Misrecognised, misfit and misperceived: why not a Latin American school of IPE?
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Misrecognised, misfit and misperceived : why not a Latin American school of IPE? / Tussie, Diana; Chagas-Bastos, Fabrício H.
I: Review of International Political Economy, Bind 30, Nr. 3, 2023, s. 891-913.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Misrecognised, misfit and misperceived
T2 - why not a Latin American school of IPE?
AU - Tussie, Diana
AU - Chagas-Bastos, Fabrício H.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Although IPE has become more reflexive over the last decade, Latin America’s IPE thought has not been seen as part of the disciplinary canon. In this article we investigate why and how mainstream IPE misrecognised, labelled as a misfit, and misperceived Latin American contributions to the discipline. We also examine and define the ontological and epistemological characteristics, and the evolving boundaries of IPE studied in Latin America. We argue that differently from the relative homogeneity that defines and has nurtured the ‘Transatlantic divide’, the diversity of expertise, backgrounds, and analytical approaches has founded and moulded the Latin American school of IPE. While treating Latin America’s intellectual endeavours as an applicable ontology within IPE, we contribute to reframing narrow disciplinary approaches to knowledge coming from non-Western regions of the world. The notion of a Latin American school of IPE dispels the idea that regional contributions to the discipline may have been significant but remain in the past. To advance these global conversations, we must explore other IPE foundational myths and disciplinary origins beyond the disciplinary mainstream
AB - Although IPE has become more reflexive over the last decade, Latin America’s IPE thought has not been seen as part of the disciplinary canon. In this article we investigate why and how mainstream IPE misrecognised, labelled as a misfit, and misperceived Latin American contributions to the discipline. We also examine and define the ontological and epistemological characteristics, and the evolving boundaries of IPE studied in Latin America. We argue that differently from the relative homogeneity that defines and has nurtured the ‘Transatlantic divide’, the diversity of expertise, backgrounds, and analytical approaches has founded and moulded the Latin American school of IPE. While treating Latin America’s intellectual endeavours as an applicable ontology within IPE, we contribute to reframing narrow disciplinary approaches to knowledge coming from non-Western regions of the world. The notion of a Latin American school of IPE dispels the idea that regional contributions to the discipline may have been significant but remain in the past. To advance these global conversations, we must explore other IPE foundational myths and disciplinary origins beyond the disciplinary mainstream
KW - Faculty of Social Sciences
KW - international political economy
KW - transatlantic divide
KW - disciplinary history
KW - Sociology of knowledge
KW - Global IPE
KW - Latin America
U2 - 10.1080/09692290.2022.2056902
DO - 10.1080/09692290.2022.2056902
M3 - Journal article
VL - 30
SP - 891
EP - 913
JO - Review of International Political Economy
JF - Review of International Political Economy
SN - 0969-2290
IS - 3
ER -
ID: 320658514