Thank-you for this response, Patricia.

I don't doubt the effort involved or the value of the product, but it seems to me that if the aim was to create a database of researchers, then it seems somewhat inefficient and slightly old-fashioned to do this as a static survey which is entirely dependent on time-limited funding rather than to create an easily updatable active database, that could be altered and added to without significant financial implications.

Perhaps next time the Japan Foundation do fund something like this, this kind of model could be considered, and a small amount built into the bid for the maintenance of the database in between major iterations, which would deal with the financial implications of adding new people or changing existing details (the doctoral student information is clearly particularly time-limited). It would add significant further value to an already valuable output.

Just to make it very clear - none of what I say here should be taken as implying that I don't think this is a worthwhile project - it's excellent - but it could have been even more useful than it already is - and more importantly, could be next time around.

All the best,

David.