ABSTRACT
As Jarvis (2008, p. 3) rightly pointed out, political risk as a field of inquiry “can [. . .] be claimed by political science, development studies, international relations, international business, economics, and economic geography, a feature which has undoubtedly been the principal reason hindering its theoretical consolidation and advancement”. Similar claims about the theoretical underdevelopment of this field are extremely common in the literature on the subject (see for instance Fitzpatrick, 1983, p. 249; Simon, 1984, p. 124; Sethi & Luther, 1986, p. 58; Jarvis & Griffith, 2007, p. 10). The very entry of the International Encyclopedia of Political Science dedicated to PRA reads:
Social science research and nonacademic interpretations of current affairs influence all three phases – namely, the analysis, assessment, and management
of political risk. In principle, political risk could also be useful in analyzing the general judgment and policy design of politicians under conditions of uncertainty. However, political risk analysis is undertheorized in this regard and currently remains rooted in the intersection between politics and business.
