Text 1: Economist Dr. Helen Stone defends intellectual property. "Patents incentivize innovation by ensuring inventors profit from their work," Stone argues. "Without protection, creators would underinvest in research and development."
Text 2: Development economist Dr. James Kim examines global effects. "Strict IP regimes exclude poor countries from essential technologies," Kim observes. "Life-saving medicines remain unaffordable. The innovation incentive argument ignores distribution—who benefits from what gets created."
What consideration does Kim add to Stone's innovation argument?
That patents don't actually exist as legal instruments
That the distribution of innovation's benefits matters alongside creation incentives
That inventors have no economic interests
That research and development never occurs
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Stone focuses on creation incentives. Kim adds access concerns—who benefits from innovation. Creation without access leaves populations excluded from benefits.
- Evidence: Kim: Stone's argument "ignores distribution."
- Reasoning: Incentivizing creation doesn't guarantee equitable access.
- Conclusion: Kim adds distribution to Stone's creation-focused analysis.
Choice A is incorrect because Kim engages IP regimes. Choice C is incorrect because Kim acknowledges inventor interests. Choice D is incorrect because Kim discusses R&D products.