Between July and September, 2013, we surveyed members of the Global Congress community to learn more about their projects and priorities. We invited participation through email lists and solicited anyone who had either been to a Global Congress, been invited to one, or expressed interest in coming. We received around 90 responses.
Rather than create an agenda document, we’ve decided to let the responses speak mostly for themselves. We’ve split them into two parts: a searchable, sortable database for Current Projects (below) and a series of posts on Research Priorities (forthcoming on Infojustice) that compile perspectives on research opportunities and its relationship to policymaking in the next several years.
Here are the caveats: The responses are drawn from–but do not exhaustively reproduce–the responses we received. Responses have been cherry picked, edited, and loosely organized under primary themes. We favored detailed responses over lists of projects or statements of general interests or concerns. The list is also quite limited: it attributes projects to the person or persons who reported it–not necessarily to all contributors to a project. We can, of course, make adjustments where the attribution is clearly inadequate (let us know if that’s the case). But we are not aiming for a rigorous accounting of the research field, just a useful one given the usual constraints on time and resources. If this proves popular, we can discuss expanding it as part of future Global Congresses.
Priorities for Future Research
Want to Contribute 2-3 Paragraphs on Research Priorities?
|Primary Investigator(s) and/or Person Who Reported It||Research Venue||Project Title||Topic(s)||Geographical Focus||Description|
|Kimberlee Weatherall||University of Sydney, Australia||Testing Trade Mark Law's Image of the Consumer||Trademark||Australia||Project involves working with cognitive psychologists on finding useful ways to test confusion in trade mark law - ie empirical ways to test the 'rules of thumb' courts seem to adopt in most cases regarding what trademarks will lead to confusion. This is a three year project involving work with Trade Marks Office and Federal Court of Australia.|