Comparing Juvenile Justice Systems: Towards a Qualitative Research Project in East Asia

This paper contrasts the assumptions and methods used by quantitative criminologists with the approach to comparison pursued by the interpretive tradition in sociology. Whereas quantitative studies tend to conceal distinctive legislative or institutional responses in particular countries, interpretive studies make it possible to address internal debates about policy issues, as well as how practitioners exercise professional judgement. The paper considers a variety of ways in which the interpretive traditions of symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology have approached comparison. It also considers the conceptual and practical issues that might arise in conducting a qualitative comparative study about juvenile justice within East Asia focusing on Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Whereas quantitative studies tend to ask questions that interest Western researchers, interpretivism makes possible a dialogue between countries that have different institutions, philosophies and cultures.     

Antigovernment Networks in Civil Conflicts: How Network Structures Affect Conflictual Behavior

In this article, we combine a game‐theoretic treatment of public goods provision in networks with a statistical network analysis to show that fragmented opposition network structures lead to an increase in conflictual actions. Current literature concentrates on the dyadic relationship between the government and potential challengers. We shift the focus toward exploring how network structures affect the strategic behavior of political actors. We derive and examine testable hypotheses and use latent space analysis to infer actors’ positions vis‐à‐vis each other in the network. Network structure is examined and used to test our hypotheses with data on conflicts in Thailand from 2001 to 2010. We show the influential role of network structure in generating conflictual behavior.     

Creating value through external intellectual property commercialization: a desorptive capacity view

In open innovation systems, capturing value through external intellectual property (IP) commercialization is an increasingly important strategy for firms to keep pace with competitive changes. However, many firms have major difficulties in creating value through external patent exploitation. To understand these challenges, this paper explores how firms manage their external patent exploitation based on a multiple case study research design with fourteen firms from the pharmaceutical and chemical industry. Adopting a desorptive capacity perspective we find four main factors influencing the firms’ management of external patent exploitation: the type of value creation, the organizational structure, the locus of initiative, and the extent of know-how transfer along with the patent. Based on these factors, three archetypes of external patent exploitation with different levels of desorptive capacity are identified. The article extends the concept of desorptive capacity and existing literature on intellectual property management in the context of open innovation. Managerial implications helping firms to implement external IP commercialization structures are discussed.