The transatlantic divide: Why are American and British IPE so different?

  title={The transatlantic divide: Why are American and British IPE so different?},
  author={Benjamin J. Cohen},
  journal={Review of International Political Economy},
  pages={197 - 219}
  • B. Cohen
  • Published 25 January 2007
  • Economics
  • Review of International Political Economy
THE TRANSATLANTIC DIVIDE: WHY ARE AMERICAN AND BRITISH IPE SO DIFFERENT? * Benjamin J. Cohen An academic field of study may be said to exist when a coherent body of knowledge is constructed to define a subject of inquiry. Recognized standards come to be employed to train and certify specialists; full-time employment opportunities become available in university teaching and research; learned societies are established to promote study and dialogue; and publishing venues become available to help… 
RIPE, the American School and diversity in global IPE
ABSTRACT On the occasion of the Review of International Political Economy's 20th anniversary, this paper systematically assesses RIPE's claim to represent an alternative to the ‘mainstream’ study of
International Relations in the US Academy
Using two new data sources to describe trends in the international relations (IR) discipline since 1980—a database of every article published in the 12 leading journals in the field and three surveys
Bye-Bye, American IPE
Benjamin Cohen's International Political Economy: An Intellectual History (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2008) is not a neutral history of how IPE was constructed as a discipline,
Monism vs. Pluralism, the Global Financial Crisis, and the Methodological Struggle in the Field of International Political Economy
In recent years, a comprehensive debate has been taking place over the ontological, epistemological, and methodological roots underlying the discipline of International Political Economy (IPE). A
International Relations in the US Academy 1
Using two new data sources to describe trends in the international relations (IR) discipline since 1980—a database of every article published in the 12 leading journals in the field and three surveys
Torn Between Two Lovers? Caught in the Middle of British and American IPE1
I approach this topic much as a man without a country approaches international travel: with trepidation. I am a British subject who was educated at Strathclyde University in the 1980s. I left for the
BOOK REVIEW International Political Economy: An Intellectual History
As it is understood here, IPE developed out of a growing dissatisfaction in the late 1960s and early 1970s with the disciplinary separation of economics and politics. However, the basis for any
The IPE of money revisited
ABSTRACT Some two decades after an earlier review essay of mine, the time seems ripe to revisit the international political economy (IPE) of money. How has the study of money evolved in more recent
The intellectual and institutional challenges for International Political Economy in the UK: Findings from Practitioner Survey Data
This article asks whether there is a discrepancy between the field of International Political Economy (IPE) as we know it from recent debates about its role, distinctiveness, and contribution
TRIPs across the Atlantic: Theory and epistemology in IPE
ABSTRACT Beginning from the Teaching, Research, and International Politics (TRIP) survey, this paper outlines the most important emerging paradigm in international political economy (IPE), known as


International Organization and the Study of World Politics
A distinct subfield of international relations, IPE, has emerged over the last thirty years, largely in the pages of International Organization . IPE began with the study of international political
International Political Economy: A Tale of Two Heterodoxies
International political economy (IPE) originated in the early 1970s. For almost 20 years it has been dominated by separate, largely non-communicating schools, one centred on scholarly institutions in
State, market, and global political economy: genealogy of an (inter-discipline)
International Political Economy (IPE), as a diverse and fragmented field of inquiry, has often had trouble situating itself in the social sciences. This article argues that IPE belongs firmly in the
The evolution of international political economy
The ‘invisible college’ of international political economy (IPE) is a house divided. The field is split between the rationalist species that dominates in the US and a diverse genus of critical
Transcending the State-Global Divide a Neostructuralist Agenda in International Relations
Part 1: States and Regions in the Face of the Global Capitalist Crisis, A. Lipietz State and Society in International Relations, R. Palan. Part 2: World Economic Interpretation of European Politics,
The English School of International Relations: A Contemporary Reassessment
  • R. Little
  • Education
    Perspectives on Politics
  • 2007
The English School of International Relations: A Contemporary Reassessment. By Andrew Linklater and Hidemi Suganami. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 302p. $80.00 cloth, $29.99 paper. The
Global Hegemony and the Structural Power of Capital
dimensions. These distinctions are elaborated to help explain aspects of the changing nature of present-day capitalism, with particular reference to aspects of transformation in the 1980s and beyond.
Power versus Plenty as Objectives of Foreign Policy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries economic thought and practice were predominantly carried on within the framework of that body of ideas which was later to be called “mercantilism.”
International theory: positivism and beyond: The accomplishments of international political economy
Introduction International political economy (IPE) is concerned with the political determinants of international economic relations. It tries to answer questions such as: How have changes in the
Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory
Academic conventions divide the seamless web of the real social world into separate spheres, each with its own theorizing; this is a necessary and practical way of gaining understanding.