Editor’s Note
With the support of the university and the school, the School of Economics at Shanghai University of Finance and Economics is building the branded academic series Statecraft Economics · Frontiers of Political Economy. Relying on key academic initiatives including academic papers, monographs, seminars, lectures and research reports, the school further expands new room for the development of its political economy discipline. On the new journey toward Chinese‑style modernization, it contributes the insights and strengths of SUFE’s political economy discipline to the construction of the theoretical, knowledge and discourse systems of Chinese economics.
To thoroughly explore the theoretical logic and practical pathways for constructing China’s independent knowledge system in economics and advance the development of an economic theoretical system with Chinese characteristics, style and ethos, the Department of Political Economy, School of Economics, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, invited Professor Yang Hutao, Director of the Foreign Economic Thought History Research Office at the Institute of Economics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and Associate Editor of Journal of the History of Economic Thought, to deliver a special lecture titled Constructing China’s Independent Knowledge System in Economics on April 17. The lecture was hosted by Professor Mao Peihua, Deputy Dean of the School of Economics, and attended by all faculty members and graduate students of the Department of Political Economy.
01 The Necessity of Constructing an Independent Knowledge System
Professor Yang Hutao pointed out that global economic knowledge production is marked by obvious hierarchical features: academia in Europe and the United States holds the power to define core theories, while latecomer countries have long occupied a peripheral position as consumers and verifiers of theories. Addressing this predicament of dependency, he analyzed the necessity of building an independent knowledge system from three dimensions. First, regarding path dependence in knowledge production, scholars from latecomer countries often adopt prevailing analytical frameworks and study hot topics featured in international journals. As a result, unique local social phenomena tend to be filtered out due to insufficient relevant literature, and excessive pursuit of technical sophistication may divert research away from substantive contributions to the intellectual community. Second, concerning paradigm evolution in mainstream economics, economics shifted from theory‑dominated research in the 1970s to empirics‑dominated research in the 1990s. Chinese scholars entered this field amid the econometric revolution, which narrowed the space for theoretical development rooted in China’s local experience. Third, on the essential requirements for constructing an independent knowledge system, he emphasized that independence does not equal isolation or confrontation. Instead, it refers to the capacity to generate categories and develop theories with intellectual subjectivity. The goal is not merely to supplement existing theories with Chinese cases, but to participate in setting international standards by proposing new categories and propositions, transforming from “paradigm adopters” into “knowledge producers” and realizing equal academic dialogue.
02 The Epistemological Foundation for Constructing an Independent Knowledge System
From the perspective of philosophy of science, Professor Yang Hutao responded to the doubt that constructing an independent knowledge system would undermine the scientific nature of the discipline, and distinguished the fundamental differences between the Euclidean view of science and the Babylonian view of science. He noted that the Euclidean view of science pursues a single axiomatic system with strong exclusivity and applies to closed systems with stable parameters. In contrast, the Babylonian view allows multiple models to coexist and be continuously calibrated, making it better suited for guiding research on complex social science issues. On this basis, he elaborated on the essential nature of economics as a “toolkit”. In his view, economic theory is not a unified body of truth, but an engine for discovering truth. Economic models are essentially theoretical cases that serve as reference benchmarks. By comparing deviations from reality, researchers can identify new mechanisms rather than chase one single universal truth. Progress in economics lies in continuously expanding the library of context‑specific models. Building an independent knowledge system adds new categories and propositions to this toolkit and is therefore fully scientific and justified.
03 Feasible Pathways for Constructing an Independent Knowledge System
Professor Yang Hutao proposed two pathways for building the independent knowledge system: reconstructing existing stock of knowledge and capturing incremental knowledge. For the reconstruction of stock knowledge, he put forward an inverse law of complexity and exclusivity: short‑term microeconomic issues tend to have high exclusivity, whereas long‑term macro evolutionary issues feature low exclusivity and accommodate coexisting categories, which provides favorable conditions for constructing an independent knowledge system. He argued that theoretical exclusivity declines systematically as the time horizon extends, offering a clear analytical instrument for understanding the space of theoretical innovation in this undertaking. Taking Wang Yanan’s Principles of Chinese Economy as an example, he elaborated on the core methodology of jointly applying comparison, comprehensive analysis and developmental analysis, and explained the category reconstruction method that moves from the general to the particular and then back from the particular to the general. For capturing incremental knowledge, when new technologies or phenomena emerge and no mature theoretical system has yet been established, scholars who put forward new propositions and categories first can take the lead in setting knowledge production standards in that field. China has the world’s largest and most diverse application scenarios. It should seize the “activation window” of technological change to establish new standards from scratch.
At the end of the lecture, faculty and students engaged in a lively discussion with Professor Yang Hutao on topics including the applicability of scientific epistemology and the boundary definition of the Sinicized theoretical system. Professor Yang Hutao remarked that constructing China’s independent knowledge system in economics does not mean discarding existing scholarship. Instead, it requires extracting China‑specific categories and propositions across sub‑disciplines before forming a mutually supportive large‑scale system, which demands long‑term and solid accumulation.
In his concluding remarks, Professor Mao Peihua, Deputy Dean of the School of Economics, stated that starting from perspectives of philosophy of science and history, Professor Yang profoundly analyzed the dependency trap in economic knowledge production and systematically expounded the epistemological foundation and methodological pathways for building an independent knowledge system. This offers faculty and students a systematic framework for understanding this initiative. Moving forward, the school will continue to host thematic events focused on “constructing the independent knowledge system of socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics”, cultivate economic researchers with solid theoretical foundations and original research capacity, and contribute SUFE’s insights to the development of China’s independent knowledge system in economics.
