A1. Survey methodology
The survey methodology is designed to achieve the outlined objectives. It comprises the definition of the target population, the development of the questionnaire, the quota-based sampling design, the data collection mode and the post-stratification weighting approach. Each of these components is described in the following subchapters.
The target population was defined as the general world population aged 18 to 65. In practice, it is represented in the survey through selected national populations. Quota stratification was designed to ensure data collection across the world regions and to achieve national representativeness within each country. This national representativeness is based on three socio-demographic characteristics: gender, age group and place of residence (region within the country).
The countries are grouped into five global regions following the United Nations Regional groups
In each country, 500 interviews were conducted with respondents from the target population, with the exception of Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago. These four were combined into a single “Caribbean states” group due to accessibility and representativeness considerations. Individually, these countries posed challenges such as limited online panel reach, smaller populations and difficulties in achieving consistent national samples. Grouping them allowed for a stable and analytically meaningful respondent base while still reflecting the region’s diversity. A total of 500 interviews were conducted for the “Caribbean States” group as a whole.
In total, 35,500 interviews were conducted worldwide across all 74 surveyed countries.
A2. Questionnaire design
The 2025 survey used the same questionnaire as in 2023, which had undergone rigorous testing during its initial development phase, including comprehensive pilot interviews conducted under real interview conditions. These pilots ensured the applicability and clarity of question wording, the appropriateness of any explanatory notes, and the overall interview length.
Given the questionnaire’s unchanged content and structure in 2025, no additional pilot testing was deemed necessary. The stability of the instrument supports comparability across survey waves, while avoiding respondent fatigue and ensuring continuity in measuring key concepts consistently over time.
A3. Language coverage and adaptation
The final questionnaire, originally developed in English, was translated into 33 languages. These translations were provided and reviewed by WIPO to ensure accuracy and appropriateness for each target country. Through this multilingual approach, the main official national language(s) of each of the 74 target countries were covered comprehensively.
In countries with multiple official languages, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, Canada, Kazakhstan and Switzerland, respondents were given the option to complete the survey in any of the respective official languages. Additionally, in Morocco, it was also offered in French. These measures were implemented to maximize inclusivity and minimize the exclusion of population groups due to language barriers.
During the translation process, WIPO provided adaptations to address culturally sensitive concepts and ensure the precise translation of intellectual property (IP)–specific terminology, thus preserving the conceptual equivalence and legal relevance across different languages and cultural contexts.
A4. Sampling
Sampling is the process of selecting a subset of individuals from the broader population to collect data relevant to the study’s objectives. For the WIPO Pulse survey, the target population was defined as the general world population, operationalized through coverage of 74 countries spanning five global regions.
Data collection was conducted via national online access panels provided by the fieldwork partners Cint
Quota sampling was applied to control for key demographic characteristics such as age, gender and geographical region at the national level. Each national sample was designed to reflect the composition of the population. To ensure minimum analytical power and comparability across countries, the study implemented a fixed target of 500 completed interviews per country. While this leads to disproportionate representation in terms of population size at the global level, it allows for robust analysis at the country level.
Disproportionalities introduced by this fixed-country sampling design were subsequently corrected during the weighting stage through post-stratification adjustments.
A5. Mode of data collection
The survey was conducted using the Computer-Assisted Web Interviewing (CAWI) methodology. This mode was selected for several key reasons. CAWI enables rapid data collection across multiple countries and regions, making it highly suitable for large-scale international surveys. The online format ensures standardized presentation of questions, response options and routing, minimizing interviewer effects and improving data consistency. CAWI allows respondents to complete the survey at their preferred time and pace, which can improve response quality and reduce respondent burden.
To ensure data quality within the CAWI framework, several mode-specific quality control measures were implemented. The survey platform incorporated real-time input validation to prevent inconsistent or out-of-range responses, ensuring data completeness and accuracy. Embedded attention-check questions and minimum completion time thresholds helped identify and exclude inattentive or fraudulent responses. The online panels used for recruitment undergo regular verification procedures, including double opt-in and identity validation, to maintain panel integrity.
Since the CAWI mode was used exclusively across all countries and waves of the survey, mode equivalence concerns commonly associated with mixed-mode designs were inherently avoided. This consistency supports comparability of results across countries and survey years. Additionally, the survey questionnaire was optimized for diverse devices, including desktops, tablets and smartphones, ensuring a consistent respondent experience regardless of device type.
A6. Fieldwork
The survey fieldwork was conducted between February 20 and April 25, 2025. A database-driven sample management system was employed to implement quota controls and monitor progress throughout the fieldwork period.
To promote a representative and random distribution of respondents within the gross sample, panel members were randomly assigned to invitation batches. These batches were processed sequentially, with each batch being closed once the target number of completes was reached. Invitations were distributed across different times of day and multiple days to reduce potential time-of-day bias and maximize response rates.
Prior to the full-scale launch, a soft launch was conducted in each country, consisting of 30 to 50 completed interviews. This phase served to verify the technical functionality and linguistic accuracy of the country- and language-specific web survey versions. Following successful validation, the main data collection phase proceeded to gather the remaining 450 to 470 interviews per country.
The overall average interview duration was approximately 10 minutes.
A7. Data processing and validation
To ensure consistency in data quality and methodological rigor across all participating countries, all processes related to questionnaire programming, data cleaning and dataset preparation were fully centralized.
To safeguard against low-quality responses, a dedicated attention check question was embedded in the questionnaire. Additionally, throughout the fieldwork period, samples of completed interviews from each country were randomly reviewed to assess response validity, internal consistency and overall reliability. These reviews included checks on unusually fast completion times, illogical answer patterns, and evidence of straight-lining. Furthermore, the language-specific interpretation of key questions was monitored continuously during the fieldwork period to ensure conceptual equivalence and clarity across different translations.
Following the completion of fieldwork, all data underwent a multi-stage validation process. This included comprehensive checks for completeness of responses, the correct application of conditional logic, and internal consistency across related items. Particular attention was paid to the plausibility of response patterns, especially for outliers and potentially non-substantive or systematically patterned data entries.
Due to the real-time quality control during data collection, the dataset did not contain missing values requiring imputation. Any interview that failed logic or quality checks during the validation stage was excluded from the final dataset to ensure the integrity and comparability of the results.
A8. Nonresponse analysis
A comprehensive nonresponse analysis was carried out as part of the data quality assurance process. Response rates were calculated for each country to identify potential indications of nonresponse bias. These rates varied across countries but remained well within the expected range for online panel surveys.
To assess nonresponse bias more thoroughly, the characteristics of the data were compared with national socio-demographic benchmarks. This comparison helped detect any deviations resulting from differential participation across subgroups. In most countries, such deviations were minimal, demonstrating the effectiveness of quota-based sampling during fieldwork. Additionally, available information on non-response was used to compare key characteristics with those of respondents. These comparisons revealed no systematic differences likely to impact the survey results.
To address any remaining bias, post-stratification weights were applied. Preventive measures were also implemented during fieldwork to reduce the risk of nonresponse bias from the outset. These included quota controls, random sampling within defined strata, real-time monitoring, and an attention-check question to ensure data quality. Collectively, these measures helped minimize bias and supported the validity and comparability of findings across countries and regions.
A9. Post-stratification weighting
Post-stratification aims to adjust the data after the completion of the fieldwork to better reflect the structure of the target population. For this purpose, weights are calculated and applied to the raw data before generating statistical results. The analysis of the WIPO Pulse survey data produces representative results at the national, world regional and global levels. This representativeness has been achieved through a two-step post-stratification weighting design.
The first step ensures that the data from each country accurately represents its respective national population. To achieve this, quota-based weighting was applied on three key socio-demographic dimensions: gender, age groups and place of residence (region within the country). These quotas have been already in use during sampling and fieldwork to align the collected data as closely as possible with national population targets. However, to correct for any remaining deviations, post-stratification weights are introduced.
The second step of the post-stratification weighting process ensures that the data is also representative at the regional and global levels. Since the same number of interviews was conducted in each country, population weights had to be applied in order to adjust for disproportionate sampling. As a result, each country contributes in proportion to its actual population size, giving more populous countries a greater impact on the regional and global figures.
Data from each of the four Caribbean countries that were combined into a single “Caribbean states” group underwent the first weighting step to improve national representativeness. In a subsequent step, the data from these four countries was aggregated using population weights, similar to the second step of the overall weighting process. Therefore, the “Caribbean states” group reflects well the population of the individual countries and the Caribbean as a region.
The following tables present the actual sample size (number of completed interviews) for each country and country group alongside the population-weighted sample size obtained after the second stage of the post-stratification weighting process. The population-weighted sample size represents the estimated number of individuals in the target population (aged 18 – 65) for each country or country group.
A10. Statistical testing and significance
All reported differences and findings, such as comparisons between the 2023 and 2025 survey results, are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level, unless otherwise noted. Statistical significance is assessed using standard inferential methods, including tests for differences in means and proportions. A p-value threshold of 0.05 is applied, meaning the probability of observing a given difference by chance is less than the specified threshold. This ensures that the highlighted trends and patterns are unlikely to be random variations and instead reflect meaningful differences in the data.
A11. Analytical basis per topic
To clarify the data underlying each thematic analysis in this report, the table below summarizes the analytical basis used. The section “Perception of IP rights” utilizes filtered data: only responses from participants who demonstrated a qualified understanding of the respective IP subject matter were included in the analysis. This approach ensures that the reported findings are based on informed responses.
A12. Inter-wave comparison
To ensure comparability between the 2023 and 2025 surveys, particular attention was given to methodological consistency. The questionnaire remained unchanged in wording, structure and order across both years, allowing for direct comparison of variables without the need for additional harmonization.
The mode of data collection was identical in both waves (CAWI), and the sampling followed the same framework and strategy. The only modification was the exclusion of respondents who had participated in the 2023 survey wave. This step was taken to ensure independent cross-sectional samples and to minimize potential response biases from repeated participation, such as panel conditioning or learning effects. Despite this adjustment, the sampling design continued to follow quota-based principles to ensure national representativeness.
The same 50 countries surveyed in 2023 were included again in 2025, with an additional 24 countries added in this wave. This expansion does not introduce methodological inconsistency, as the same sampling and weighting procedures were applied uniformly across all countries. On the contrary, by broadening the data base with more countries and interviews, it strengthens the reliability of regional and global estimates by improving geographic coverage and reducing variability in the aggregated results.
To verify that observed differences between 2023 and 2025 reflect actual developments rather than methodological inconsistencies, measurement conditions were carefully controlled. Additional socio-demographic benchmarks were monitored throughout and showed no irregular shifts across the survey waves, supporting the stability and comparability of the achieved samples. Where relevant, subgroup analyses, distribution checks, and other validation methods were employed to help confirm that the observed trends represent genuine changes rather than artefacts of measurement.
A13. Limitations
While the survey was designed to ensure high data quality and comparability, several limitations should be acknowledged.
The exclusive use of CAWI excludes individuals without internet access or sufficient digital literacy, potentially underrepresenting certain demographic groups such as older adults or those from particular socio-economic backgrounds. In countries with lower internet penetration, national online access panels may not fully reflect the general population. Post-stratification weights based on population benchmarks were applied to improve representativeness, however, some coverage bias may persist.
Despite preventive measures such as quota sampling and weighting adjustments, certain population segments, particularly harder-to-reach or less engaged individuals, may still be underrepresented. As a result, residual nonresponse bias cannot be entirely ruled out.
The fixed sample size of 500 respondents per country allows for reliable national-level estimates but limits the statistical power of subgroup analyses. Results broken down by age, gender or other socio-demographic characteristics should therefore be interpreted with appropriate caution. For regional and global level representativeness, a second post-stratification weighting step was applied to adjust for differences in national population sizes. This ensures that each country contributes to the results in proportion to its actual population. As a result, individual interviews from highly populated countries carry more weight in the regional and global aggregates than those from smaller countries. This means that variation or outliers within large-population countries can have a disproportionate impact on regional and global results, which should be taken into account when interpreting them.