Peripheral Thoughts for International Political Economy: Latin American Ideational Innovation and the Diffusion of the Nineteenth Century Free Trade Doctrine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nineteenth-century Latin America saw more extensive innovative thought about international political economy than generally recognized. Far from simply imitating British free-trade doctrine, Latin Americans from that era actively modified it to produce distinctive revolutionary, conservative, and developmental rationales for free trade. Opponents of free trade also generated three varieties of Latin American protectionist thought—developmental protectionism, artisan political economy, and autarchic protectionism—that foreshadowed some aspects of post-1945 Latin American structuralist and dependency thought. These various ideational innovations involved both of dominant British free-trade doctrine as well as adaptation of alternative ideas diffusing from elsewhere (a process that we call alternative localization). They reveal new dimensions of the intellectual agency of actors in peripheral regions in the context of the international diffusion of ideas. They also highlight underappreciated diversity within, and overlap between, the historical international political economy (IPE) schools of economic liberalism and economic nationalism. More generally, recognition of these Latin American contributions helps to widen the historical foundations of IPE in ways that are more inclusive of the voices, experiences, knowledge claims, and contributions of those beyond the core powers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".