CHAPTER 1
WHAT IS INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY?
Overview
International political economy or IPE is…? Chapter 1 answers this question in three ways: by examples of
important events, situations, and people or leaders in the global political economy today; by comparison, contrasting
IPE with more familiar disciplines such as economics, political science, and sociology; and directly, through
discussion of the three dominant IPE perspectives, each of which includes different phenomenon, fundamental
principles, concepts, and values reflected in the policies and behavior of a variety of individuals, states, regional, and
international actors.
In simple terms, we define IPE as the study of those international and global problems and issues that
cannot adequately be addressed by recourse to economic, political, or sociological analysis alone. The term
“international political economy” refers to what is studied. By combining different elements of these disciplines we
are able to better explain many of the facets of complex interdependence that define some of our most pressing
problems today.
The need to study IPE arises because many important contemporary questions cannot adequately be
addressed from the standpoint of a social single discipline—economics, politics, or sociology—or by the analysis of
actors and actions that take place on a particular level of analysis—individual, state, or international system. IPE
breaks down the barriers that separate and isolate the traditional methods of analysis, seeking a comprehensive
understanding of issues and events.
We first illustrate these points using many of the events surrounding the global financial crisis that began in
2007 and that has now spread throughout the world along with a discussion of the popular concept of globalization
and its role in the global political economy.
We make clear that events like this are best understood by employing a an interdisciplinary,
multidimensional perspective that IPE provides together with a number of other conceptual tools students can use to
describe, analyze, and explain any number of IPE issues and problems. The chapter introduces the three major
disciplines that are typically included under the rubric of IPE, three dominant IPE analytical perspectives, four levels
of analysis, and four global structures.
What is true of the recent financial crisis is also true of a great many other issues. IPE presents us with an
analytical framework, which is outlined in this chapter and then developed throughout the book. IPE help us to
understand more clearly both the major events of our times and our daily lives as well.
Learning Objectives:
• To define the international political economy and IPE as a method of study.
• Based on a brief discussion of the three major interconnected recent global issues, namely the global financial
crisis, the Occupy Wall Street movement, and the Arab Spring, to discuss and explain why IPE is a relevant and
popular field of study.
• To discuss how IPE is different from and related to such disciplines as economics, politics, sociology, and
history.
• To explain and discuss how states, markets, and societies differ in terms of their values, methods, and goals.
• To examine how other academic disciplines would analyze the events surrounding the current financial crisis in
a narrow manner that does not explain broad theoretical issues and policy problems.
• To identify and discuss the fundamental elements of the multidisciplinary approach called IPE.
• To explain and discuss the dynamic nature of the interaction between states, markets, and society.
• To define and discuss Kenneth Waltz’s levels of analysis employed in IPE.
• To define and explain Susan Strange’s four essential “structures” and their analytical purposes in IPE.
• To identify and discuss the three dominant IPE perspectives, the academic disciplines they are most closely
associated with, and the values and policies they represent.
• As an example of what and how IPE studies something, to discuss the relationship between “globalization” and
IPE.
• To briefly outline the major themes of this edition of the text.
Chapter Outline:
THE DARKNESS ON THE EDGE OF TOWN
a) The chapter begins with an overview of developments related to the current global economic crisis that
made international headlines in the fall of 2008 together with the prolonged debt crisis that has emerged in
the European Union. A number of questions about the financial crisis are asked of students in terms of their
familiarity with the issue.
b) Many of the outcomes of the crisis included: mortgage defaults, increased unemployment and deep cuts in
social services, health care benefits and spending for education along with increased trade protection, state
conflict, and increased migration.
c) Recovery from the Great Recession of 2008 has proved elusive. Much of the EU remains in a deep
recession. Many Euro zone countries face huge debts, which have raised doubts in some countries about
remaining in the European Monetary Union.
d) Many people have lost confidence in both national and international institutions. New technologies have
led to layoffs and downsizing of the middle class in many industrial nations.
e) The number and intensity of environmental disasters seem to be growing.
f) High energy and energy costs have contributed to increased global hunger.
g) The development of many alternative energy resources have been either delayed or cancelled.
Hope on the Horizon?
a) Some developing nations like Brazil, China, and Argentina have been doing relatively well based on
increased investment in these and some of the poorer nations.
b) Three interrelated developments have given rise to hope for many people: The Arab Spring in the Middle
East, the European sovereign debt crisis, and the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement.
c) All three movements have in common: protests against government corruption and growing inequality, not
only in the Middle East but also in the industrialized nations.
d) More people are critical of globalization and also the austerity policies that cut into state assistance
programs
The Road Ahead
a) IPE is a study that synthesizes methods and theories of economics, politics, and sociology to study
international problems like the global financial crisis.
b) The text provides students with the analytical tools they need to study the economic crisis and other
issues in the future.
c) One such issue is the popular idea of globalization, which together with its underlying economic liberal
ideas and values, has been criticized by generating some of the conditions that produced the global
economic crisis.
THE WHAT, WHY AND HOW OF IPE
a) In traditional academic disciplines, an event such as the global economic crisis or the process of
globalization would be analyzed in ways that reflect the specialized disciplines that include international
relations, international economics, comparative politics, sociology, and anthropology.
b) These disciplines emphasize specialization and analytical efficiency but also offer a distorted and
incomplete explanation that comes from using one set of analytical methods and concepts.
c) IPE is an attempt to explain complex problems that could benefit from analysis offered by a
multidisciplinary perspective.
d) IPE represents a synthesis of these social science approaches. It examines the complex interactions of
subjects, issues, and analytical approaches that characterize international affairs of all sorts.
What is International Political Economy (IPE)?
a) The term IPE is associated with:
i. A subject or field of inquiry that explains international as well as global issues and problems.
ii. A multidisciplinary method of inquiry that combines concepts and ideas from the disciplines of
politics, economics, and sociology. Employing a more holistic outlook elicits a more accurate
description and explanation of the ever-changing relationships between states, markets, and societies
than do the narrow explanations associated with the antecedent disciplines of IPE.
b) IPE combines elements of politics (for example states and power) that interact with the economic (markets
and wealth) and societal (the behavior of different cultural groups) in the international (and some would
say, increasingly global) arena that is conditioned by history and different cultural values.
c) States are the realm of collective action and collective interests that tend to emphasize values like security.
States allocate and distribute power. Power can be viewed as divided between relational power (the ability
to cause another actor to do or not do something) and structural power (the ability to affect the nature of the
system of relationships within which bargaining takes place).
d) Markets are the realm of individual action and self-interest, and tend to emphasize concerns of scarce
resources and efficiency. The depersonalized actions of markets often act as an unseen coordinator of social
behavior in today’s global political economy.
e) Because the state, market, and society often embrace different values and prefer different methods for
realizing them, sharp tension and conflict often occurs.
f) Given the interconnectedness between these three spheres, a change in one often evokes a change in the
others, rendering IPE to a constant state of tension.
How to Study IPE: Contrasting Perspectives and Methodologies
a) The three dominant perspectives of IPE are mercantilism, economic liberalism, and structuralism.
Distinctions between these outlooks usually correspond to disciplinary traditions that make it difficult to
understand and explain their connections to one another.
b) Each perspective emphasizes different values, actors, and solutions to policy problems but also obscures
important elements highlighted by the other two perspectives.
c) Liberalism or economic liberalism is the perspective most closely associated with economics. It values
production and economic efficiency. Today economic liberals tend to be divided between the more
classical orthodox economic liberals (OELs) and the heterodox interventionist liberals (HILs). Economic
liberal ideas have been the foundation behind the globalization campaign.
d) Mercantilism or economic nationalism is the perspective most closely associated with political science and
realism. The realist variant of mercantilism tends to view power as divided between hard power (the
application of coercive force to compel another actor to do something) and soft power (using the influence
of culture, beliefs, and values to persuade another actor to do something). Actors and theorists associated
with this perspective value (national) security above all other objectives.
e) Structuralism is rooted in Marxist thought and is the perspective most closely associated with sociology.
Attention is usually directed at the values and belief of the dominant economic classes in society, but also
in the exploitative outlook of the proletariat or working class.
The Benefits of IPE
a) Each IPE perspective zeroes in on different actors, issues, and developments in the global political
economy. Each viewpoint also sheds light on some aspect of a problem particularly well, but casts a
shadow on other important aspects.
b) IPE helps us move to the “big picture”—the most comprehensive and compelling explanation of global
processes and patterns.
c) The big picture of IPE is not the same as a single IPE theory. Rather, IPE attempts to blend together distinct
perspectives to produce a more holistic explanation of something.
d) IPE is more flexible than most disciplines because it asks the analyst to choose why and how something
should be studied and with what tools.
e) A starting point for mixing states, markets, and society is to focus on the question of qui bono? Or, who
benefits from complex interactions in the international political economy?
f) Most of the time the way one explains a problem depends on the questions asked about it, the data
available, and the theoretical or ideological outlook of the analyst herself.
The Four Level of Analysis
a) One productive tool of analysis is Kenneth Waltz’s suggestion that explanations for causes of international
conflict are located on different stages of an analytical scale of increasing complexity, related to different
units ranging from individual behavior and choices (the individual level) to factors within states (the
state/societal level) to something stemming from the interconnection of states (the interstate).
b) A good deal of focus today by IPE experts is on a fourth “global” level where issues, such as globalization,
reflect increasing interaction among these units throughout the entire “global” international political
economy.
Susan Strange’s Four IPE Structures
a) From a theoretical standpoint, IPE examines the interactions and tensions within four structures or
frameworks (production and trade, money and finance, knowledge and technology, and security) that are
the underlying foundation of the international political economy.
b) Each structure can be understood as a formal (institutional) arrangement and set of bargains between many
international actors that directly and indirectly decide the outcome or that shapes the “rules of the game” on
a particular international issue or problem.
c) At the global level, the security structure is comprised of those persons, states, international organizations,
and NGOs that contribute to or provide safety for all people everywhere. The bipolar balance of power
between the U.S. and the Soviet Union during the Cold War is a good example of a structure that
conditioned state security.
d) The production and trade structure examines the sets of actors, institutions, and their formal informal rules
that determine what kinds of goods and services are produced, where, when, and by whom. When these
items are exported or imported by people and corporations in different states they can severely impact local
and national wealth and welfare, making it difficult to agree on international trade rules and regulations
(see Chapter 6).
e) The money and finance structure examines the sets of institutions and actors that determine international
currency and foreign investment rules and regulations related to money and credit.
f) Finally, the knowledge and technology structure examines the sets actors and institutions that produce and
manage a variety of issues related to information, knowledge, and technology—issues that play an
increasingly important role in the emerging “global” political economy.
PUTTING THE PIECES TOGETHER: GLOBALIZATION, THE FINANCIAL CRISIS, AND STATE–
MARKET–SOCIETAL RELATIONS
a) We use the concept of globalization as an example of an issue that bisects each of the four structures of the
international political economy outlined above.
b) Globalization has brought about a significant change in the way many experts and officials think about the
international political economy. It has both strengthened and weakened the power of many institutions and
actors along the way.
c) Globalization incorporates the growing interdependence (interconnections) among people and states all
over the world that resulted from new information and communications technologies and the spread of
Western (U.S.) ideas and culture.
d) Globalization also accounts for the increased dependency of a nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) on
trade and other economic activities outside the state.
e) Beginning in the 1990s the world seemed to be going through another phase of major global transformation
that involved more intense connections with other states and their societies.
f) Where states had been preoccupied with territorial security and war, in the 1990s something more akin to a
truly global world political-economic order emerged dominated by economic issues.
g) In the 1980s U.S. President Reagan and British Prime Minister Thatcher made popular a number of
economic liberal principles and open market policies that resulted in increased economic growth but also
increased economic integration in the world.
h) After the Cold War ended in 1990, the U.S., Great Britain, and other industrialized nations engaged in a
campaign to promote globalization along with the promise that together with capitalism, globalization would
increase economic growth while laying the groundwork for democracy the world over.
i) Thomas Friedman, among many others, popularized the idea of globalization, which usually includes some
of the following characteristics:
1. An economic process that reflects accelerated and intense interconnections based on new
technologies and communications systems and the mobility of trade and capital,
2. The integration of national and regional markets into a single global market,
3. A political process that weakens state authority and replaces it with deregulated market outcomes,
4. A cultural process that reflects a densely growing network of complex cultural interconnections and
interdependencies in modern society,
5. Is an inevitable occurrence that has produced a new form of capitalism—hypercapitalism,
6. A process for which nobody is in charge,
7. Benefits everyone, especially economically, and
8. Furthers the spread of democracy in the world.
j) Speed is the new and necessary major feature of twenty-first-century communications, commerce, travel,
and innovation. Along with economic growth and personal wealth comes the demand for mass consumer
products such as electronic goods, music, clothing, and food.
k) Friedman asserted that globalization often required a “golden straightjacket” of state policies that must be
adopted and implemented if states want to realize globalization’s benefits. Globalism stands for the
economic liberal ideas behind globalization. It became synonymous with production efficiency, the free
flow of currency (capital mobility), free trade, open markets, and individual empowerment, which realize
the “triumph of market” that produced economic prosperity and democracy everywhere in the world.
l) In his book The World is Flat Friedman argues that globalization is here to stay and should be embraced.
Many state officials and leaders of international organizations claimed that developing nations would grow
out of their debt and prosper if they adopted neoliberal policies and integrated into the global economy.
Globalization is also supposed to help create more peaceful relations between states that traded with one
another, especially if U.S. hegemonic leadership promoted it as an option for the world’s poor who might
otherwise support rogue states and terrorists. Globalization is also expected to help transform the global
society by increasing flows of people across borders that might eventually lead to a better understanding
between different groups.
m) In the 1990s, the anti-globalization movement gained momentum on a global scale. Many NGOs and other
public-interest groups focused sweatshop production conditions in many poor countries, damage to the
environment, and income distribution issues. Demonstrations aimed at the WTO, IMF, and World Bank’s
support for the “Washington Consensus” (see Chapter 8) about the benefits of globalization. Issues
surrounding globalization have decisively affected local, regional, and even national elections. Some critics
charged that anti-globalization might have been a motive behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United
States.
n) For many people living in poorer countries, globalization became synonymous with “wildcat” capitalism,
which meant higher standards of living and consumer consumption for a few and an increase in the misery
for a vast majority of people. For Ignacio Ramonet and many others, society had become a slave to the
market, which operates like clockwork, driven by economic and Social Darwinism, leading to excessive
competition and consumption and the necessity of people to adapt to market conditions.
o) Thomas Friedman himself became concerned about the extent to which globalization was having a
homogenizing effect on cultures the world over. The triumph of the market can trump politics and society,
with devastating results for poorer people. Friedman acknowledged that globalization alone would not
automatically achieve success for everyone. He suggested that if it increased the rich–poor gap or left too
many behind, it would likely generate opposition and be a destructive force in the world.
p) By the turn of the twenty-first century, most developing nations were not growing out of poverty as
expected. Many of the more successful Asian Tigers and a few other newly industrializing countries (NICs)
experienced tremendous national and per-capita growth. Yet a number of newly emerging economies in
Asia and other parts of the world experienced a financial crises in 1997.
q) In a tacit admission that globalization was not delivering on its promises, in 2000 the United Nations (UN)
established Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) directed at increasing foreign aid for poorer nations,
halving global hunger, reducing debt, and fighting diseases like AIDS. Other critics suggested that
globalization did not produce world but may also be intensifying tensions between the western
industrialized nations and many Islamic countries in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa. Finally,
globalization was criticized for contributing to poverty, which many linked to conventional and
nonconventional wars in developing regions—particularly in “failed states” such as Sudan and Somalia.
r) Many HILs, structuralists, and realists became concerned that neoliberal ideas and pro- globalization
policies were responsible for many global environmental and energy problems that may not be reversible.
Many would like to reform capitalism and redesign globalization such that people would curtail the
excessive use of the earth’s resources. Many scholars expect major problems in adjusting to a sustainable
level of resource use in the industrialized nations, while China, India, and other developing nations are
making increasing demands on the resources of “Spaceship Earth.”
s) Finally, the current global financial crisis has generated still more (intense) criticism of globalization and
its economic liberal oriented ideas, values, and institutions. Some see signs of “green shoots” that foretell
recovery from the recent financial crisis. Meanwhile unemployment numbers still continue to rise in many
countries. Some have suggested that until the financial crisis is adequately dealt with, globalization and
globalism will continue to come under severe criticism, not only from anti-globalization protestors but also
from economic liberal academics and policy officials who support a managed globalization that better
serves everyone.
PRELUDE AND CONCLUSION
Some of the main questions and issues dealt with in the text.
a) Globalization: Efforts to manage its negative externalities and impacts on the environment, resources, and
society.
b) Tensions between market fundamentalism and protectionism and efforts to re-embed the market into
society and its cultural institutions.
c) Tensions between rising production and distribution of gains.
d) Tensions between a state’s domestic needs and its international obligations (throughout the text).
e) Balancing security and freedom.
f) Focusing more on how social groups influence markets and states.
g) Global inequality between and within countries.
h) How the rise of China, India, and other newly industrializing countries is fundamentally reshaping the
global economy.
i) Development and transformation: strategies and dilemmas.
j) Regionalism as a development strategy many countries, such as those in the European Union, use to
maintain wealth and power.
k) The impact of technological changes on political economic institutions and processes.
l) The issue of hegemony or leadership over the global political economy.
m) Global governance, management, and systemic order provided by a variety of institutions, along with
resistance to them.
n) The increasing analytical and policy linkages of issues to one another.
STANDING ON THE PRECIPICE
a) For the last one hundred years most states and societies have been engaged in an effort to develop
economically. Many states have employed a mixture of mercantilist and economic liberal ideas and policies
to achieve tremendous economic development, while much of the world has been unable to attain anything
near that objective. Even so, in the future development, as we have conceived it, may not be realized for
many societies. Furthermore, development involves more than industrialization. It is also an ongoing
process of perpetual political, economic, and social transformation in all societies.
b) Two other major global developments are currently impacting states and societies. First is the major shift in
the distribution of global wealth and power. Second is the idea that war on terrorism may not be “winnable”
in any real sense of the term. For a variety of reasons related to the availability of certain technologies,
porous state borders, and increased frustrations related to among other things poverty and
underdevelopment, state and personal insecurities may in fact be increasing.
c) Not only terrorism but also the emergence of India and China as global powers now challenges many state
officials to suggest that the global center of the balance of power is shifting even faster than expected as a
reflection of many planned and unexpected changes in the world economy. This shift could very well
increase North–South tensions and weaken global governance when it comes to solving many problems
such as trade, hunger, energy, and climate change.
d) Finally, the global financial crisis not only generated more skepticism about government bailouts and free
markets, but also resulted in renewed interest and support for more government intervention to save both
individual national economies and the entire international finance system. Thus, another major issue
throughout the book is: if globalization and economic liberal values and policies have proved not to be
politically and economically beneficial to all, how is the global political economy to be managed or
governed without generating even bigger problems? Many mercantilists and realists would point out that
solutions to such issues are not likely to be separated from the interests of the states.
e) Likewise, many structuralists would question the extent to which reform of globalization is even possible
without profoundly changing the neoliberal principles and values that are its foundation. It would seem
obvious then that because of the interconnectedness of states, institutions, and societies at all levels,
international institutions must play some role in solving international problems. Paradoxically, precisely at a
time when the global political economy could use more cooperation to solve an assortment of interrelated
issues, we suggest that the compulsion of actors to cooperate for the sake of providing global governance
remains weak. Dealing with the global financial crisis, among other important global issues, is just one such
case.
f) For many experts, the problem comes down to either fixing economic liberalism or finding another
perspective that blends the three perspectives and some alternative theories together in such a way as to
produce something more pragmatic. In the cases of migration and refugees, civil society is rapidly changing
and making demands for democracy and human rights, which are harder than ever for regimes to suppress.
The case of illicit markets reveals the limits of state sovereignty, international cooperation, and even
compassion for the most vulnerable people in the world.
g) The chapter ends with two hopes for students. First, is that the political– economic institutions of states and
societies are able to deal with the highest priorities of states without destroying the earth’s capacity to
sustain development? Second, is that solutions to contentious economic and political issues will include
compassion for the most vulnerable people in the world?
Key Terms:
• international political economy
• global civil society
• economic liberalism
• orthodox economic liberals
• heterodox interventionalist liberals
• mercantilism
• realism
• sovereignty
• soft power
• hard power
• structuralism
• the levels of analysis
• IPE structures
• globalization
• global governance
Teaching Tips:
• This chapter introduces students to a number of fairly abstract ideas (states, markets, values, structures, etc.) and
asks them to apply them to a few simple examples. It is important to give attention to both abstract and the
concrete here and to provide students with ample opportunity to link the two together.
• The global economic crisis fascinates most students, so it is useful to keep going back to it as an illustration of
the major concepts covered under the heading of International Political Economy (IPE) today. Admittedly,
some students will feel that they have to have had economics to understand the situation. Assure them that that
is not the case as the text was written especially for those with little to no background in politics, economics, or
sociology. Assure them that if they read the background material here as a story or problem, they will
understand some of the more difficult parts of it all the time.
• Ask students to read newspapers and bring to class other examples of IPE topics that are currently in the news
such as the financial crisis, the war on terror, the environment, immigration, and trade policy issues. For
homework assignment, ask them to read a part or the complete chapter and then to find a newspaper article
dealing with any IPE type issue. They should come to the next class with a one-page write-up that summarizes
the problem and identifies the political, social, and economic elements in the article. Specifically, ask students
to discuss the role of the state, market, and society in the article. What tensions exist between these entities and
the actors in the article? Cui bono? Who benefits and who loses?
• You could also ask students to identify the levels of analysis in the article. What could have been highlighted if
the author of the article had approached the subject from a different level? Some students will find this creative
exercise difficult, but many will find it useful to generate interest in IPE early on in the class. This exercise also
helps generate class discussion.
• Try having students break into small groups of 3 or 4 and having them tell (not read) to each other what they
wrote. Bring the class back together and then go around and ask the class who heard a good “story.” That
person should then explain to the class what IPE concepts were used by the student and article’s author. How do
IPE concepts help explain the issue or problem at hand? Note: this exercise might be repeated in written form as
a class short essay (4–5 pages) topic.
• Finally, the four IPE structures can also be used to help students see IPE around them. Ask students to provide
examples of problems they have read about or heard about that involve international or global security,
production and trade, finance, or knowledge and technology issues. Be sure to have some examples of your own
ready from the nightly news or a newspaper.
• Discuss why there has been so much criticism of economic liberalism recently. What is the nature of this
criticism? Do students agree or disagree with it?
Sample Essay-Discussion Questions:
1. Define the terms “state” and “market” and give examples of “state actions” and “market actions.” Is the line
between state and market clean and clear, or is it sometimes hard to determine? What is the relationship between
politics and the state on one hand and economics and the market on the other?
2. International political economy is sometimes defined as the set of questions and issues arising from the parallel
existence and dynamic interaction of states and markets. Have students locate a current event article in a
newspapers and newsmagazines and then discuss (or write a one page essay explaining) how state, market, and
society tensions and interactions figure in these events. What IPE tools were helpful when it came to making
sense of the problem in the article?
3. Use the same article to highlight the levels of analysis the author(s) of the article focus on in the article. Discuss
what benefits were gained by using that (those) levels. What was overlooked? Ditto the three IPE perspectives
or the four IPE structures.
4. How do states and markets differ in the values and goals and the means with which they seek to achieve their
goals? Discuss this question both in general and with respect to the current event topic in Question 2.
5. Efficiency and security are two important factors in IPE. Briefly explain why efficiency and security are both
desirable values. Can security exist without efficiency? Can efficiency exist without security? Explain.
Sample Examination Questions:
1. IPE is created by the parallel existence and dynamic interaction of
2. The Arab Spring started in which country?
3. The EU debt crisis has had which of the following effects?
4. The “state” is to collective interest as
5. Which dimension of IPE focuses on the use of power to make rules and to distribute tangible things such as
money and intangible things such as security?
6. The depersonalized actions of _____ often act as an unseen coordinator of social behavior in today’s global
political economy.
7. Which level of analysis would focus on the actions of different national legislatures when it comes to dealing
with the global financial crisis?
8. Which of the following statements about IPE structures is wrong?
a) International debt is part of the finance structure.
b) Defense agreements are part of the security structure.
9. Which of the following is a major characteristic of globalization?
10. Which IPE perspective professes that people and states should value economic efficiency, and a laissez-faire
role for the state in the economy?
11. Which of the following is not regarded as one of the characteristics of globalization?
12. Who wrote The World is Flat, which argues that new technological developments are in the process of leveling
the relationship of individuals to their states and to one another?
13. This effort adopted by the UN in 2000 is directed at increasing foreign aid for poorer nations, halving global
hunger, reducing debt, and fighting diseases like AIDS.
14. Which of the two states do many IPE experts expect to emerge as global political and economic powers in the
near future?
15. When it comes to solving an assortment of policy issues on global warming, “paradoxically, precisely at a time
when the global political economy could use more cooperation to solve an assortment of interrelated issues, we
suggest that the compulsion of actors to cooperate for the sake of providing _____ remains weak.”