Theory, change and the search for epistemological courage in shaping a new world order

No matter how narrowly you focus your spatial or temporal lenses, you are bound to catch sight of multiple significant challenges to human community. Many of these challenges are shared, such as Covid-19, though their impacts on individuals and groups are felt unevenly. Some challenges are immediate and existential, such as the wars in Ukraine, Syria, and Yemen. Others, such as race, gender, caste, and class-based inequalities, are deeply embedded in social structures, providing privilege and persecution, and reward and oppression in unequal measures. And climate change, though slower moving, holds out the prospect of leading to total social collapse. How to make sense of these dramatic changes? This essay explores the adequacy of theories of IR and G/IPE in explaining the emergent world (dis)order. It argues that, whether orthodox or critical, theory must find a way to centre humanity within the biosphere if theory is to adequately inform practice.

Theory, change and the search for epistemological courage in shaping a new world order

No matter how narrowly you focus your spatial or temporal lenses, you are bound to catch sight of multiple significant challenges to human community. Many of these challenges are shared, such as Covid-19, though their impacts on individuals and groups are felt unevenly. Some challenges are immediate and existential, such as the wars in Ukraine, Syria, and Yemen. Others, such as race, gender, caste, and class-based inequalities, are deeply embedded in social structures, providing privilege and persecution, and reward and oppression in unequal measures. And climate change, though slower moving, holds out the prospect of leading to total social collapse. How to make sense of these dramatic changes? This essay explores the adequacy of theories of IR and G/IPE in explaining the emergent world (dis)order. It argues that, whether orthodox or critical, theory must find a way to centre humanity within the biosphere if theory is to adequately inform practice. © The Author(s) 2023.

Covid-19 Küresel Salgınının Uluslararası Ticarete Etkileri

Tarihteki küresel salgınlar incelendiğinde, her salgının beraberinde yıkıcı sonuçlarla birlikte bir değişim dönüşüm fırsatı da sunduğu görülmektedir. Ínsanlığın başlangıcından beri, küresel salgınlar ağır, kalıcı ve derin ekonomik ve toplumsal etkiler bırakmıştır. Yaşanılan tüm bu zorluk ve dönüşümlere rağmen insanlığın sınır tanımayan direşkenliği ve uyum yeteneği olağanüstüdür, tarihteki çeşitli örnekler ve kanıtlar buna tanıklık eder. Çalışmada Covid-19 dışında incelenmiş olan diğer salgınlar da göz önünde bulundurulduğunda, uluslararası ticaret ve ekonomik sonuçlar bağlamında ortak özellikler gözlenmiştir. Önde gelen ekonomiler anlaşmazlıklarını bir ölçüde azaltabildiği takdirde küresel ekonominin ve uluslararası ticaretin en zor şartlarda dahi sürdürülebilmesine olanak tanınabilecek anlaşmalara ve çözümlere varılabilecektir. Bu çözümlerin başında her ulusun öz tarımsal üretiminin ve gıda egemenliğinin güvence altına alınmasının olanaklı hale getirilmesi önemli bir yer tutmaktadır.Alternate :Examination of global epidemics in history shows that, despite destructive consequences, each epidemic offers a change-transformation opportunity. Since the beginning of humanity, global epidemics have had heavy, lasting and profound economic and social impacts. Despite all these difficulties and transformations, humanity's unlimited resilience and ability to adapt is extraordinary, and various examples and evidence in history testify to this. Considering the other epidemics examined in the study, besides Covid-19, common features were observed in the context of international trade and economic results. If the leading economies can reduce their disagreements to some extent, agreements and solutions that will allow the continuation of the global economy and international trade even under the most difficult conditions will be reached. At the beginning of these solutions, it may be possible for every nation to secure its own agricultural production and food sovereignty.

COVID-19 and the Global Political Economy: Same as it Never Was?

This introductory article outlines how Global Political Economy and the nuanced perspectives of scholars from this interdiscipline navigate claims about the origins and consequences of, as well as responses to, the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging social scientific assessments have tended to understand the pandemic as either an entirely novel crisis (“everything has changed”) or one merely extending preexisting economic and political tensions (“nothing has changed”). Early analyses of political-economic aspects of the crisis assembled in this collection instead highlight both patterns of continuity and change—and the importance of situating changes within prepandemic continuities—that have emerged during the first year of the global pandemic. This introductory article brings together suggestions by and for Global Political Economy scholars, as well as social scientists more generally, for further researching key dynamics shaping the global political economy in the COVID-19 era as it keeps unfolding and evolving.

The Pandemic Techno-Solutionist Dilemma

This commentary identifies a key dilemma in immediate responses to the COVID-19 pandemic: the persistent foregrounding of digital technologies as “silver-bullet” solutions to overcoming tensions between surveillance and privacy. It illustrates the pandemic techno-solutionist dilemma by pointing to global efforts to harness blockchain technologies for “squaring the circle” between privacy and surveillance. It then concludes that further investigating the persistence and possible inevitability of this dilemma requires overcoming solitudes both within international political economy and between international political economy and interdisciplines such as surveillance studies.

Investment Screening before, during, and after COVID-19

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, several states introduced and expanded regulatory frameworks for screening (and potentially blocking) inward foreign direct investment. This shift accelerated a preexisting trend in the global political economy, as states have been widening their understanding of “national security” risks arising from foreign investment. The result is that such screening mechanisms are evolving from a niche subject to a broader regulatory tool that touches an expanding share of global economic activity. The tensions inherent in this shift—including how firms will respond, how states can evaluate systemic (rather than transactional) risk, and the potential and limits of international cooperation in investment screening—have not yet been resolved.

The Pandemic, the Economy, and Environmental Change: Six Implications for the Study of International Political Economy

What is the relationship between the global COVID-19 pandemic, the economic recession that followed in its wake, and the ongoing degradation of the global environment? What are key takeaways from this relationship for scholars of international political economy? This article identifies a trialectical relationship between these three forces, addresses ways that the trialectic presents moments of both continuity and change in the trajectory of the global political economy, and invokes Arundhati Roy’s concept of “the pandemic as portal” to foreground the need for scholars of international political economy to tease out and promote new political economic ideals that improve humanity’s resilience to future destabilization risks.

Eurobonds versus Coronabonds: Same Idea, New Context, Different Outcome?

Since the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the European Union has taken tentative steps toward the issuance of joint debt. This progress is significant but puzzling: the technical value of such instruments has never been in doubt;however, the political will to move forward has always been lacking. What changed? This short article argues that contemporary political economy research points us toward the role of ideas and identity in explaining this shift.

The COVID-19 Pandemic and the Crisis of the Liberal International Order: Geopolitical Fissures and Pathways to Change

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerates and exacerbates many preexisting tendencies in the global political economy. Consequently, the crisis of the liberal international order (LIO), which has been ongoing for several years, is also being affected by the pandemic. These effects are, however, not uniform: some aspects of the crisis of the LIO, as a multidimensional phenomenon, are under more pressure than others. In this article, I detail these varied effects with a specific focus on questions of geopolitics and hegemonic change. I argue that especially the societal level, where socioeconomic distortions and popular discontent are long-existing drivers of crisis, will be severely hit by the social and economic fallout of the pandemic. I conclude by suggesting a set of hypotheses regarding the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the crisis of the LIO that can be tested once more data becomes available.

COVID-19 and the International Political Economy of Risk and Resilience

This forum contribution highlights the confluence of two distinct trends in the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath. On one hand, many of the worst socio-economic costs of the virus and control measures have been disproportionately borne by marginalized workers, primarily in the global south. Often these impacts have not overlapped with the public health costs of the virus itself. In this sense the pandemic has highlighted the ways that risks in the global political economy are unevenly and systematically distributed. On the other, early indications are that highly individualized notions of ‘risk management’ and ‘resilience’ will be central to post-crisis global development agendas. At the same time as the COVID-19 pandemic has made the systemic and unequal nature of risks in the global political economy visible, then, many of the most marginalized segments of the world’s population are being asked to take responsibility for managing those risks.

Ireland’s Multinationals-Dominated Economy in the Pandemic: Did Big Tech and Big Pharma Save the Day?

Similar to the Eurozone crisis, Ireland engineered a more successful bounce back from the COVID-19 shock than crisis-hit peers. This article argues that the Irish path is less of a product of a generalizable export-led growth strategy, but, rather, can be explained by a set of idiosyncratic features. Using a wide array of macroeconomic indicators, the analysis assesses the opportunities and risks associated with Ireland's distinct path. It shows how strong ties to the United States, and emergence as the European hub for the world’s fastest growing firms sets Ireland apart from European peers. The US is a reliable “spender of last resort,” countercyclically spending and borrowing, boosting growth prospects of trading partners. Irish sectoral specialization in pharmaceutical manufacturing and digital services was also a boon in this crisis. The pandemic created opportunities for health-related industries;reliance on digital technologies helped digital firms. The article also finds, however, that banking on tech and pharma giants has significant limitations. First, multinationals’ accounting tricks artificially inflate economic statistics, and these two sectors are most affected. Second, to the extent that there is job-sustaining activity, it is not straightforward how the success of these sectors is transmitted to the rest of the economy. In the aftermath of the Eurozone crisis, the hospitality industry played a significant role as a “‘transmission belt,” receiving spillovers from the high value-added export sector. Since lockdowns hit hospitality the most, the social insurance function of fiscal policy is of paramount importance to ensure a more broad-based recovery.

Globalization, international mobility and the liberal international order.

Since the Second World War, globalization has been underpinned by a liberal international order, a rules-based system structured around the principles of economic interdependence, democracy, human rights and multilateralism. However, the relationship between international mobility and the liberal international order (LIO) is contested. In the article, I disaggregate 'international mobility' into three regimes: the travel regime, the voluntary (labour) migration regime, and the refugee regime-each governed by distinct norms and operating procedures. I outline the characteristics of the LIO that pertain to international mobility and provide evidence to demonstrate that none of the three dimensions of international mobility-travel, migration, and asylum-reflects these characteristics. Given the LIO principles enumerated above, the exclusion of international mobility from the LIO is surprising. I survey the scholarship on the LIO and international mobility and argue that the exclusion of international mobility from the LIO rests on benefits provided to core states by the status quo ante governing international mobility. That is, the status quo ante permits countries of destination to determine the level and type of cross-border mobility. Thus, international mobility continues to be underpinned by the play of state preferences rather than the principles of the LIO. The COVID-19 pandemic is likely to shape these norms and operating procedures in ways that reinforce the status quo.

Globalization/deglobalization: lessons from liberal monetary orders.

Economic globalization never proceeded in a smooth steady trajectory. The current international economy, organized around liberal principles, faces potential problems unleashed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Two popular theoretical approaches offer varying reasons for the survivability of the contemporary order. One stresses the benefits associated with participating in liberal international orders, claiming such arrangements are essentially self-sustaining. The rival view emphasizes the uneven distribution of gains, emphasizing the role of leadership, especially for dampening crises. To examine the support for each argument, I examine the evolution of international monetary arrangements. International monetary orders lie at the heart of liberal international economies; no prior liberal monetary order has proven self-sustaining. Liberal international monetary sub-orders depend upon leadership as much as cooperation for their survival-leaders exert efforts to shape followers' actions so long as the leader draws sufficient benefits to make such efforts worthwhile. The economic disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic provides the latest illustration of this point, though these arguments also suggest experiences across issue-areas will vary.