From a Theory to a Paradigm: Examining the Eclectic Paradigm as a Framework in International Economics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the course of a quarter of a century, the eclectic paradigm has derived its strength from being a general framework of analysis that explains the level and pattern of foreign value-added activities of firms, and/or of countries, and allows for the co-existence of complementary and alternative theories in the discipline of international economics in a logically consistent manner without being inextricably wedded to any one particular approach. The current study aims to support such broad theoretical appeal of the paradigm by refining its theoretical interpretations of the concepts of ownership advantages and internalisation. To support its view that asset ownership advantages are both competitive advantages and monopolistic advantages, the theoretical interpretation of asset ownership advantages in the paradigm needs to be broadened from a narrow emphasis on Bain-type monopolistic advantages which enable firms to erect barriers to entry to new competition and exercise monopoly power in final product markets. It must also accommodate the theoretical perception of asset ownership advantages as part of the rivalrous behaviour or competitive process between firms consistent with the approach of Cantillon and the classical economists starting with Adam Smith, the Austrian economists such as Schumpeter and Hayek, as well as Penrose. The eclectic paradigm must also effectively address the important distinction between 'internalisation of ownership advantages or intermediate products' and the 'internalisation of the markets for ownership advantages or intermediate products' within the context of endogenous structural market imperfections in final products and exogenous transactional market imperfections in intermediate products. In clearly distinguishing between the alternative interpretations of the concepts of ownership advantages and internalisation, the paradigm could more effectively synthesise alternative theories of the firm and the multinational corporation in one cogent framework of economic analysis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.030 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".