Middle powers trade policy. Why international political economy needs to pay closer attention to it

International political economy (IPE) is a field that has been dominated by political scientists and economists. But sociologists have also been interested in IPE. Some of their work has managed to percolate into the mainstream literature. Some of it has not. This chapter takes stock of all this. It shows where the work of sociologists is most obviously related to the study of IPE. But it also shows that there are other areas of sociology to which conventional IPE scholars might pay attention with considerable benefit. This is particularly true insofar as IPE scholars and political and economic sociologists have turned their attention to economic globalization, by which I mean the increase since the mid-1970s in transnational trade, capital flows, and economic activity in general. However, as some IPE scholars have recognized (e.g. Finnemore 1996b), many sociolo-gists approach these things differently than do conventional IPE scholars. Sociologists often emphasize that norms and ideas of various sorts-as opposed to the pursuit of material interests-shape the behavior of actors. Of course, some sociologists take intellectual positions that are quite close to the materialist (or realist) view, which is common in conventional IPE scholarship. But one of sociology’s most original contributions to the IPE literature is to offer normative and ideational rather than realist explanations. I begin by discussing areas where the normative approach of sociology is most obvious. This includes research on the international diffusion of norms and ideas and the rise of neoliberalism. I then move on to areas where sociologists are less inclined to favor normative explanations, but still have insights that diverge from mainstream IPE scholarship. There I discuss research on the international division of labor in the world system, socioeconomic performance as it is influenced by political-economic institutions and international networks, and welfare reform, particularly insofar as social class and family figure prominently in sociological accounts of reform. Two caveats are in order. First, IPE emerged from the traditional literature on international relations, which assumed that international relations was largely about states making war or peace (e.g. Hoffman 1965; Waltz 1959). That is, international relations was about states, security issues, and the politics that linked them (Holsti 2004: 3). IPE argued that international relations was to an increasing extent not just about states, diplomacy, security, and military power, but also about building national economies that could compete internationally-and therebyprovide an economic base for state power in the diplomatic, security, and military domains (e.g. Gilpin 1987; Keohane 1984). As this is a volume on IPE, not international relations in this sense, I will not deal with the sociological literature that is of obvious importance for traditional international relations. This would include, for example, the work of Charles Tilly (1990), Anthony Giddens (1985), Gianfranco Poggi (1978), and Michael Mann (1993) on the relationship between war-making and state-building. Proper treatment of this literature would require a separate chapter. Second, there has been a disciplinary separation between the fields of IPE and com-parative political economy (CPE). On the one hand, traditional IPE scholars emphasize how international pressures operate on states and other international actors to constrain or drive their behavior. They view the structure and functioning of national political economies as being very much embedded in international processes, particularly as state power in the international arena has come to depend increasingly on economic power (e.g. Gilpin 1987). On the other hand, CPE scholars emphasize the study of national institutional differences in political economies. They recognize that international pressures impinge on national political economies, but their focus has been more on the different national responses to these pressures than on the pressures per se (e.g. Gourevitch 1986; Katzenstein 1978). To a degree, then, IPE and CPE study flip sides of the same coin. But especially since the oil crises and stagflation of the 1970s, and then the rise of economic globalization and concerns about how it affects national political economies, these two fields have moved much closer together and blurred (Weber 2001: 7). Indeed, there are now a fair number of people who do work that overlaps CPE and IPE (e.g. Garrett 1998; Keohane and Milner 1996; Kitschelt et al. 1999). Hence, this chapter does not draw a sharp distinction between IPE and CPE.

Content analysis is a research technique used to systematically describe the content of communication, with a view to its interpretation. Over the past two decades this technique has become highly relevant to key questions addressed by International Political Economy (IPE) scholars. This chapter traces the history of content analysis, its varieties, and ways in which it has transformed some research agendas in IPE. As such, the analysis shows that the method has come a long way, from a simple and opaque register (word frequencies, three-point coding schemes, non-transparent coding rules) to a register that is technically sophisticated (automated machine learning, sentiment analysis, author-topic modeling, text mining), transparent and layered with other formal methods (network analysis, sequence analysis, regression analysis). This sophistication has greatly benefited IPE and should be applauded. Yet with growing technical sophistication there emerges the danger of technological fetishism. The chapter suggests that IPE scholars should be mindful of this risk, keep the method flexible, pluralistic, and in touch with the qualitative evidence that has anchored the fundamentals of IPE.

The work of Karl Polanyi has figured prominently over the past two decades in critical international political economy (IPE) scholarship that attempts to understand the changing foundations of the world economy. Especially important have been the concepts of ‘embedded’ versus ‘disembedded’ economies and the double movement, which were embraced by John Ruggie in his pathbreaking effort to harness Polanyi to better understand changes in the Bretton Woods era during the 1980s. Most IPE scholarship follows Ruggie’s use of Polanyi, which we argue does not fully exploit the depth and scale of his usefulness. We extend the applicability of Polanyi’s ideas for IPE by considering two under-appreciated facets of his thought: his focus on the state as the most critical site of contestation through which world market is established and organised, and his concern for controlling the speed by which change unfolds in society, or what he called the ‘rate of change’. Both facets are underpinned by Polanyi’s deeply historical account of global change and transformation. Including these into our use of Polanyi extends the utility of his ideas to better understand contemporary developments such as technological change and the resurgence of nationalism and populism, which are the well-springs of the next great transformation.

In recent years, International Political Economy (IPE) scholars have increasingly turned their attention to cities. However, their primary focus has been on the role of a select few global ‘cities’ that regulate global flows of capital, goods, and services. Nonetheless, a significant gap in the IPE literature pertains to the limited exploration of how processes of neoliberal globalization are impacting and regulating the low-income ‘informal’ housing sector in cities located in the global South. To address this gap in the existing IPE literature, this paper critically analyzes the processes of formation and demolition of informal housing settlements against the backdrop of the neoliberal regime of accumulation. Informal housing settlements have been extensively examined by critical geographers and scholars in the field of urban studies. What distinguishes this paper is its unique contribution to the literature on IPE, that is, it utilizes the political economy of informal housing settlements as an entry point to critically analyze social ontology and the inherent contradictions of the postcolonial state. The paper argues that the relationship between informal housing settlements and the postcolonial state can be better understood through the lens of the ‘institutional hybridity.’ This concept refers to the fusion of contradictory socio-economic and institutional impulses within the postcolonial state, which aims to manage social reproduction and capitalist accumulation simultaneously. The inherent tension between social reproduction and accumulation manifests in the informal housing settlements in the form of a dialectic of ‘benevolence-violence.’ On one hand, the postcolonial state attempts to appear ‘benevolent’ towards marginalized groups by ‘allowing’ them to establish informal housing settlements through a multi-layered network of clientelism. On the other hand, the postcolonial state resorts to violent displacement of marginalized groups as soon as they pose obstacles to real estate-led capitalist accumulation. Thus, the paper contends that IPE scholars should carefully consider the political economy of informal housing settlements, as it provides captivating insights into the mechanisms through which the postcolonial state becomes subject to regulation and is pulled in different directions by the socio-economic forces of neoliberal globalization.

This chapter reviews changes and continuities for the development of International Political Economy (IPE) in the twenty-first century. We highlight four themes, which authors in this handbook subsequently explore. These include necessary adaptations of IPE theory in response to changing global conditions; how global reordering affects global economic governance, production, and power relations; the diverse global crises to which actors must respond, often under intense time pressure; and a variety of emerging IPE issues on which we need new and/or more attention from IPE scholars and students. We conclude by identifying five trends which we argue would help enhance IPE understandings, ensure the policy relevance of our discipline, and prepare our students in the coming decade.

ABSTRACTOne of the fundamental questions in the study of international political economy (IPE) is the foundation of order, stability and justice in international politics and economy. The study of international institutions and global governance is part of this larger inquiry. With China's rising importance in the global economic system, it might be expected that IPE scholarship in China would give rise to uniquely ‘Chinese’ approaches to this area of inquiry, approaches informed by China's position in the world and China's rich cultural and intellectual traditions. However, our examination of Chinese scholarship shows that thus far, it has produced little new knowledge and theoretical innovation. Why has this been the case? We argue that it is because (1) as a new field of study, IPE in China – including the study of international institutions and global governance – is still under the strong socialization effect of Western scholarship; and (2) the institutional environment in China constrains the kind of research that promises new insights and innovative perspectives. We also discuss how scholarship in China could contribute to the positive evolution of IPE globally in the future, and the obstacles that may hinder this development.

International trade and state efforts to liberalize or restrict trade generate very contentious politics. Trade creates winners and losers at the individual level, firm level, industry level, national level, and even regional level. It also generates conflict among transnational social groups, such as environmental advocacy organizations, human rights organizations, and transnational business alliances. Because of this complexity of the politics of international trade, scholars of international political economy (IPE) can focus on different levels of analysis and a variety of stages of the political decision-making process. Scholars agree that not only societal preferences but collective action problems, domestic institutions, and international factors all affect trade politics and policy outcomes. These aspects of trade politics together form the key influences on trade policy and whether it is liberal or protectionist in nature. Societal preferences constitute the initial inputs into the trade policy-making process. Understanding how different groups of economic actors within society win or lose from trade liberalization or protection is the first step toward understanding trade politics and trade policy outcomes. Once societal trade preferences are formed, they must be aggregated into cohesive pressure groups or grass-roots movements whose purpose is to influence trade policy. This is easier for some groups of actors to achieve than others. In lobbying government actors on policy, interest groups find that domestic institutions play an important role translating societal inputs into policy outputs. Policy-making institutions vary in the degree to which they are susceptible to special-interest lobbying versus the preferences of broader societal coalitions, and electoral rules and party structures also affect policy outcomes, with certain configurations creating a bias toward more protectionism or liberalization. In addition to these domestic-level influences on trade policy, IPE scholars have extensively studied the ways that international factors also affect trade policy outcomes such as the extent of liberalization and the content of what is liberalized (e.g., manufactures versus agricultural goods versus services). International factors such as the distribution of power, the character of international institutions and trade agreements (e.g., multilateral versus bilateral), transnational civil society and diffusion processes may be thought of as inputs into the policy-making process as well. Systemic conditions may constrain the types of policies that governments can adopt, or they may open the door to a range of possible policy outcomes that are nevertheless limited by the preferences of domestic societal actors.

This book analyses India’s trade policy evolution in the last two decades in the broad context of trends and patterns in global trade and in particular, with reference to the emergence of global value chains (GVCs). Through an in-depth analysis of its trade policy evolution in the 2000s, the author explains India’s limited share of global merchandise trade, especially manufacturing trade and relatively low GVC integration. The book discusses India’s trade policy, pattern and global trade participation not just in the comparative context of China as is true of most analyses relating to the Indian economy, economic reforms and trade liberalization in India but also in the context of regional economies like Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Bangladesh and other emerging market economies (EMEs) that have successfully integrated with GVCs/ RVCs in the period under reference. Progress and nature of India’s value chain participation relative to other economies has been evaluated in this context. The book further examines policy developments with respect to traditional trade measures like tariffs and export schemes, trade and GVC related policies in special economic zones (SEZs) as well as GVC-facilitating policy instruments such as regional/ free trading agreements (RTAs/FTAs) and investment treaties. Three sectoral case studies - automobiles, textiles and apparel and electronics - are presented to examine India’s participation in these dynamic GVC intensive sectors. An important study of one of the fastest growing economies in the world for almost two decades, this book will be of substantial interest to academics and policymakers in the fields of Economics, International Economics, Foreign Policy, Economic Relations, Economic Diplomacy, Indian- Southeast/East Asian Economics.

This book advances an ecologically grounded approach to International Political Economy (IPE). Katz-Rosene and Paterson address a lacuna in the literature by exploring the question of how thinking ecologically transforms our understanding of what IPE is and should be. The volume shows the ways in which socio-ecological processes are integral to the themes treated by students and scholars of IPE – trade, finance, production, interstate competition, globalisation, inequalities, and the governance of all these, notably – and further that taking the ecological dimensions of these processes seriously transforms our understanding of them. Global capitalism has always been premised on the extraction, transformation and movement of what have become known as ‘natural resources’. The authors provide a synthesis of ecological arguments regarding IPE and weave them into an overall approach to be usable by others in the field. This synthesis draws on basic ecological political ideas such as limits to growth and environmental justice, ideas in ecological economics, practices of ecological movements in the global economy, as well as key ideas from other political economic traditions relevant for developing an ecological approach. Providing a broad and critical introduction to international political economy from a distinctly ecological perspective, this work will be a valuable resource for students and scholars alike.

Sexuality—broadly defined to include sexual practices, behaviors, desires, and identities—remains a key site of political struggle around the world. While mainstream (and some critical) International Political Economy (IPE) has tended to overlook the importance of sexuality, there is a rich tradition of feminist and queer scholarship that locates sexual subjectivities, labor, and oppression firmly within the boundaries of the global capitalist economy. This chapter explores some of the material bases of sexual injustice and explains what a queer approach to IPE tells us about the relationship between capitalism and sexuality. It examines the relationship between sexuality and IPE across three primary dimensions: hetero- (and homo-)normativity and the nation-state; hetero- (and homo-)normativity and global governance; and the everyday political economies of queer lives and resistance. The chapter argues that it is impossible to understand the social relations of global (re)production and the types of exploitation and oppression they entail without paying attention to the social construction of sexuality (and therefore to the lives and experiences of LGBTQ+ people). Moreover, since capitalism constitutes, and is constituted by, sexuality across multiple scales and modes of governance, sexual injustices are fundamentally globalized in character. This means that scholars of IPE must not only interrogate the sexual politics of neoliberalism and how this plays out in different parts of the world, but also examine how the legacies of slavery and colonialism continue to shape global terrains of sexual struggle and injustice.

International relations scholarship on climate change exists primarily in the field of Global Environmental Politics (GEP) and outside the substantive purview of mainstream International Political Economy (IPE). This chapter argues that the climate crisis is fundamentally an IPE problem, and it requires attention from IPE scholars as a primary subject of interest. To facilitate engagement, the chapter reviews a diverse literature at the intersection of IPE and climate across three substantive areas: the global climate regime, trade, and renewable energy transitions. Each section offers avenues for research, and provides ideas on how to put concepts and ideas from IPE to work in climate crisis scholarship.

Abstract: This chapter on "Global Business and Trade Strategies" provides a comprehensive exploration of the key concepts, economic impact, and historical evolution of global business and trade. It highlights the fundamental importance of international trade in promoting economic growth, improving efficiency, and fostering innovation. The chapter traces the historical context through an examination of early trade routes, the colonial trade era, the Industrial Revolution, and modern trade agreements like GATT, WTO, NAFTA, and TPP. The chapter delves into the drivers of global business, including economic policies, market demand, technological advancements, and cost efficiencies, and explores how globalization has reshaped business strategies to achieve competitive advantage. It analyzes the global trade environment through the lens of economic, political, legal, and cultural factors, and discusses key international trade theories such as comparative and absolute advantage. The roles of international economic institutions, trade policies, tariffs, and trade agreements are examined, along with strategies for managing cultural diversity in international business. Market entry strategies such as exporting, importing, foreign direct investment (FDI), joint ventures, strategic alliances, licensing, and franchising are thoroughly examined, with a focus on benefits, challenges, and best practices. The chapter also emphasizes global supply chain management, including logistics, risk management, and the role of technology. International marketing strategies, financial management, and legal and ethical issues are addressed, highlighting the importance of digital marketing, currency exchange mechanisms, compliance, and corporate social responsibility. The chapter concludes with case studies of successful global business strategies and a summary of key points, future trends, and recommended further reading. Keywords: Global Business,International Trade,Economic Impact,Historical Trade Evolution,Globalization,Trade Theories,Economic Indicators,International Economic Institutions,Trade Policies,Cultural Differences,Market Entry Strategies,Exporting and Importing,Foreign Direct Investment (FDI),Joint Ventures,Strategic Alliances,Licensing,Franchising,Supply Chain Management,Logistics and Distribution,Risk Management,Digital Marketing,Financial Management,Currency Exchange,Risk Management,Budgeting and Forecasting,International Trade Laws,Ethical Business Practices,Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR),Intellectual Property Rights,Case Studies,Multinational Companies,Innovation,Competitive Advantage,Sustainability and Global Business Strategies.

Perhaps the key question of debate among neorealist scholars of international political economy concerns the manner in which cooperation may or may not be secured in the global economic order "after hegemony," a question posed by Robert Keohane. A second broad question of interest to scholars of international politics concerns the manner in which weaker states attempt to influence stronger ones. A conflation of these two questions could cause scholars and practitioners alike to pay closer attention than they have in the past to coalitions of the weak as vehicles for cooperation and regime building in the global political economy.This article offers a case study of one recent exercise in coalition building as an attempt to foster cooperation in a "nonhegemonic" environment. Specifically, it examines the role of the Cairns Group of Fair Trading Nations in its attempts to foster reform in global agricultural trade within the current Uruguay Round of trade negotiations. The Cairns Group is shown to be an atypical, single-issue driven, transregional coalition. Led by Australia, the Group's actions represent an interesting exercise in "middle power" politics in a global economic order whose decisionmaking processes are increasingly more fragmented and complex and whose major actors need coaxing toward processes of cooperative economic management.

Studies in international political economy (IPE) that use survey-response data sets and survey (or field) experiments have grown dramatically in recent years. New developments in survey and experimental methodology have arguably influenced IPE scholars not only to think more deeply about the microfoundations of the preferences, attitudes, and political behavior of key IPE actors but also to use survey or experimental methods to test causal claims and predictions. Yet the reasons for the rapid growth in survey and experimental methods in IPE are more multifaceted. We therefore seek to answer the following three pertinent questions in the introduction. First, what are the main substantive puzzles and issue-areas that IPE scholars analyze via survey and experimental methods in their research? Second, what are the main methodological advantages and drawbacks from using survey and experimental methods in IPE? Third, what are the key substantive theoretical and empirical insights that scholars have learned from recent research in IPE that employs either survey or experimental methods (or both)? In addition to answering these questions here, we also provide a summary of each article included in the special issue. The introduction concludes with a road map for future studies on survey and experimental research in IPE.

If the world is to achieve an energy transition to address climate change, global finance must shift rapidly away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy. Despite the prominence of global finance in International Political Economy (IPE), it is striking that one of the key institutions – export credit agencies (ECAs) – that provide a significantly larger volume of public investment in fossil fuels than multilateral financial institutions, such as the World Bank, has been largely overlooked in the literature. In this commentary, we argue that IPE scholars are well placed to lead research on the role of ECAs in the energy transition. Specifically, we consider ECA behaviour, such as lending decisions, to be the outcome of interest, and propose three possible sets of factors that are likely to shape ECA lending: Namely, domestic political economy factors, climate governance and international security. In doing so, we set out a research agenda for IPE in relation to ECAs by laying out a series of research questions and linking them to adjacent streams in the literature. This largely unexplored research agenda has great potential to expand not only our understanding of ECAs in IPE, but also the shape of the energy transition in the 21st century.