Latin American Global Political Economy: an effervescent field of study between development and regionalism
Keywords:
International Political Economy, Global Political Economy, Latin America, development, regionalismCopyright (c) 2022 Cintia Quiliconi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Abstract
This article aims to contribute to a recent debate to re-evaluate Latin America's contributions to International Political Economy (IPE) from a broader and more pluralistic perspective offered by Global Political Economy (GPE). This approach emerges as a set of conversations and questions about the world order that are answered from diverse perspectives and conceptual umbrellas. Thus, rather than a discipline, it represents a field of study where diverse theoretical, methodological, epistemological and ontological positions coexist with a local basis for the equal recognition of theories and contributions generated in the Global South (Seabrooke and Young, 2017).
Although it does not represent a counter-hegemonic approach to Western thought (Vivares, 2020), the GPE recognises that each region has its own intellectual traditions and, above all, intellectual production that does not always find space in the dominant theories of the North for its demand for agency (Deciancio and Quiliconi, 2020). Hence, I question the applicability of the prevailing theories of IPE as limited in terms of explanation and replicability for Latin America.
Northern IPE has had a dichotomous view of the world divided into positivist versus interpretivist in terms of knowledge production, or, more broadly, a geopolitical division into North American versus British schools focused on power politics and economics under very different points of view. These are self-centred perspectives on Anglo-Saxon thought that place Latin American ideas on the periphery, considering them as area studies rather than regional contributions to IPE (Tussie, 2020).
It has not been taken into account that, since the late 1940s, Latin America has questioned the alleged universality of growth theories, constructing a local debate separate from the prevailing theories given its own discussions on development. The Latin American schools of structuralism and heterodox economics took a critical view of the ontological basis of orthodox trade, arguing that knowledge is always partial or fragmentary in origin and that international trade is unevenly distributed between developed and developing countries. Nor has consideration been given to later discussions of regionalism, financing for development and more recently to studies of varieties of capitalism that have arisen in Latin America.
Despite the relevance and continuity of debates in Latin America, these ideas, which were put forward even before IPE was formally constituted as an area of study in the North, have been ignored by the dominant currents. As if this were not enough, within the region itself, it has been claimed that neoliberalism conquered this space and that, along with it, the critical debate on IPE had disappeared in Latin America (Palma, 2009). Against this background, this paper highlights how the GPE can contribute to a broader research agenda in which the contributions of the Global South are recognised. From a historical analysis, it proposes to compare the most relevant political and economic events that led to the creation of a regional field in GPE. The article contrasts the seminal contributions of structuralism, development and dependency theories to the GPE and the debates that subsequently emerged on regionalism, financing for development and the varieties of capitalism that constitute a Latin American school of thought in the GPE.
In this way, it addresses how structuralism and development theories became the pillars of a Latin American school of thought that has had international insertion as an articulating concept in the regional search for spaces of agency within the international system. Latin American contributions to the GPE have always revolved around the themes of development and international insertion based on their own epistemological and methodological contributions.
At the ontological level, Latin American theories broke with the acceptance of the universality of positivist and orthodox theories by establishing the need to incorporate reflectivist and critical approaches, and above all, theoretical debates around economics and development have contributed to the generation of an innovative methodology based on historical structuralism. Dependency theory mainly contributed to this methodological transformation, highlighting the importance of understanding the region's international insertion based on the relationship between internal structures 'as agents' and the political and economic power of the rest of the world as 'the structure'.
Under a historical-critical analysis based on the peripheral condition, the region promoted a new understanding of IPE that examined how external and internal factors determined the political economy and social relations in Latin American countries. While structuralism favoured an inward-looking development policy, largely through import substitution industrialisation (ISI), dependency theory suggested the need for a new international economic order and, in one of its strands, a transition to socialism as a way out of the problem of underdevelopment; for many dependentists the goal was to reform capitalism domestically and internationally (Kay, 1998).
Contributions on regionalism and financial issues have also been important for the development of the Latin American GPE. Historically, both ideas on Latin American regionalism and debates on financing for development emerged as a way of resisting great power interventions or achieving autonomy (Deciancio, 2018; Simonoff and Lorenzini, 2019). Thus, economic integration, regionalism and financing for development became key themes in the Latin American School of IPE, underpinning the quest to improve patterns of international insertion.
It is argued that these contributions can be identified as a particular strand built primarily on the terms of trade debate and development studies in general, but with later ramifications that have inserted debates in the region on regionalism and international insertion, as well as financing for development and varieties of capitalism, into a discussion that has grown in recent decades and has become effervescent and eclectic. In particular, it is argued that Latin American GPE has developed on the margins of conventional IPE but within a rich and vibrant regional debate, which has generally been related on the one hand to the political practice of development (Tickner, 2008; Tussie, 2020) and, on the other, to the creation of regional integration initiatives (Perrotta, 2018).
The article is divided into four sections that address the main contributions of the Latin American GPE. First, the seminal debates in the construction of the field of Latin American GPE from structuralism and dependency theories are synthesized. Second, it highlights the importance of regional integration and regionalism as central pillars of the Latin American School of EPG. Thirdly, it discusses how more recent analyses of financing for development and varieties of capitalism have contributed to nurturing the Latin American GPE. Finally, it examines whether the GPE field is global in nature or is facing a new phase in which the contribution and uniqueness of regional debates is revalued and highlighted.
Downloads
References
Acharya, A. (2014). Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds: A New Agenda for International Studies. International Studies Quarterly, 58, 647-659.
Acharya, A. y Buzan, B. (2007). Why is there non-Western international relations theory? An introduction. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 7, 287-312.
Acosta, A. (2009). La maldición de la abundancia. Primera Edición. Ediciones Abya-Yala.
Álvarez, M. (2021). A Theory of Hegemonic Stability in South American Regionalism? Evidence from the Case of Brazil in UNASUR and Venezuela in ALBA. Contexto Internacional, 43, 55-76.
Agostinis, G. y Palestini, S. (2021). Transnational governance in motion: Regional development banks, power politics, and the rise and fall of South America's infrastructure integration. Governance, 34, 765–784.
Aponte, M. (2014). El Nuevo Regionalismo Estratégico: Los primeros diez años del ALBA-TCP. CLACSO.
Bárcena, A. (2016). Pactos sociales para más democracia e igualdad: La persistente y tenaz importancia del Estado y la política en el desarrollo de América Latina y el Caribe. En Prado, A. y Carneiro, R. (Coord.). Desarrollo e Igualdad en América Latina (pp. 287-302). CEPAL.
Basualdo, E. (1987). Deuda externa y poder económico en la Argentina. Editorial Nueva América.
Battaglino, J. (2012). Defense in a Post-Hegemonic Regional Agenda: The Case of the South American Defense Council. En Riggirozzi, P. y Tussie, D. (Eds.). The Rise of Post – Hegemonic Regionalism (pp. 81-100). Springer.
Bianculli, A. (2016). Regulatory Governance Regimes and Interregionalism: Exploring the Dynamics of EU-Mercosur Negotiations. Revista Canadiense de Estudios Latinoamericanos y Caribeños, 41 (2), 173-198.
Bielschowsky, R. (1998). Cincuenta Años de Pensamiento en la CEPAL. Fondo de Cultura Económica - CEPAL.
Bizberg, I. y Théret, B. (2014). Las coaliciones sociopolíticas y las trayectorias de los capitalismos latinoamericanos. En Bizberg, I. (Coord.). Variedades de capitalismo en América Latina: los casos de México, Brasil, Argentina y Chile (pp. 95-139). El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Internacionales.
Bernal-Meza, R. (2016). China y América Latina: de la oportunidad al desafío. Revista tempo do mundo, 2 (2), 63-78.
Bouzas, R. (Ed.) (1988). Entre la heterodoxia y el ajuste. Negociaciones financieras externas de América Latina (1982–1987). Grupo Editorial Latinoamericano.
Bouzas, R. (1999). Mercosur’s External Trade Negotiations: Dealing with a Congested Agenda. En Roett, R. (Ed.). Mercosur: Regional Integration, World Markets (pp. 81–94). Lynne Rienner.
Bogliaccini, J. y Filgueira, J. (2011). Capitalismo en el Cono Sur de América Latina luego del final del consenso de Washington: ¿notas sin partitura? Revista del CLAD Reforma y Democracia, 51, 45-82.
Boschi, R. (Ed.) (2011). Variedades de capitalismo, política e desenvolvimiento na América Latina. UFMG.
Bresser-Pereira, L.C. (2012). Five Models of Capitalism. Revista de Economía Política, 32 (1), 21-32.
Briceño Ruíz, J. (2013). Ejes y modelos en la etapa actual de la integración económica regional en América Latina. Estudios Internacionales, 175, 9-39.
Brumat, L., Acosta, D., y Vera-Espinoza, M. (2018). Gobernanza migratoria en América del Sur: ¿hacia una nueva oleada restrictiva? En Bizzozero Revelez, L., y Fernández Luzuriaga, W. (Eds.). Anuario Política Internacional y Política Exterior 2017-2018, (pp. 205-211). Universidad de la República de Uruguay - Ediciones Cruz del Sur.
Castro Silva, Julissa. (2022). Difusión y redes en la cooperación regional: la institucionalidad comercial de la Alianza del Pacífico. Colombia Internacional, 109, 31-58.
Cohen, B. (2014). Advanced Introduction to International Political Economy. Edward Elgar.
Comini, N. (2015). El origen del Consejo de Defensa Suramericano. Modelos en pugna, una perspectiva desde Argentina. Revista de Estudios en Seguridad Internacional, 1 (2), 109-135.
Costa Vaz, A., Fuccille, A. y Pereira Rezende, L. (2017). UNASUR, Brazil, and the South American defence cooperation: A decade later. Revista Brasileira De Política Internacional, 60 (2), 1-21.
Chenou, J.M. y Quiliconi, C. (2020). Estudios globales: contribuciones latinoamericanas en un mundo globalizado. Colombia Internacional, 102, 3-21.
Dabène, O. (2012). Consistency and Resilience through Cycles of Repoliticization. En Riggirozzi P. y Tussie, D. (Eds.). The Rise of Post-hegemonic Regionalism: The Case of Latin America (pp. 41- 64). Springer.
Deciancio, M. (2018). La Economía Política Internacional en el campo de las relaciones internacionales argentinas. Desafíos, 30 (2), 15-42.
Deciancio, M. y Quiliconi, C. (2020). IPE Beyond Western Paradigms: China, Africa, and Latin America in Comparative Perspective. En Vivares, E. (Ed.). The Routledge Handbook to Global Political Economy: Conversations and Inquiries (pp. 457-471). Routledge.
Deciancio, M. y Quiliconi, C. (2022). South American Cooperation: Regional and International Challenges in the Post-Pandemic. En M. Deciancio y C. Quiliconi (Eds.). Regional and International Cooperation in South America After COVID. Challenges and Opportunities Post-pandemic. Routledge
Dolcetti-Marcolini, M. y Vivares, E. (2015). Two regionalisms, two Latin Americas or beyond Latin America? Contributions from a critical and decolonial IPE. Third World Quarterly, 37 (5), 866-882.
Dusell Peters, E. (2015). The Omnipresent Role of China’s Public Sector in its Relationship with Latin America and the Caribbean. En Dusell Peters, E. y Armony, A.C. (Coords.). Beyond Raw Materials: Who are the Actors in Latin America and the Caribbean-China Relationship? (pp. 50-72). Nueva Sociedad - Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.
Ebenau, M. (2014). Comparative capitalisms and Latin American Neodevelopmentalism: A critical political economy view. Capital & Class, 38 (1), 102-114.
Ebenau, M. y Suau Arinci, L. (2018). Variedades de capitalismo en América Latina: en torno a un debate. En Fernández, R. y Ebenau, M. (Eds.). Variedades de Capitalismo entre Centro y Periferia, Miradas Críticas desde América Latina (pp. 53-74). Miño y Dávila editores.
Estay, J. y Sánchez, G. (Coords.). (2005). El ALCA y sus peligros para América Latina. CLACSO.
Fernández Alonso, J. (2020). Economía Política Internacional y Relaciones Internacionales en Argentina: a propósito del abordaje de las cuestiones financieras. STUDIA POLITICÆ, 50, 11–41.
Fernández, R., Ebenau, M. y Bazza, A. (2018). Repensando las variedades de capitalismo desde la periferia latinoamericana En Fernández, R. y Ebenau, M. (Eds.). Variedades de Capitalismo entre Centro y Periferia, Miradas Críticas desde América Latina (pp. 75-100). Miño y Dávila editores.
Ferrer, A. (1979). Crisis y alternativas de la política económica argentina. Respuestas a comentaristas. Desarrollo Económico, 19 (73), 125–135.
Ffrench-Davis, R. (1986). Notas sobre el desarrollo económico y la deuda externa en América Latina. Desarrollo Económico, 25 (100), 571–585.
Furtado, C. (1959). Formación económica del Brasil. Fondo de Cultura de Río de Janeiro.
Gaitán, F. y Boschi, R. (2015). State-Business-Labour Relations and Patterns of Development in Latin America. En Ebenau M., Bruff I., May C. (Eds.). New Directions in Comparative Capitalisms Research (pp. 172-188). International Political Economy Series. Palgrave Macmillan.
Giacalone, R. (2018). El regionalismo asimétrico como eje de la resistencia sudamericana a Brasil (2000-2013). Revista de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad, 13(1), 163-192.
Gilpin, R. (2001). Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order. Princeton University Press.
Gómez Mera, L. (2015). Complejidad del régimen internacional y gobernanza regional: evidencia de las Américas. Gobernanza global: una revisión del multilateralismo y las organizaciones internacionales, 21(1), 19-42.
Gómez Mera, L. (2008). How ‘new’ is the ‘New Regionalism’ in the Americas? The case of Mercosur. Journal of International Relations and Development, 11, 279-307.
González Jauregui, J. (2020). Latin American countries in the BRI: challenges and potential implications for economic development. Asian Education and Development Studies, 10 (3), 348-358.
Gudynas, E. (2009). Diez tesis urgentes sobre el nuevo extractivismo: Contextos y demandas bajo el progresismo sudamericano actual. Extractivismo, política y Sociedad. Centro Andino de Acción Popular (CAAP) y Centro Latino Americano de Ecología Social (CLAES), 187-225.
Hall, P. y Soskice, D. (Ed.) (2001). Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford University Press.
Herrero, M.B. y Tussie, D. (2015). UNASUR Health: A quiet revolution in health diplomacy in South America. Global Social Policy, 15 (3), 261-277.
Hettne, B. (2003). The New Regionalism revisited. En Söderbaum, F. y Shaw, T. (Eds.). Theories of New Regionalism (pp. 22-43). Palgrave Macmillan.
Hettne, B. y Söderbaum, F. (2002). Theorizing the rise of regions. En Breslin, S., Hughes, C.H., Phillips, N. y Rosamond, B. (Eds.). New regionalism in the global political economy (pp. 33-47). Routledge/Warwick.
Hirschman, A.O. (1968). La economía política de la Industrialización a través de la Sustitución de Importaciones en América Latina. El Trimestre Económico, 140 (35), 626-658.
Jiménez-Peña G., Leiteritz R. y Urrego-Sandoval C. (2018). Dossier-Estado del arte de la Economía Política Internacional en Latinoamérica. Desafíos, 30 (2), 9-11.
Kacowicz, A. (2018). Regional Governance and Global Governance: Links and Explanations. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 24 (1), 61-79.
Kay, C. (1998). Estructuralismo y teoría de la dependencia en el periodo neoliberal. Nueva Sociedad, 158, 100-119.
Legler, T. (2013). Post-hegemonic Regionalism and Sovereignty in Latin America: Optimists, Skeptics and an Emerging Research Agenda. Contexto Internacional, 35 (2), 325-352.
Madariaga, A. (2018). El resurgimiento de la economía política en la ciencia política actual. Revista de Economía Institucional, 21 (41), 21-50.
Malamud, A. y Gardini, G.L. (2012). Has Regionalism Peaked? The Latin American Quagmire and its Lessons. The International Spectator: Italian Journal of International Affairs, 47 (1), 116-133.
Margulis, M. (2017). Introduction: the global political economy of Raúl Prebisch. En Margulis, M. (Ed.). The Global Political Economy of Raul Prebisch (pp. 1-23). Taylor & Francis/Routledge.
Meller, P. (1989). En torno a la doble condicionalidad del FMI y del Banco Mundial. Revista de la CEPAL, 37, 73-88.
Míguez, M.C. (2021). Autonomy in Foreign Policy: A Latin American Contribution to International Relations Theory. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies.
Montenegro Braz, A. (2018). Migration governance in South America: The bottom-up Diffusion of the Residence Agreement of Mercosur. Revista Brasilera de Administración Pública de la Fundación Getulio Vargas, 52 (2), 303-320.
Motta Veiga, P. (1999). Brazil in Mercosur: Reciprocal Influence. En Roett, R. (Ed.). Mercosur: Regional Integration, World Markets (pp. 25–34). Lynne Rienner.
Nahón, C., Rodríguez, C. y Schorr, M. (2006). El pensamiento latinoamericano en el campo del desarrollo del subdesarrollo: trayectoria, rupturas y continuidades. Crítica y Teoría en el Pensamiento Social Latinoamericano (pp. 327-379). CLACSO-Argentina.
Nemiña, P. (2019). La relación entre el FMI y los gobiernos tomadores de crédito. El aporte de la EPI centrado en la incidencia de los intereses. Desafíos, 31, 341–373.
Nolte, D. y Weiffen, B. (Eds.) (2021). Regionalism Under Stress: Europe and Latin America in Comparative Perspective. Routledge.
Oyarzún, L. (2021). Asia Pacífico en la Política Exterior de Chile: ¿oportunidad para implementar una gran estrategia país? En Bywaters, C., Sepúlveda, D. y Villar, A. (Eds.). Nuevas Voces de Política Exterior: Chile y el Mundo en la era Post-Consensual (pp. 327-336). Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Palestini, S. y Madariaga A. (2021). Introduction: Dependency as a Research Program: From Situations to Mechanisms of Dependency. En Madariaga A., Palestini S. (Eds.). Dependent Capitalisms in Contemporary Latin America and Europe (pp. 1-25). Palgrave Macmillan.
Palma, J. (2009). Why Did the Latin American Critical Tradition in the Social Sciences Become Practically Extinct? En Blyth, M. (Ed.). Routledge Handbook of IPE: IPE as a Global Conversation (pp. 243–265). Routledge.
Pareja Cucalón, F. (2017). El Pensamiento de Germánico Salgado sobre Integración Regional. En Salgado, G. (Ed.). Integración Económica y Desarrollo en América Latina (pp. 11-48). Corporación Editora Nacional.
Peixoto Batista, J. (2017). La EPI y las Relaciones Internacionales, ¿Dónde está el Derecho? Relaciones Internacionales, 26 (2), 181-194.
Peixoto, J. y Perrotta, D. (2018). El Mercosur en el nuevo escenario político regional: más allá de la coyuntura. Desafíos, 30 (1), 91-134.
Perrotta, D. (2018). El Campo de Estudios de La Integración Regional y Su Aporte a Las Relaciones Internacionales: Una Mirada Desde América Latina. Relaciones Internacionales, 38, 9-39.
Pinto, A. (1956). El Estado, la empresa privada y las inversiones extranjeras en la promoción del desarrollo económico. Panorama Económico, 150, 105-148.
Prieto Corredor, G.C. (2015). Collective Identity in the Andean Community: An Institutional Account. Papel Político, 20 (2), 585-604.
Prebisch, R. (1949). El desarrollo económico de la América Latina y algunos de sus principales problemas. CEPAL, (E/CN 12/0089).
Quiliconi, C. y Rivera, R. (2019) Trends and Politicization Cycles in the South American Regional Cooperation, Revista Uruguaya de Ciencia Política, 28 (1), 219-248.
Quiliconi, C. y Rodríguez Vasco, P. (2021). Chinese Mining and Indigenous Resistance in Ecuador. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/09/20/chinese-mining-and-indigenous-resistance-in-ecuador-pub-85382
Quiliconi, C. y Salgado, R. (2017). Latin American Integration: Regionalism a la Carte in a Multipolar World? Colombia Internacional, 92, 15-41.
Riggirozzi, P. y Tussie, D. (2015). A global conversation: Rethinking IPE in post hegemonic scenarios. Contexto Internacional, 37 (3), 1041–1068.
Riggirozzi, P. y Tussie, D. (Eds.) (2012). The Rise of Post – Hegemonic Regionalism. Springer.
Riggirozzi, P. (2017). Regional integration and welfare: Framing and advocating pro-poor norms through southern regionalisms. New Political Economy, 22 (6), 661-675.
Rivarola, A. (2017). Thinking Big from the Periphery: Raul Prebisch and the world System. En Margulis, M. (Ed). The Global Political Economy of Raul Prebisch (pp. 45-60). Taylor & Francis/Routledge.
Romero, M. (2007). Los Desafíos de una Nueva Integración Andina. Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar.
Ross Schneider, B. (2013). Hierarchical Capitalism in Latin America. Business, Labor and the Challenges of Equitable Development. Cambridge University Press.
Rostow, W.W. (1960). The Process of Economic Growth. Clarendon Press.
Saggioro García, A., Mendonça, M.L. y Borba de Sá, M. (2016). International Political Economy in Latin America: Redefining the Periphery. En Cafruny, A., Simona Talani, L. y Gonzalo Pozo, M. (Eds.). The Palgrave Handbook of Critical International Political Economy (pp. 431–452). Palgrave Macmillan.
Sanborn, C., y Ching, V. C. (2016). Chinese–Peruvian Relations in the Mining Sector: Learning Step by Step. En Myers, M. y Wise, C. (Eds) The Political Economy of China-Latin America Relations in the New Millennium (pp.159-192). Routledge.
Saguier, M. (2014). Minería para el Desarrollo integral en la estrategia de UNASUR. Revista Conjuntura Austral, 5, 39-65.
Salgado, G. (1979). El mercado regional latinoamericano: el proyecto y la realidad. Revista CEPAL, 7.
Sanahuja, J. (2012). Cambio de Ciclo en el Regionalismo y la Integracio?n Regional en Ame?rica Latina: Enfoques Diferenciados y Bu?squeda de Marcos Comunes. En Bonilla, A. y Orti?z, M. (Eds.). De Madrid a Santiago: Retos y Oportunidades, Balances y Perspectivas de las Relaciones entre la Unio?n Europea, Ame?rica Latina y el Caribe (pp. 143-156). FLACSO.
Sanahuja, J. y López Burian, C. (2021). Latin American neo-patriot far-right: between the crisis of globalisation and regional political processes. En Pereyra Doval, G. y Souroujon, G. (Eds.). Global Resurgence of the Right (pp. 98-122). Routledge.
Sánchez-Ancochea, D. (2020). The Costs of Inequality in Latin America. Lessons and Warnings for the Rest of the World. I.B. Tauris.
Seabrooke, L. y Young, K.L. (2017). The networks and niches of international political economy. Review of International Political Economy, 24 (2), 288-331.
Serbin, A. (2021). El Indo-Pací?co y América Latina en el marco de la disputa geoestratégica entre Estados Unidos y China. Documento de la Fundación Carolina, 45/2021.
Simonoff, A. y Lorenzini, M.E. (2019). Autonomía e integración en las teorías del sur: desentrañando el pensamiento de Hélio Jaguaribe y Juan Carlos Puig. Iberoamericana-Nordic Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 4 (1), 96-106.
Slipak, A. (2012). Revisitando a Prebisch en el Siglo XXI: Un estudio de la relación sino-argentina. REBELA-Revista Brasileira de Estudos Latino-Americanos, 2 (2), 203-238.
Sunkel, O. (1959). Un esquema general para el análisis de la inflación. Economía, 62, 1-14.
Svampa, M. (2013). Consenso de los Commodities y lenguajes de valoración en América Latina. Nueva Sociedad, 244, 30-46.
Tickner, A. (2008). Latin American IR and the Primacy of lo práctico. International Studies Review, 10 (4), 735-748.
Tickner, A. (2015). Autonomy and Latin American International Relations Thinking. En Domínguez, J. y Covarrubias, A. (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Latin America in the World (pp. 86-96). Routledge.
Tomassini, L. (1984). El escenario internacional y la deuda externa de América Latina. Revista de la CEPAL, 24, 137-148.
Tussie, D. (2020). The tailoring of IPE in Latin America: lost, misfit or misperceived? En Vivares, E. (Ed). The Routledge Handbook to Global Political Economy: Conversations and Inquiries (pp. 92- 110). Routledge.
Tussie, D. (2009). Latin America: Contrasting Motivations for Regional Projects. Review of International Studies, 35 (1), 169-188.
Tussie, D. (1988). La coordinación de los deudores latinoamericanos: ¿cuál es la lógica de su accionar? Desarrollo Económico, 109 (28), 67-88.
Vadell, J. (2021). China’s bilateral and minilateral relationship with Latin America and the Caribbean: the case of China–CELAC Forum. Area Development and Policy, 7(2), 187-203.
Vadell, J. (2011). A China na América do Sul e as implicações geopolíticas do Consenso do Pacífico. Revista Sociologia Política Curitiva, 19, 57-79.
Vivares, E. (2020). Global Conversations and Inquiries. En Vivares, E. (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook to Global Political Economy: Conversations and Inquiries (pp. 9-25). Routledge.
Vivares, E. (2014). Toward a Political Economy of New South American Regionalism. En Vivares, E. (Ed.), Exploring the New South American Regionalism (NSAR) (pp. 9-28). Ashgate.