Search results

Economic diplomacy refers to methods and processes by which states take advantage of cross-border economic activities to achieve their national interests. It makes connections between the sphere of corporate players, who export or invest abroad, and the sphere of diplomats, who represent the state on the international scene and implement geopolitical decisions. The main purpose of this paper is to provide an overall and coherent framework for asking, classifying and discussing the main issues raised by economic diplomacy. It investigates concepts such as national interest, power and influence. It surveys the relevant literature and deals with various expressions of economic diplomacy such as export promotion agencies, economic role of embassies and consulates, or international economic sanctions. It analyzes the two-way relationship between international economics and international politics, which is at the core of economic diplomacy, and tries to answer the following questions: on the global scene, is diplomacy just accompanying the economy? Is diplomacy driving the economy?

The so-called “oil price war” of 2014-2016 took place between several main global oil producers; OPEC (led by Saudi Arabia), Russia and the newcomer; American tight oil or fracking oil. These oil producers were competing against each other over market shares in the global oil market, by maintaining their high oil production rates, even if this led to a decline in oil prices and a reduction in revenues from oil sales. As energy politics need more coverage in International Political Economy (IPE) theory, this paper aims to argue that Saudi Arabia's policies during the oil price war of 2014-2016 reflected a policy of neomercantilism, which is the IPE equivalent of the school of realism in International Relations (IR).

This paper tests for neomercantilism by testing three of its main definitional components. The first definitional component is that the state, as the political authority, intervenes in the economic decisions. The second component is the primacy of the state interests over business corporate profits, or the primacy of political and security considerations over short-term economic and corporate profit considerations. The third is the zero-sum or relative gains nature of dealings between states. Afterwards, this paper tests for neomercantilism in the Saudi policy by examining how each of these definitional components is reflected in the Saudi policy during the oil price war.

As energy politics need more coverage in International Political Economy (IPE) theory, this paper argues that Saudi Arabia's policies during the oil price war of 2014-2016 reflected a policy of neomercantilism, which is the IPE equivalent of the school of realism in International Relations (IR).

As energy politics need more coverage in International Political Economy (IPE) theory, this paper argues that Saudi Arabia's policies during the oil price war of 2014-2016 reflected a policy of neomercantilism, which is the IPE equivalent of the school of realism in International Relations (IR).

The purpose of this paper is to analyse international political economy (IPE) thought in Korea during its pre-modern and colonial eras.

It divides these eras into three periods. The first period is the eighteenth century, in which Silhak arose. The second is the mid- and late nineteenth century, a time characterised by conflicts between Wijeong-cheoksa and Gaehwa thoughts. The final period is that of colonial Korea under imperial Japan, and during this time economic nationalist movements were pursued while Marxist theories were also introduced to the country.

This research shows that IPE thoughts analogous to Western economic liberalism and economic nationalism did emerge endogenously in Korea when its environment was similar to those in which these Western thoughts arose, although in ways that reflected Korea’s peculiar situations of the times. This study also demonstrates that the “economic” thoughts of the Koreans in these periods were shaped largely by their political thoughts.

This research contributes to the building of a more “globalised” intellectual history of classical IPE thought.

The main purpose of the paper is to examine the truth behind allegations of neo-colonialism performed by China toward Africa, which was raised due to the growing relationship between China and Africa that enhanced the debate between supporters of the notion of neo-colonialism or mutual beneficial relationship. In addition to the growing number of arguments are on the dominance of PRC in Africa over the western powers as European Union or United States in the Continent.

The paper investigates the claims of neo-colonialism practiced by China toward Africa through the lenses of international political economy using the Interdependence theory of neoliberalists. Egypt was selected as a case study due to the emphases that Egypt gives to China as a strategic partner and as rising economic power as well as representing a way of diversifying Egypt's foreign policy and an additional economic partner beside the western ones. The research relied on two interwoven indicators to investigate the main argument: Trade and Development Aid.

The two pillars of analysis indicate that the growing relationship between Egypt and China is a form of interdependent relationship that is expected to get further complex in the future, which is relatively indicated among other things in the synergy Egypt has made between its Vision 2030 and China's Belt and Road Initiative. In reference to development aid, China uses different techniques that is not commonly used by the donors of Official Development Assistance (“ODA”), and due to unpublished actual data on China's aid figures, any indication of dominance is hard to attain regardless a solo incident of debt trap in Africa, the model of China's aid is provided through low-interest loans for development projects that is highly important for developing countries.

The paper tried to engage in the ongoing debate and examine the truth behind the neo-colonial allegations from the perspective of international political economy, which is an added value to the literature in this regard as the data provided are prepared for the present research purpose.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the major political and economic changes in the world and the likely impact that these changes will bring to tourism and hospitality industries.

The paper adopts a geopolitical perspective on the dynamics of tourist flows, stipulating that geopolitics has a major impact on the size, structure, and direction of these flows.

The paper identifies six geopolitical drivers of tourist flows in the future, namely: the fall of the American Empire, the rise of the BRIC and the PINE countries, increased global political instability, increased importance of regional supranational organisations, greater control of the individuals on a global scale, and the greater importance and power of corporations than national governments.

The paper critically evaluates the geopolitical drivers of tourist flows, their likely future development and the impact they have on tourism.