Abstract

Although IPE has become more reflexive over the last decade, Latin America’s IPE thought has not been seen as part of the disciplinary canon. In this article we investigate why and how mainstream IPE misrecognised, labelled as a misfit, and misperceived Latin American contributions to the discipline. We also examine and define the ontological and epistemological characteristics, and the evolving boundaries of IPE studied in Latin America. We argue that differently from the relative homogeneity that defines and has nurtured the ‘Transatlantic divide’, the diversity of expertise, backgrounds, and analytical approaches has founded and moulded the Latin American school of IPE. While treating Latin America’s intellectual endeavours as an applicable ontology within IPE, we contribute to reframing narrow disciplinary approaches to knowledge coming from non-Western regions of the world. The notion of a Latin American school of IPE dispels the idea that regional contributions to the discipline may have been significant but remain in the past. To advance these global conversations, we must explore other IPE foundational myths and disciplinary origins beyond the disciplinary mainstream.

摘要

尽管IPE在过去十年中变得更加具有反身性，但拉丁美洲的IPE思想并未被视为学科经典的一部分。在本文中，我们调查了主流 IPE 为何以及如何错误地认识、贴上不合时宜的标签以及误解拉丁美洲对该学科的贡献。我们还研究和定义了拉丁美洲研究的 IPE 的本体论和认识论特征以及不断发展的边界。我们认为，与定义和培育“跨大西洋鸿沟”的相对同质性不同，专业知识、背景和分析方法的多样性建立并塑造了拉丁美洲 IPE 学派。在将拉丁美洲的智力活动视为 IPE 内的适用本体的同时，我们致力于重新构建对来自世界非西方地区的知识的狭隘学科方法。拉丁美洲IPE学派的概念消除了这样一种想法：地区对该学科的贡献可能是重大的，但仍然是过去的事情。为了推进这些全球对话，我们必须探索学科主流之外的其他 IPE 基础神话和学科起源。