Abstract

There is relatively less attention to illicit financial activities in the International Political Economy (IPE) studies, and it is quite ambiguous how to study these illicit activities. American IPE’s materialistic nature and state-centric approach miss essential features/relations of these illicit activities because they are neither materialistic nor state-centric. On the other hand, the British school is more suitable than American IPE because of its inclusive and multidisciplinary research and its engagement with real-world situations. However, its normative agenda and its motivation to judge rather than explain can be tricky in researching illicit activities. I argue that Constructivist IPE is the most suitable school because of its dynamism and concepts, namely meaning, cognition, uncertainty, and subjectivity. Utilizing these four concepts, researchers can conduct more detailed and more fruitful analyses regarding illicit financial activities. Showing why the Constructivist IPE is the most suitable school of IPE to research with a case study on tax havens’ status after 9/11, I assert that there should be more research in illicit financial activities in the IPE studies.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call