Maisonville, Derek2008-07-292008-07-292006-02http://hdl.handle.net/10315/1325http://www.yorku.ca/yciss/publications/documents/WP38-Maisonville_000.pdfThis paper will explore the practices and consequences of disciplinary IPE before turning to considerations of how to move beyond hegemonic disciplinary practices through incorporation of various critical approaches that remain too undisciplined for the field’s core. A dual purpose undergirds this paper: to speak to the disciplinary mainstream of IPE for the broadening of enclosed thinking spaces, and to challenge critical scholars to both engage GPE more actively and, in so doing, to reject the grounds that define legitimate knowledges. Indeed, in the words of Bleiker, my approach ponders the impossibility of “decenter[ing] the center through the language of the center.” Accordingly, it is argued that escape from the confines of this artificial ‘space’ is impossible in the absence of a critical framework that treats discipline as a verb rather than a noun and that denounces the binary oppositions that enable reified and spatial disciplinary ‘sites’ (and intermediating boundaries).enGlobal Political EconomyGPEInternational Political EconomyIPEdisciplinary practicesWorking Paper