Taylor Wessing is an unverifiable survey.
Cohen et al. ’22 [Mark, Ani Harutyunyan, and Matthew Chervenak; 2022; Senior Fellow at Berkeley Center of Law and Technology and Director of BCLT’s Asia IP Project, with over 30 years’ experience as a law firm attorney, in-house counsel, government official, and adjunct and visiting professor of law, and was previously Senior Counsel and Senior Advisor to the Undersecretary of Commerce/ Director of the USPTO; Edison Innovation Law and Policy Fellow at George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School, holds PhD in Economics and published in a variety of peer-reviewed scientific journals; entrepreneur and investor in data, healthcare, real estate, and public policy, founder and President of the Sunwater Institute; Sunwater Institute, a nonprofit, nonpartisan interdisciplinary think tank, “Measuring Intellectual Property Rights: Existing Indices, Addressing Gaps and Suggestions for Policymakers,” North Bethesda, MD: Sunwater Institute]
Another measurement concern is the replicability of the indices. The results of the study conducted by Taylor Wessing LLP are partly based on a worldwide survey of assessments given by IP owners and users, and it is unclear how the raw data were reduced to specific ratings. The study for the IIPI is conducted by Pugatch Consilium consultancy, which provides in-depth explanations of the scoring methodology for each indicator used in the study. Although most of the indicators can be easily duplicated based on the described methodology, some of the indicators are measured based on the author’s expertise; hence the ability to replicate those results without that vast experience is limited. The replications of the IPR and the PEI are relatively straightforward due to the limited number of indicators included in the measurements and the simplicity of the scoring methods.