“States and new markets: The novelty problem in the IPE of finance”. Review of International Political Economy. [First view online]. (with Christian Elliott).

Finance has changed, and the study of finance needs to change with it. Previously marginal actors – hedge funds, index providers, tech firms, etc. – have become lynchpins in the global financial system. Likewise, the traditional subjects of international political economy (IPE) – states, IOs, banks, central banks, etc. – are engaging in once-peripheral spheres. Yet, these novel trends have been largely ignored in mainstream political science and international relations venues for IPE scholarship. We demonstrate this through a discussion of two trends – the rise of shadow banking and central bank involvement in climate change – and an analysis of publications in top international relations and political science journals. While previous commentaries identify a methodological and epistemological divide in IPE,, our results suggest an empirical one. We then construct a practical framework to remedy this problem by returning to the work of Susan Strange. Strange’s approach embodied a radical ontology, a focus on structures and their interaction, and an analytical eclecticism that provided keen insights into the politics of finance.We argue that these principles, often embraced in Review of International Political Economy, should be applied more broadly for IR scholars to better contribute to emerging political economic issues.

“Silencing the crowd: China, the NBA, and leveraging market size to export censorship”. Review of International Political Economy. 29(4): 1112-1134.

While censorship within China has been a longstanding phenomenon, efforts to suppress information and to reshape perception of China abroad have become increasingly widespread and sophisticated. Recently, this trend has manifested through several high-profile incidents of foreign firms censoring controversial content outside of China in order to retain access to the Chinese consumer market. This article argues that China is uniquely situated to leverage this type of market power due to its enormous, growing consumer base and authoritarian structure. This form of ‘exporting’ censorship can occur in three ways: content bans, position reversal, and self-censorship. Outward-facing firms, especially in the entertainment industry, are particularly vulnerable to this type of pressure as their employees, including actors, athletes, and celebrity CEOs, may have an independent following and audience for their personal views. By analyzing the controversy between China and the National Basketball Association over a single tweet in support of pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong, this article demonstrates the conditions under which censorship efforts may be outsourced to private, foreign actors in jurisdictions outside of China.