“…IPE is a highly pluralistic field. Despite representations of binary divisions between 'orthodox/heterodox', 'positivist'/'critical' approaches to IPE (Cohen, 2008;Murphy & Nelson, 2001), such divisions have broken down under closer scrutiny (Blyth, 2009;Helleiner, 2009;Higgott & Watson, 2008;Leander, 2015;Wullweber, 2019). Sharman and Weaver's (2013) analysis of a 20-country TRIPS survey, a database of books in IPE and all RIPE articles from 2000 to 2010, also find significant evidence for diversityof methods used, of paradigms, of epistemology, and even of the geographic array of scholars.…”