Karl Polanyi and critical IPE: great transformations, the state and the importance of controlling the ‘rate of change’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The work of Karl Polanyi has figured prominently over the past two decades in critical international political economy (IPE) scholarship that attempts to understand the changing foundations of the world economy. Especially important have been the concepts of ‘embedded’ versus ‘disembedded’ economies and the double movement, which were embraced by John Ruggie in his pathbreaking effort to harness Polanyi to better understand changes in the Bretton Woods era during the 1980s. Most IPE scholarship follows Ruggie’s use of Polanyi, which we argue does not fully exploit the depth and scale of his usefulness. We extend the applicability of Polanyi’s ideas for IPE by considering two under-appreciated facets of his thought: his focus on the state as the most critical site of contestation through which world market is established and organised, and his concern for controlling the speed by which change unfolds in society, or what he called the ‘rate of change’. Both facets are underpinned by Polanyi’s deeply historical account of global change and transformation. Including these into our use of Polanyi extends the utility of his ideas to better understand contemporary developments such as technological change and the resurgence of nationalism and populism, which are the well-springs of the next great transformation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".