Oh, never mind, it looks like it's just a dog whistle word for free-market types.

Which is why I'm going to replace it with the post-modern dog whistle word "intersections." Take that, Adam Smith. Bwa ha ha.

"dog-whistle word," hee hee.

Miko, your comment gains 10 points for being positioned, on my screen at least, as if it were a caption for Tubbs the MeCha sidebar dog.

Tubbs turned his head like that when he heard you say "intersections." He's a pomo puppy.

He's a pomo puppy.

You can tell, can't you? He's obviously pondering the various levels of discourse here, and how they overlap with the impossibility of authorship (can we really *own* our own words once they are released into a virtual "reality"?), the shifting identities that are both enhanced and obscured by a purely textual forum (does the occasional portrait thread shatter the illusion or simply make it explicit?), and the problems of determining intentionality (are you planning on finishing that sandwich on your desk? Because it looks really good and I've been a good puppy! *thump, thump thump*).

Nonsense! Political economy isn't a dog-whistle word at all.

It means the study of political institutions by economists, so for example, you look at the effect of separation of powers on economic growth, the relative merits of parliamentary and presidential systems, the optimal mechanisms for preventing politicians from rent-seeking etc etc. 'Institutions' can include things like social norms, the rule of law and levels of trust and reciprocity, not just the obvious concrete stuff like the legislature and judiciary. To some extent, you could say that it's the intersection of Political Science and Economics, though in practice it tends to be that economists apply economic models to politics without always paying that much attention to what political scientists think

"Intersections" is a hideous hand-wavy term, and since Political Economy is a long-established term in its own right I would keep it.

I think matthewr is correct: in my experience in academia, the term refers to the study of politics [subject matter] by means of economics [methodology], thus distinguishing it from, say, financial economy etc. This is similar to the use of the term "sexual politics" which does not really indicate the intersection of the two, but rather the "political" aspects of sexuality.

Also, for full disclosure, I am a free-market type.

Came in here to say, essentially, what Matthewr said.

The thing is, it's not really all that important a point in the article I'm writing -- I'm not trying to get in depth about what they're doing, just give a two-sentence "Here's the overall deal" intro before talking about a specific program. So, in an intro sentence, saying they deal with "politics, economics, and political economies" sounds like I can't come up with more interesting words, and I think, in terms of writing-style concerns, it'll make people tune out or gloss over. Especially for a piece that's not going out to political or economic types, but to a general-public audience.

In that case, it's probably best to just drop the phrase altogether, rather than muddy the waters.

I'm itchin' to muddy the waters, though.

Not because I'm particularly annoyed with "political economy," but because I really hate the organization I'm writing about and I have to write as if I'm enthusiastic, and it's pissing me off. Grrrrrr.

This is what I get for working for The Man. ;-)

In that case I would skip "political economy" because it doesn't really add anything to the non-specialist's understanding of what they do. Any economist or political scientist will understand that an organisation that deals with "politics and economics" will be dealing with political economy as well without you having to spell that out. Good luck with the piece!

Thanks!

Oh, and you can do whatever you want, but don't say "political economies". It's never pluralised.

Thanks. I actually keep correcting myself in typing here; missed that one above.

Perhaps they should *consider* pluralizing it. I think it's catchier. :-)

eco political, the Green Party.

and Tubbs sez I'll bite on that.

Yeah, in a nonspecialist setting the organization studies politics and economics.

"Political economy" is one of those squirrelly concepts that academics use.

Sometimes it means study of the intersection of politics and economics. People who study international political economy tend to study thing like trade policies and trade pacts, or how government policies affect trade flows or capital flows, and so on.

Other times, it might mean "any study that uses any sort of formal mathematical or logical modeling, which is common in economics." My dissertation got nominated for a political economy award, and it's a study of legislatures with not a goddam word about economics, but it does have a game-theoretic model. It didnae win.