How do foreign firms patent in emerging economies with weak appropriability regimes? Archetypes and motives

Foreign firms patent in emerging economies with weak appropriability regimes at an increasing rate. This phenomenon constitutes a paradox since in such a setting foreign firms should have weak incentives to patent. In an attempt to resolve this paradox, we conducted an inductive analysis of 11 foreign firms that patent in such a setting, using the case of China as our empirical context. We identify four archetypes of foreign firms and three key antecedents the interaction of which determines which archetype a firm can be subsumed under.Our study complements the developed-economy focus of the extant appropriation literature by adding an international perspective. We extend previous econometric studies by identifying salient factors on the firm level that determine the extent to which a foreign firm patents in emerging economies with a weak appropriability regime, highlighting that the extent of a firm's motivation to maintain its freedom to operate can supersede imitability concerns. We also comment on the practical implications of these contributions for managers of foreign firms. Highlighting a structural conflict of interest between foreign firms from developed economies and the development goals of an emerging economy, we point to the generalizability of our results to a wide range of other emerging economies worldwide.     

CONFRONTING THE RABIN ASSASSINATION IN OUR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

PART II The Subject Matter

Despite the Differences noted in the various curricula under consideration here, all three are dedicated to the proposition that knowledge is central to the forming of the Jew. The 1978 curriculum, appearing as it does at a time in which many Jewish educators have opted for an emphasis on affective experience, reaffirms the assertion that “An empty-headed person cannot be sin fearing, nor can an ignorant person be truly pious.” The centrality of subject matter in each of the curricula invites a comparison of the levels of achievement to which they aspire. In this section we propose an analysis of several areas of the curricula and thereby to arrive at an estimate of what the student “knows” and is capable of doing if the course of study in these subjects is completed as planned.     

A JEWISH SCHOOL MODEL FOR MORAL EDUCATION

Since Gaonic times a great deal of Jewish history had been made, and vast areas of Jewish living had been vitally affected by an intellectual device known as “Shaalot Utshuvot” (“Responsa”), an exchange of correspondence between two leaders of Jewish thought and learning. Something in the nature of such a responsum took place between our colleagues Drs. Judah Pilch and David Kuselewitz, on the occasion of the former's publishing an experimental edition of a proposed High School curriculum, in his former capacity as director of the Curriculum Research Institute.

We publish herewith David Kusele‐witz's reply to Judah Pilch's request for his evaluation of the curriculum proposal. Written in 1965, it is still very relevant to our troubles and our challenges, and offers much food for bold and innovative thought on several vital Jewish educational issues.