ABSTRACT
One 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. In China, the study of
international institutions and global governance is quite new. But with China’s rising importance in the global economic system, it might be expected that IPE scholarship in China could 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. Many Chinese scholars have, in fact, called for Chinese approaches to IPE broadly. They argue that this is important because China is a major power, that it should not only be a producer of material goods, but also of ideas and knowledge. Some scholars even argue that it is imperative, and call for decreasing the reproduction of Western knowledge and increasing the production of local contributions (Zou, 2003; Tang, 2010). As one IPE scholar from Fudan University has highlighted, as China moves from the periphery to the centre of the world economic system, it should become less dependent on the core countries, including overcoming the dependence in knowledge creation (Song, 2011). However, as we will show in this paper, the reality is quite different
from such aspirations. An examination of the predominant Chinese IPE literature on international institutions and global governance, including the articles of a leading Chinese journal,World Economy and Politics, several core books, and a few heterodox streams, suggests Chinese scholars have thus far developed little new knowledge or theoretical perspectives. Whyhas this been the case despiteChina’smeteoric rise in theworld and
despite its distinctive cultural and intellectual traditions? This is the main question, the intellectual puzzle, that guides this paper. We argue that this is the case because (1) as a new field of study, IPE – including the study of international institutions and global governance – is still under the strong socialization effect of Western, particularly American, scholarship; and (2) the institutional environment in China constrains the kind of research that promises new insights and innovative perspectives. Section I of the paper will outline the evolution of Chinese IPE in the
study of international institutions and global governance. Section II briefly compares Chinese scholarship with other schools of IPE and gauges how distinctive this ‘Chinese’ body of scholarship is. Section III explores why Chinese scholarship has thus far not produced distinctively Chinese contributions to the study of international institutions and global governance. Section IV discusses how scholarship in China could contribute to the positive evolution of IPE globally and the obstacles that may hinder this development.
