Modern IPE

Randall Germain
{"title":"Modern IPE","authors":"Randall Germain","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198793519.013.37","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although there is some disagreement, a remarkable consensus exists that IPE as a formal subject of study emerged in the late 1960s or early 1970s, as the Bretton Woods system was dissolving. This chapter interrogates such a consensus by considering why modern IPE failed to materialize as an organized subject of enquiry after World War II, when there was a demonstrable calling for knowledge of the type it provides. To explore this puzzle I establish that an ongoing academic conversation was available through the work of three eminent intellectuals who would today be clearly recognized as IPE scholars: Karl Polanyi, E.H. Carr and David Mitrany. Although they all advanced distinct IPE-centered ways of framing the central problems of the post-1945 world, their work failed to launch a systematic and coherent conversation about IPE because of the absence of key conditions for this to occur. There are two lessons which we may draw from this case: disciplines require institutional homes from which to carry out “conversations,” and, more controversially, these homes might best be assembled within an architecture provided by a single discipline rather than within multi- or inter-disciplinary venues in which few agreed-upon rules exist.","PeriodicalId":360159,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of International Political Economy","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of International Political Economy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198793519.013.37","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although there is some disagreement, a remarkable consensus exists that IPE as a formal subject of study emerged in the late 1960s or early 1970s, as the Bretton Woods system was dissolving. This chapter interrogates such a consensus by considering why modern IPE failed to materialize as an organized subject of enquiry after World War II, when there was a demonstrable calling for knowledge of the type it provides. To explore this puzzle I establish that an ongoing academic conversation was available through the work of three eminent intellectuals who would today be clearly recognized as IPE scholars: Karl Polanyi, E.H. Carr and David Mitrany. Although they all advanced distinct IPE-centered ways of framing the central problems of the post-1945 world, their work failed to launch a systematic and coherent conversation about IPE because of the absence of key conditions for this to occur. There are two lessons which we may draw from this case: disciplines require institutional homes from which to carry out “conversations,” and, more controversially, these homes might best be assembled within an architecture provided by a single discipline rather than within multi- or inter-disciplinary venues in which few agreed-upon rules exist.
尽管存在一些分歧,但存在一个显著的共识,即国际政治经济学作为一门正式的研究学科出现在20世纪60年代末或70年代初,当时布雷顿森林体系正在瓦解。本章通过考虑为什么现代国际政治经济学在第二次世界大战后未能成为一门有组织的研究学科来质疑这样一种共识,当时有一种对它所提供的那种知识的可论证的呼吁。为了探索这个谜题,我建立了一个正在进行的学术对话,可以通过三位著名知识分子的工作来获得,他们今天被清楚地认为是国际政治经济学学者:卡尔·波兰尼、E.H.卡尔和大卫·米特拉尼。尽管他们都提出了独特的以国际政治经济学为中心的方法来构建1945年后世界的核心问题,但由于缺乏关键条件,他们的工作未能启动关于国际政治经济学的系统和连贯的对话。我们可以从这个案例中得到两个教训:学科需要进行“对话”的机构家庭,而且,更有争议的是,这些家庭可能最好是在由单一学科提供的建筑中组装,而不是在多学科或跨学科的场所中组装,在这些场所中几乎没有商定的规则存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信