Suchergebnisse

This article traces the formation of a new discipline -- international political economy (IPE) -- in terms both of concepts & theoretical debates, & of the social process of its institutionalization, as shown by journals, textbooks, course offerings, & Internet Websites. In its first part, this article presents some well-known definitions of IPE & illustrates different types of theory. Special attention is given to Robert Gilpin, because of the importance of his work & the evolution of his thinking about IPE. In the second, the 30-year life of IPE is analyzed to identify the most important events leading to the creation of a new field of social research: the organization of conferences in the early 1970s; the publication of important books written by unorthodox economists like Kindleberger & Hirschman; & theoretical debates. The work of R. W. Cox, which is related to the "Gramscian turn" in international relations, is a particular focus of attention. Finally, the consequences of the "Fourth Debate" on positivism in international relations are considered in terms of the connection of IPE with constructivism, historical sociology, & the "cultural turn" in the social sciences. The third part shows how the debate on IPE has moved from being fully internal to (American) political science, to include general concerns about the social sciences at the beginning of the 21st century. An extensive bibliography follows. 210 References. Adapted from the source document.

Prospects for economic and political developments in southeastern Asia; economic successes and their social and political ramifications; some emphasis on causal factors and exportability of local development models both within the region and outside it; 12 articles.

Based on recent IPE contributions on three key themes in international politics (the relation between trade-technology & interstate conflicts, the link between multinationalization in production & world stability, & the political economy of democracy promotion in post-conflict countries), this essay calls the attention on the potential that IPE studies have for the analysis of complex processes (political & economic, with domestic, international & trans-national reach) across long time-spans. Empirical research on these topics has provided new ground to test & refine hypotheses from the three IPE orthodox Schools (Realism-Mercantilism, Liberalism & Marxism), pointing to the advantages of multivariate setups that treat both political & economic determinants of international outcomes as endogenous. Studies on the trade-war links have opened the way to analyses of how growth-inducing mechanisms in war economies may combine with the lasting effects of war-borne protectionist coalitions in producing differential outcomes, according to countries' resource endowments & level of development. Hypotheses on the peace-inducing features of multinationalized production appear in need of revision, especially when applied to the context of North-South relations, in which traditional dynamics identified in the FDI literature do not seem to obtain. Last, scholars interested in the political economy of post-war reconstruction could fruitfully borrow from the comparative literature on transitions, the economic contributions on development & the IR research on conflict, to provide new theoretical tools for the analysis of democracy promotion in post-conflict states. References. Adapted from the source document.

Gives an overview of the contributions of major economists & researchers to the research published in Il Politico. Some common themes are discussed: reflections on the free market, the role of the state & economic planning, analyses of the economies of socialist countries & their transitions to the market, & the study of the process of economic & monetary integration in Europe. Discusses how these themes have developed over the years in the publication. E. Miller