Abstract
This paper focuses on the differences between International Political Economy (IPE) versus Global Political Economy (GPE) in Latin America. It explores how IPE tends to be taught and researched beyond mainstream IPE but in dialogue with it. It engages with the main literature of this field to discuss the contours and extension of a transition in teaching and research. It rests upon a historical sociological approach and employs a qualitative analysis of syllabi and curricula of various masters and doctoral programs on International Relations/Studies and underlying disciplines, and is complemented with semi-structured interviews with leading scholars of IPE from across the region. The paper argues that there is a shift from mainstream IPE to a new Latin American GPE as the result of a revitalization of the field and as a response to the new regional and global challenges. New dynamics of development, conflict and a changing world order coexist with old problems, pushing our field to find new responses, demonstrating the limits of the traditional knowledge, and requiring the development of new contributions. While the shift may be minor, it is constant and steady, and is neither homogenous nor dominated by a unique vision of the field, but it is defined by heterogeneity and plurality.
Highlights
This paper critically analyses key research contributions concerning how teaching and research is done the field of International Political Economy (IPE) in Latin America and tackles elements of scholarly interest for recent developments of the field in the region
This paper focuses on the differences between International Political Economy (IPE) versus Global Political Economy (GPE) in Latin America
-Saxon IPE approaches, and refers to the means of engaging in a conversation with other IPEs as well as the mainstream (ACHARYA, 2011; COHEN, 2019). This analysis argues that there is an increasing shift from mainstream Latin American International Political Economy (LAIPE) to a Latin American Global Political Economy (LAGPE), which are clearly defined by recent contributions (TUSSIE, 2020)
Summary
This paper critically analyses key research contributions concerning how teaching and research is done the field of International Political Economy (IPE) in Latin America and tackles elements of scholarly interest for recent developments of the field in the region. It draws on an analysis of 70 curricula and syllabi from masters and doctoral programmes from universities in 15 Latin American states, including Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Chile, and Ecuador, among others, and the editorial boards of the main academic journals IPE globally (SALGADO; VIVARES, 2019) In this sense, this research has a qualitative and descriptive orientation and is driven by analytical and theoretical insights provided by our and other similar investigations both in the field of IR in the region and abroad. The grounding principles of mainstream IPE in its response to academic questions relate to the transformation of the old liberal order and its issues such as complex interdependence, interstate relations, hegemony, free trade, regimes, liberal institutions, and others Today these pillars of mainstream IPE continuously evaporate into the air as new severe concepts appear, such as global power transitions, exodus, racism, environmental catastrophes, development and conflict, cyber wars, nationalism, parasitarian capitalism, and terrorism, amongst others. The orientations and differences between IPE and GPE are basically outlined here in the chart below
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callMore From: Estudos Internacionais: revista de relações internacionais da PUC Minas
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
