Neoliberal Approach in Global Political Economy: Transition from State-Centric to Networked World

Document Type : Research

Authors

1 Allameh Tabataba'i university

2 Allameh Tabatabai University

Abstract

Global political economy is a field of study that can be investigated from various theoretical perspectives. The subjects of global political economy are understood in different ways under the influence of which approach considered (such as realism, liberalism, Marxism, constructivism, criticism, feminism, and post-structuralism). In this research, to understand modern global issues, the theoretical developments of the liberal approach are analyzed toward global political economy. The concern of the authors is whether the theoretical and conceptual developments of the liberal approach provide the necessary capacity to achieve a correct understanding of the new issues and phenomena of the global political economy or not? In this regard, this article has examined the background and theoretical foundations of the liberal approach in political economy, concepts such as institutionalism, interdependence, globalization, virtual government, and networked world. Based on the research findings, it should be said that the new theoretical perspectives of the liberal approach in the global political economy, based on a network perspective toward global space and attention to the network economy, have provided a suitable framework for a realistic understanding of the emerging advancements in the world’s political economy. Influenced by the networking of the global economy, we are witnessing the transition from a state-centered world to one in which diverse and extensive links have been formed between various actors. Moreover, the "development" paradigm has overcome other paradigms in this new environment. Within such an approach, the decision-makers and planners of the national development of countries, while managing new global threats, can take advantage of emerging opportunities to promote the power by designing favorable mechanisms and complying with internal and external requirements, and provide prosperity and sustainable development of their country.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

سلیمی، حسین (1384). دولت مجازی یا واقع‌گرایی تهاجمی؛ بررسی مقایسه‌ای نظریه ریچارد روز کرانس و جان میرشایمر. پژوهش حقوق و سیاست، 7 (17)، 19-43.
سلیمی، حسین (1400). ‌گذار از اقتصاد بین‌الملل به اقتصاد جهانی. پژوهشنامه اقتصادی، 21 (82)، 163-195.
References
Balaam, D. N., & Dillman, B. (2014). Introduction to international political economy. Pearson Education. doi: 10.4324/9781315463452
Baldwin, D. A. (2016). International relations: A conceptual approach. Princeton University Press.
Blyth, M. (2009). Routledge handbook of international political economy (IPE). Routledge.
Broome, A. (2014). Issues and actors in the global political economy. Palgrave Macmillan.
Cohen, B. J. (2008). International political economy. Princeton University Press.
Cohn, T. H. (2016). Global political economy: Theory and practice. Routledge.
Economides, S., & Wilson, P. (2002). The economic factor in international relations: A brief introduction. I. B. Tauris.
Everard, J. (2010). Virtual states: The internet and the boundaries of the nation-state. Routledge.
Fritsch, S. (2011). Technology and global affairs. International Studies Perspectives, 12(1), 27–45. doi: 10.1111/j.1528-3585.2010.00417.x
Gilpin, R. (1987). The political economy of international relations. Princeton University Press.
Gilpin, R. (2001). Global political economy: Understanding the international economic order. Princeton University Press.
Jervis, R. (1992). The future of world politics: Will it resemble the past? International Security, 16(3), 39–73. doi: 10.2307/2539088
Keohane, R. O. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton University Press.
Keohane, R. O. (1988). International institutions: Two approaches. International Studies Quarterly, 32(4), 379–396. doi: 10.2307/2600589
Keohane, R. O. (2002). Power and governance in a partially globalized world. Routledge.
Keohane, R. O. (2009). The old IPE and the new. Review of International Political Economy, 16(1), 34–46. doi: 10.1080/09692290802524059
Keohane, R. O. (2011). Neoliberal institutionalism. In C. W. Hughes & L. Y. Meng (Eds.), Security studies (pp. 1–20). Routledge.
Keohane, R. O. (2018). International institutions and state power: Essays in international relation theory. Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780429032967
Keohane, R. O., & Martin, L. L. (1995). The promise of institutionalist theory. International Security, 20(1), 39–51. doi: 10.2307/2539214
Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2000). What's new? What's not? (And so what?). Foreign Policy, 118, 104–119. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1149673
Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2012). Power and interdependence. Longman.
Lim, T. C. (2014). International political economy: An introduction to approaches, regimes, and issues. Saylor Foundation.
Maswood, J. (2000). International political economy and globalization. World Scientific Publishing.
May, E. R., Rosecrance, R., & Steiner, Z. (2010). History and neorealism. Cambridge University Press.
McGlinchey, T., Walters, R., & Scheinpflug, C. (2017). International relations theory. E-International Relations Publishing.
Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International Organization, 51(4), 513–553. doi: 10.1162/002081897550447
Nye, J. S. (1988). Neorealism and neoliberalism. World Politics, 40(2), 235–251. doi: 10.2307/2010363
O’Brien, R., & Williams, M. (2016). Global political economy: Evolution and dynamics. Palgrave Macmillan.
Paul, D. E., & Amawi, A. (2013). The theoretical evolution of international political economy. Oxford University Press.
Rogerson, K. S. (2000). Information interdependence: Keohane and Nye's complex interdependence in the information age. Information, Communication & Society, 3(3), 415–436. doi: 10.1080/13691180051033379
Rosecrance, R. (1996). The rise of the virtual state. Foreign Affairs, 75(4), 45–61.
Rosecrance, R. (2002). International security and the virtual state: States and firms in world politics. Review of International Studies, 28(3), 443–455. doi: 10.1017/S0260210502004436
Rosecrance, R. (2010). Bigger is better: The case for a transatlantic economic union. Foreign Affairs, 89(3), 42–50. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25680914
Salimi, H. (2005). Virtual states or aggressive realism: A comparative study of the theory of Richard Rosecrance and John Mearsheimer. Law and Politics Research, 7(17), 19–43 (In Persian).
Salimi, H. (2021). Transition from an international economy to a global economy. Journal of Economic Research, 21(82), 163–195. doi: 10.22054/joer.2021.56239.911 (In Persian).
Saryal, R. (2015). Global environmental agenda: The neoliberal institutional perspective. Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, 19(1), 1–21. doi: 10.1177/097359841559988
Slaughter, A.-M. (2009). America's edge: Power in the networked century. Foreign Affairs, 88(1), 94–113.
Slaughter, A.-M. (2017). The chessboard and the web: Strategies of connection in a networked world. Yale University Press.
Smith, R., El-Anis, I., & Farrands, C. (2017). International political economy in the 21st century. Routledge.
Young, O. R. (1982). Regime dynamics: The rise and fall of international regimes. International Organization, 36(2), 277–297. doi: 10.1017/S0020818300018956
International Political Economy Studies
Volume 8, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
September 2025
Pages 1-26

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 04 November 2024
  • Revise Date: 05 May 2025
  • Accept Date: 07 July 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics