, and assumes that all countries progress through the same stages. (see e.g.…”

Section: Discursive Innovation From and At The Marginsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Journal of the History of Economic Thought Preprints – A Win-Win Model of Development: How Indian Economics Redefined Universal Development from and at the Margins

Bach¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I argue that looking at lesser known intellectuals can help history of economics uncover news ways of seeing the world. My focus is the beginnings of “Indian Economics” and its conceptualization of development. The Indian economists, despite their elite status in India, were from an imperial context where they were never considered economists. Studies throughout the 20th century continued to treat them only as nationalists, rarely as contributors to economic knowledge. My research gives agency to these economists. I show how the position of Indian Economics from the margins of discursive space offered a unique perspective that enabled it to discursively innovate at the margins of development discourse. Indian Economics redefined the concept of universality in the existing 19th century idea of development by rejecting the widely accepted comparative advantage model and assertion that progress originated in Europe. Moreover, the economists pushed for universal industrialization, even for imperial territories, arguing that universal progress was beneficial to all.

show abstract

“…2. There are a few notable recent studies, such as Chey and Helleiner (2018), Helleiner (2015), Helleiner and Rosales (2017a, b), Helleiner and Wang (2018) and Hobson (2013a, b), which attempt to “globalise” the history of classical IPE thought.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

International political economy thought in pre-modern and colonial Korea

Chey

2019

ITPD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse international political economy (IPE) thought in Korea during its pre-modern and colonial eras. Design/methodology/approach It divides these eras into three periods. The first period is the eighteenth century, in which Silhak arose. The second is the mid- and late nineteenth century, a time characterised by conflicts between Wijeong-cheoksa and Gaehwa thoughts. The final period is that of colonial Korea under imperial Japan, and during this time economic nationalist movements were pursued while Marxist theories were also introduced to the country. Findings This research shows that IPE thoughts analogous to Western economic liberalism and economic nationalism did emerge endogenously in Korea when its environment was similar to those in which these Western thoughts arose, although in ways that reflected Korea’s peculiar situations of the times. This study also demonstrates that the “economic” thoughts of the Koreans in these periods were shaped largely by their political thoughts. Originality/value This research contributes to the building of a more “globalised” intellectual history of classical IPE thought.

show abstract

Globalising the classical foundations of IPE thought

Cited by 11 publications

References 27 publications

The networks and niches of international political economy

The networks and niches of international political economy

Journal of the History of Economic Thought Preprints – A Win-Win Model of Development: How Indian Economics Redefined Universal Development from and at the Margins

International political economy thought in pre-modern and colonial Korea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About