REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY at the same time,tried to control for globalization's impact on China's economy,its culture,and on state policy and the state itself.These implica- tions have not been lost on scholars of international(IPE)and comparative political economy (CPE)in the People's Republic of China (PRC),who have focused considerable-if,as we shall argue,incomplete-attention on globalization's challenge to state sovereignty,to economic sovereignty, and on the economic role of the state.China's deep interaction with and its new position in the world economy in the reform era has occurred in tandem with a move away from a traditional Marxian-type analysis in which the state is merely derivative of the international or domestic eco- nomic substructure.Our examination of a broad swath of the comparative political economy literature shows a keen awareness of new threats posed by globalization,to which the Chinese state must respond.Indeed,there is Krenuef a degree of convergence with many topics raised in Western scholarship. Yet,in this article,we also highlight features of the Chinese scholar- S ship that are quite distinctive.This literature reflexively favours a strong role for the state in the context of globalization and contains a normative presumption that the state is playing.and should continue to play,an im- portant role under globalization.(This is in contrast to the conclusion of some economists in China that the state's role has been too pronounced, as noted in the Wang and Chin article.)We also observe that the literature in general is not oriented to theory-building,which makes it impossible to conclude that there is a Chinese school of thought on this topic.In- stead,the scholarship is largely policy-driven;there is a strong impulse- reflected even in the standard format of articles-to provide positive pol- icy advice to Chinese policy-makers.Most striking,in our view,is that the understanding of the state in the Chinese literature remains partial, rey ueyS] despite the strong assumption that the state should play a role.There is a marked reluctance to delve into either empirical or theoretical study of the Chinese state itself;the state itself as a subject of critical analysis is rarely considered.Such a gap in the research agenda has prevented the emergence of a body of work on the role of the state in China.The main papeojuMo point of evolution has been greater criticism of the US-dominated system after the 2008 financial crisis,consistent with the policy and popular view (and as reflected in debates over the existence of a unique 'China Model') as well as some criticisms by the 'New Left'.Yet,even this more critical line has not led to a new epistemology or to an undermining of the other dominant features we note.Why has a distinctive,if largely a-theoretical and non-innovative scholarship remained the norm,when it might be pre- supposed that China's unique position in the world economy would be reflected in new theoretical directions in either positive or critical scholar- ship?In our view,these features reflect the broader academic crucible in which knowledge production on CPE originated and continues to grow- a topic to which we return in our conclusion. 1216REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY at the same time, tried to control for globalization’s impact on China’s economy, its culture, and on state policy and the state itself. These implica￾tions have not been lost on scholars of international (IPE) and comparative political economy (CPE) in the People’s Republic of China (PRC), who have focused considerable – if, as we shall argue, incomplete – attention on globalization’s challenge to state sovereignty, to economic sovereignty, and on the economic role of the state. China’s deep interaction with and its new position in the world economy in the reform era has occurred in tandem with a move away from a traditional Marxian-type analysis in which the state is merely derivative of the international or domestic eco￾nomic substructure. Our examination of a broad swath of the comparative political economy literature shows a keen awareness of new threats posed by globalization, to which the Chinese state must respond. Indeed, there is a degree of convergence with many topics raised in Western scholarship. Yet, in this article, we also highlight features of the Chinese scholar￾ship that are quite distinctive. This literature reflexively favours a strong role for the state in the context of globalization and contains a normative presumption that the state is playing. and should continue to play, an im￾portant role under globalization. (This is in contrast to the conclusion of some economists in China that the state’s role has been too pronounced, as noted in the Wang and Chin article.) We also observe that the literature in general is not oriented to theory-building, which makes it impossible to conclude that there is a Chinese school of thought on this topic. In￾stead, the scholarship is largely policy-driven; there is a strong impulse – reflected even in the standard format of articles – to provide positive pol￾icy advice to Chinese policy-makers. Most striking, in our view, is that the understanding of the state in the Chinese literature remains partial, despite the strong assumption that the state should play a role. There is a marked reluctance to delve into either empirical or theoretical study of the Chinese state itself; the state itself as a subject of critical analysis is rarely considered. Such a gap in the research agenda has prevented the emergence of a body of work on the role of the state in China. The main point of evolution has been greater criticism of the US-dominated system after the 2008 financial crisis, consistent with the policy and popular view (and as reflected in debates over the existence of a unique ‘China Model’) as well as some criticisms by the ‘New Left’. Yet, even this more critical line has not led to a new epistemology or to an undermining of the other dominant features we note. Why has a distinctive, if largely a-theoretical and non-innovative scholarship remained the norm, when it might be pre￾supposed that China’s unique position in the world economy would be reflected in new theoretical directions in either positive or critical scholar￾ship? In our view, these features reflect the broader academic crucible in which knowledge production on CPE originated and continues to grow – a topic to which we return in our conclusion. 1216 Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 04:55 07 January 2015