ABSTRACT
Looking more deeply at the context of knowledge creation in China, it becomes apparent that Chinese IPE specialists on money and finance have benefitted from a national characteristic which is specific to China, but which has yet to be acknowledged in academic writing: that the knowledge created by the aforementioned Chinese economists is conducive to co-option by IPE scholars because many of China’s leading international economists bear the legacies of training in (Marxian) political economy inside China’s economics departments, after 1949. One perceptive Chinese IPE scholar put it this way: ‘In many respects, China’s leading international economists are all actually doing variations of IPE or political economy-which in China meansMarxian political economy. But because of academic and policy fashion, they prefer not to acknowledge this, as it carries the stigma of doing Marxism, and they will be labeled as oldfashioned.’17 A number of Chinese IPE scholars told the author that the aforementioned Zhang Yuyan, director-general of the CASS IWEP, is thus the exception rather than the norm in that he is one of the few leading Chinese scholars who heads a prominent Chinese economic policy research institution and self-identifies, unabashedly, as an ‘IPE’ scholar.18
