scholarly journals Bayesian Approaches for Limited Dependent Variable Change Point Problems

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Spirling
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Change Point ◽  
American Politics ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Bayesian Approaches ◽  
Limited Dependent Variable ◽  
Good Advice ◽  
Type Data

Limited dependent variable (LDV) data are common in political science, and political methodologists have given much good advice on dealing with them. We review some methods for LDV “change point problems” and demonstrate the use of Bayesian approaches for count, binary, and duration-type data. Our applications are drawn from American politics, Comparative politics, and International Political Economy. We discuss the tradeoffs both philosophically and computationally. We conclude with possibilities for multiple change point work.

From Silos to Barns? Regional Institutions in International Political Economy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Etel Solingen
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Critical Theory ◽  
Transaction Costs ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Economic Efficiency ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Regional Economic ◽  
Regional Institutions ◽  
Ongoing Work ◽  
The Common

The explosion of research on regional economic institutions (REI) over the last two decades has led to a richer understanding of why they emerge, what form they take, and what effects they have. This chapter argues that research on REI is not a monopoly of any particular theoretical, methodological, or epistemological approach. Ongoing work leans not merely on standard political science and economics but on sociology, psychology, and critical theory. Yet, REI studies cluster in silos more often than barns, although this chapter highlights some research programs with potential for fostering barns. Exclusive attention to power, economic efficiency, transaction costs, and transnational normative diffusion—the common analytical currency in standard accounts of REI—may conceal deeper domestic drivers underlying REI dynamics.

The study of international political economy in Russia

2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanislav L. Tkachenko
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Academic Discipline ◽  
The West ◽  
Theoretical Generalization ◽  
Policy Community

The author argues that international political economy (IPE), however prominent in the West, has not been established in Russia as an academic discipline. In the Russian policy community, the main debate is between liberal institutionalists, who advocate the country’s integration into the global economy, and the so-called dirigists, who promote relative economic autonomy. These two schools, however, only now begin to find their way in academia. Three main problems impede IPE development in Russia—the excessive separation of political science from economics, the deficit of theoretical generalization, and the weakness of educational curricula.

Paradigms and Practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Jabko ◽  
Sebastian Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Policy Change ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Specific Domain ◽  
Stability And Change ◽  
Norm Change

Abstract Thomas Kuhn's concept of paradigm has long been a part of ordinary parlance in political science. Aside from its role in metatheoretical debate, scholars have enlisted the paradigm concept to explain policy change, particularly in the international political economy (IPE) literature. In this context, policy paradigms are defined primarily in ideational terms and with respect to a specific domain of policymaking. We argue that this stance overstates the ideational coherence of policymaking and runs a risk of reification. We re-evaluate the paradigm concept by drawing a link to the recent literature on norm change that emphasizes the importance of practice and process. This analysis highlights theoretical difficulties in using the paradigm concept, as the relation of ideas to practical logics elides the distinctness of paradigmatic frameworks. Without clear boundaries, paradigms lose much of their analytical purchase. While the paradigm concept initially proved useful in highlighting the role of ideas, it is time to recognize its limits in explaining stability and change in policymaking.

Congress in the World: Benefits of the Congressional Fellowship Program for the Study of International Relations

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 539-551
Author(s):  
Kathryn C. Lavelle
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Theoretical Work ◽  
Academic Disciplines ◽  
American Political Science Association ◽  
Fellowship Program ◽  
American Political Science

The Congressional Fellowship Program of the American Political Science Association charted new territory in the 1950s when it opened the internal workings of Congress to subsequent generations of political science scholars. Numerous programs incorporating a “Hill” experience into a variety of academic disciplines have imitated it since then. However, scholarship in the subfield of international relations has not benefited from the opportunities the program offers to the same extent as other disciplines and subfields have. I use a sample of legislative and policy matters that I encountered as a fellow in the 2006–2007 year to argue that a wide spectrum of theoretical work in international political economy would profit from insights generated by the type of direct participation the program affords. Specifically, I connect literature across subfields on institutional change, and relate how my experiences with Darfur divestment legislation, Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS) legislation, and politics in a financial crisis hold the potential to enrich our understanding of the international political economy. I suggest where more direct experience with other issues by other scholars could prompt additional insights for research on U.S. foreign policy and international relations.

Reading Notes, Winter 1987

1987 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 224-232
Author(s):  
Ghiļa Ionescu
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Professional Interest ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Empirical Material

Susan’s ‘Faites vos jeux, messieurs. Rien ne va plus’ — The Politics of Liberalism — Bertrand de JouvenelSusan’s ‘Faites Vos Jeux, Messieurs. Rien Ne Va Plus’ Professor Susan Strange is widely recognised as the foremost British exponent of the meta-discipline of International Political Economy, better known under its nickname IPE. I define it as a meta-discipline because, as is well known, its purpose it to fuse into one the three previously disparate disciplines of economics, politics (notably comparative politics, political sociology and public policy) and international relations which can make sense now only when they are related to each other. The nineteenth-century founders of the social sciences had simply used the name of Political Economy. But then the unforeseeable agglomeration of empirical material led to an objective need for specialization and to a subjective professional interest which in turn led not only to a growing differentiation in the subject-matter, but also to an unnatural incompatibility of perspectives. Like many other artificial barriers which have fallen under the sweep of twentieth-century interdependence, the disciplinary barriers, and even the inadequate ‘interdisciplinary collaborations’ between the major social sciences, should now return to the initial common matrix. Whether the end result will indeed be a new, unique, science, or whether the social sciences will learn how to ‘see’ trifocally is another matter.

The Diffusion of Policy Diffusion Research in Political Science

2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 673-701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin R. Graham ◽  
Charles R. Shipan ◽  
Craig Volden
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
American Politics ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Policy Diffusion ◽  
Network Analyses ◽  
The Past ◽  
Political Science Journals

Over the past fifty years, top political science journals have published hundreds of articles about policy diffusion. This article reports on network analyses of how the ideas and approaches in these articles have spread both within and across the subfields of American politics, comparative politics and international relations. Then, based on a survey of the literature, the who, what, when, where, how and why of policy diffusion are addressed in order to identify and assess some of the main contributions and omissions in current scholarship. It is argued that studies of diffusion would benefit from paying more attention to developments in other subfields and from taking a more systematic approach to tackling the questions of when and how policy diffusion takes place.

Trade Competition and American Decolonization

2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 387-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas B. Pepinsky
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Puerto Rico ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Political Development ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Colonial Era ◽  
Economic Relations

This article proposes a political economy approach to decolonization. Focusing on the industrial organization of agriculture, it argues that competition between colonial and metropolitan producers creates demands for decolonization from within the metropole when colonies have broad export profiles and when export industries are controlled by colonial, as opposed to metropolitan, interests. The author applies this framework to the United States in the early 1900s, showing that different structures of the colonial sugar industries in the Philippines, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico–diverse exports with dispersed local ownership versus monocrop economies dominated by large US firms–explain why protectionist continental-agriculture interests agitated so effectively for independence for the Philippines, but not for Hawaii or Puerto Rico. A comparative historical analysis of the three colonial economies and the Philippine independence debates complemented by a statistical analysis of roll call votes in the Hare-Hawes-Cutting Act supports the argument. In providing a new perspective on economic relations in the late-colonial era, the argument highlights issues of trade and empire in US history that span the subfields of American political development, comparative politics, and international political economy.

Politics: American and Non-American

1984 ◽  
Vol 17 (03) ◽  
pp. 545-548
Author(s):  
Suzanne Berger
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
American Politics ◽  
American Political Science Review ◽  
American Exceptionalism ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
The Past ◽  
Foreign Governments

Tocqueville, considering how Americans compare their nation with others, observed that general ideas about politics testify to the weakness of human intelligence. “The Deity does not regard the human race collectively.… Such is, however, not the case with man. … Having superficially considered a certain number of objects, and remarked their resemblance, he assigns to them a common name, sets them apart, and proceeds onwards.”As it is for human beings, so, too, for political scientists. And of the generalizations which have helped Americans and American political scientists organize the confusing mass of differences and similarities between this country and others, none has been more important and enduring than the notion of the uniqueness of the American political community. This conception is reflected in the split within the discipline between those who study the U.S. political system and those who study comparative politics, a field understood to encompass various foreign countries. The rubric that in theAmerican Political Science Reviewuntil the 1950s used to read “Foreign Governments and Politics” has been replaced by a subsection of the book reviews that is entitled “Comparative Politics.” But today as in the past, it is rare to find teaching or research in political science that truly integrates the analysis of American politics within a comparative framework.Why this should remain the case is difficult to understand, for over the past half-century there have been many shifts in the discipline and in the world that challenged the premises of research based on American exceptionalism. Already in the interwar period, significant work in political science was moving beyond configurative case studies of individual countries. C. J. Friedrich's importantConstitutional Government and Democracy(1937), indeed, included the United States in its examination of how well certain general political theories explained the experiences of major political systems. Whatever reservations one might have had about the methodologies of comparative research on which Friedrich relied, the broad influence of his work promised a new integration of American politics into an expanded field of comparative politics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document