This article is written like a
personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. (May 2023) |
Science diplomacy is the use of scientific collaborations among nations, international organizations, and non-profit organizations to address common problems and to build international partnerships. Science diplomacy has become an umbrella term to describe a number of formal or informal technical, research-based, academic or engineering exchanges. Along with e.g. economic, digital or para-diplomacy, it is a subcategory of the so-called new diplomacy, as opposed to the long-standing traditional diplomacy known to date. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Many of the global challenges related to health, economic growth, and climate change lay at the intersection of science and international relations. [6] Science diplomacy can therefore be seen as a sub-field of international relations [7] [8] [9] and typically involves at some level interactions between scholars and officials involved in diplomacy, [10] although whether scientist diplomats or diplomat scientists are more effective is an open question. [11]
The term ‘science diplomacy’ only began to emerge in the early 2000s, as a description of the need for new strategic partnerships at the country level to promote “activities of international cooperation and compromise on issues with a heavy scientific input”, on issues of global concern, such as biosafety. [12] This involved the development of strategic scientific relations between historical or potential rival countries or blocs as a way to promote scientific cooperation to the extent that it could hedge against diplomatic failures and reduce the potential for conflict. In the second half of the first decade of the twenty-first century, calls for the promotion of science diplomacy emerged in earnest, especially between the West and former Soviet Union countries. [13] [14] [15] [16] Forms of science diplomacy originated in previous centuries. The great voyages of exploration and colonization brought with them science-based diplomacy – such as trade in rifles in North America – as a form of diplomacy of influence.
One of the earliest ventures in joint scientific cooperation was in 1931 with the creation of the International Council of Scientific Unions, now the International Council of Science (ICSU). [17] Through partnerships with international science unions and national science members, the ICSU focuses resources and tools towards the further development of scientific solutions to the world's challenges such as climate change, sustainable development, polar research, and the universality of science.
The first major post-War science-based diplomatic initiative was the Baruch Plan, which sought to internationalize fission under the newly formed United Nations Atomic Energy Commission and stop an atomic arms race. [18] When this failed, the Cold War resulted, [19] and America developed a separate fission energy diplomatic program, the ' Atoms for Peace' initiative. [20]
The emergence of blocs during the era of industrial warfare also saw the deployment of technology as a means of influencing less developed countries, with the Cold War bringing ideologically bloc-based science diplomacy, in areas such as space exploration and the development of fission reactors and weapons, to its ultimate incarnation. [7]
John F. Kennedy established a science and technology cooperation agreement with Japan in 1961 following appeals to repair the “broken dialogue” between the two countries’ intellectual communities after World War II. That agreement helped round out a tenuous relationship at the time rooted only in security concerns. [21] [22]
In the 1970s, Henry Kissinger requested, and took, several science initiatives to his talks with China. These initiatives focused on areas in which both countries could participate; as evidenced in the Shanghai Communiqués. In 1979, when official diplomatic ties were established between China and the U.S., science played a big role in the shaping of renewed efforts, and December 2010 marked the 30th anniversary of normalized relations between the United States and China. [23]
In 1967, the African Scientific Institute was created to help African scientists reach others through published materials, conferences, seminars and provide tools for those who lack them. [24] And in 1996, countries with interests in the Arctic came together to form the Arctic Council to discuss sustainable development and environmental protection. [25] [26]
The attempts to conceptualise science diplomacy are still ongoing. There exists neither a clear-cut definition of the term nor a consensus on science diplomacy's stakeholders, instruments and activities. Science diplomacy as a discourse draws the attention of multiple social actors who present diverse interpretations of the concept. The debate is attended by researchers who study the history of science diplomacy or treat it as an empirical object as well as by actors who are or have been involved in science diplomacy practices. These are career diplomats, science counsellors/advisers, experts to national and international decision-making bodies, and politicians. Therefore, the definition of science diplomacy is not based on analytical categories but draws its meaning from a compilation of different narratives, approaches and ideas of changing and sometimes contested relations between science and foreign policy and the evolution of diplomacy and international relations per se. [27] [28] [29] [5]
There are numerous basic patterns via which scientific and technological advances influence international relations. These include:
Before the term science diplomacy was coined, science diplomacy initiatives—-at least in the United States—were often called “smart power” or “soft power” by those in the field. The term “soft power” was coined by Joseph Nye in the book, Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. [31] His notion of "smart power" became popular with the term's use by members of the Clinton and Obama administrations, although the Obama administration also used the term science diplomacy. [32]
In 2010, the Royal Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science [33] have categorized science diplomacy in three main types of activities:
In 2017, the current and former science advisers to the Foreign Ministers of the United States, New Zealand, the UK and Japan framed science diplomacy as:
CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science Rush D. Holt, Jr. wrote in his article “Scientific Drivers for Diplomacy” in Science & Diplomacy: “Beyond providing knowledge and applications to benefit human welfare, scientific cooperation is a useful part of diplomacy—scientific cooperation to work on problems across borders and without boundaries, cooperation made possible by the international language and methodology of science, cooperation in examining evidence that allows scientists to get beyond ideologies and form relationships that allow diplomats to defuse politically explosive situations.” [35]
Science diplomacy is taken to involve the direct promotion of a country's national needs, and/or the direct promotion of cross-border interests, and/or the direct meeting of global challenges and needs, including via the United Nations system. Its remit thus includes the global networked governance of such major global issues as development of renewable energy, management of climate change, fusion power, space exploration, and technology transfer. Science as a tool for diplomacy has been used for several decades and by many countries around the world. [36] [37] Science diplomacy can be seen as a form of networked and transnational governance, [38] [39] involving human collaboration, [40] especially via United Nations bodies such as UNESCO. [41]
Notable developments in science diplomacy arise as the result of scientific conferences and can feature the creation of international organizations to promote science diplomacy. Examples include the 1931 founding of the International Council of Scientific Unions, now the International Council of Science (ICSU); the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in 1954; the International Space Station in 1969; and the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor(ITER) in 2007. In more recent years, science diplomacy has been applied to pandemics and to the new age space race.
In particular, science diplomacy suggests a means for helping manage paradigmatic and disruptive change. For instance, the sheer scale of the problem of climate change has caused researchers to call for the reinvention of science communication in order to address humanity's cognitive limits in coping with such a crisis, [42] with the International Panel on Climate Change alone constituting a science-diplomacy nexus. [7] Especially within the context of the Sustainable Development Goals, the first calls to begin seeing science and its products as global public goods which should be tasked to fundamentally improve the human condition, especially in countries which are facing catastrophic change, are being made. [43] While both science and technology create new risks in and of themselves, they can also alert humanity of risks, such as global warming, in both cases transforming commerce, diplomacy, intelligence, investment, and war. [30] Science diplomacy challenges the way international relations operates as a field of human endeavor, presenting a ‘boundary problem’ involving actors from different social worlds. [44]
The civilian scientific exchanges between the United States and the then Soviet Union throughout the Cold War provide another example of science diplomacy. These collaborations linked the two countries when official diplomatic connections were stalled. [45] Today, the U.S. and Russia work together on the International Space Station and on the nuclear fusion science experiment ITER.
ITER is an international nuclear fusion research and engineering megaproject, which will be the world's largest magnetic confinement plasma physics experiment when it begins plasma operations. ITER began in 1985 as a Reagan–Gorbachev initiative with the equal participation of the Soviet Union, the European Atomic Energy Community, the United States, and Japan through the 1988–1998 initial design phases. Preparations for the first Gorbachev-Reagan Summit showed that there were no tangible agreements in the works for the summit.
Another example is the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN). Following a series of meetings, UNESCO hearings and a formal ratification by 12 member nations—Belgium, Denmark, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Yugoslavia— CERN was created. At present, CERN is run by 20 European member states, [46] but many non-European countries are also involved in different ways. Scientists from some 608 institutes and universities around the world use CERN's facilities. [47]
The European Union is also concerned with science diplomacy. Science collaboration is seen as a way to make diplomacy through "parallel means". [48] Several EU-funded projects are currently exploring and conducting research on the topic of science diplomacy.
Individuals who are not connected with the government have also practiced science diplomacy. For example, in 1957, American philanthropist Cyrus Eaton hosted a meeting of 22 scientists (seven from the United States, three each from the Soviet Union and Japan, two each from the United Kingdom and Canada, and one each from Australia, Austria, China, France, and Poland) in the village of Pugwash, Nova Scotia, Canada. [49] The stimulus for the gathering was a Manifesto issued on 9 July 1955 by Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein which called upon scientists of all political persuasions to assemble to discuss the threat posed to civilization by the advent of thermonuclear weapons. [50] The meetings eventually grew and gathered the attention of high level government officials. Since then, scientists have continued to gather at the Pugwash Conferences. Such initiatives can be understood as science diplomacy "from below".
Similar to individual initiatives, several non-profit organizations have continued science diplomacy practices in their work. CRDF Global, in partnership with the U.S. Department of State, launched the Global Innovation through Science and Technology (GIST) [51] initiative in 2010 in Egypt with follow-up meetings in Malaysia and Morocco in 2011. In addition to the GIST Initiative, CRDF Global has been active in both the United States and in the Middle East on promoting science diplomacy through conferences, panel discussions and programs including the Iraqi Virtual Science Library, Maghreb Virtual Science Library, and the Afghanistan Virtual Science Library.
The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) established the Center for Science Diplomacy [52] whose goal is to use science and scientific cooperation to promote international understanding. “It approaches this goal by providing a forum for scientists, policy analysts, and policy-makers through whom they can share information and explore collaborative opportunities”. In March 2012, the center launched the quarterly publication Science & Diplomacy [53] [54] Additionally, CRDF Global, the Partnership for a Secure America and AAAS have worked together on science diplomacy initiatives and events. [55] [56] [57] Others, such as the Science and Development Network (SciDev.Net) have dedicated an entire portion of their website for science diplomacy related articles, events and op-ed pieces.
Science diplomacy in the 21st century concerns open innovation and addresses global problems: it "encompasses the concept and practice of bridging distance and other divides (cultural, socioeconomic, technological, etc.) with focused and properly targeted initiatives to connect ideas and solutions with markets and investors..." [58]
The term "science diplomacy" gained popularity during the Obama administration, [32] and academics called for a 'new era' of science diplomacy. [13] In 2009, President Barack Obama called for partnership during his “A New Beginning” speech in Cairo, Egypt. [59] These partnerships would include a greater focus on engagement of the Muslim world through science, technology, and innovation building and connecting scientists from the United States to scientists in Muslim-majority countries. [60]
In a speech at the 2008 Davos World Economic Forum, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates, called for a new form of capitalism, that goes beyond traditional philanthropy and government aid. Citing examples ranging from the development of software for people who cannot read to developing vaccines at a price that Africans can afford, Gates noted that such projects “...provide a hint of what we can accomplish if people who are experts on needs in the developing world meet with scientists who understand what the breakthroughs are, whether it's in software or drugs.” He suggested that we need to develop a new business model that would allow a combination of the motivation to help humanity and the profit motive to drive development. He called it “creative capitalism,” capitalism leavened by a pinch of idealism and altruistic desire to better the lot of others. [61]
By the 2010s, the early emphasis on biosafety and plant genetic resources had given way to a longer list of specific risks for science diplomacy to address, including “the rising risks and dangers of climate change, a spread of infectious diseases, increasing energy costs, migration movements, and cultural clashes”. [37]:675 Additional areas of interest include space exploration; [62] the exploration of fundamental physics (e.g., CERN [63] and ITER [64]); the management of the polar regions; [7] [65] health research; [66] the oil and mining sectors; [67] fisheries; [68] and international security, [69] including global cybersecurity, [70] as well as enormous geographic areas, such as the transatlantic [38] and Indo-Pacific regions. [71] Increasingly, science diplomacy has come to be seen as a multilateral endeavor to address both global challenges and the matter of global goods, via science internationals (such as the Malta Conferences [72]); international NGOs, especially UN bodies; and various science-policy interfaces, [7] such as the U.S. National Academies system.
Several U.S. Government agencies, including the White House [73] the State Department, [74] and USAID have science and technology offices and advisors to aid with developing and creating S&T outreach policy. These advisors are regular speakers (e.g., J. Holdren, E.W. Colglazier, A. Dehgan, in 2010 and 2011) at meetings [75] of the Science Diplomats Club of Washington, to strengthen links with foreign "science diplomats". E.W Colglazier and Alex Dehgan have also contributed to Science & Diplomacy. [76]
On March 12, 2010, Congressman Howard Berman (D-CA) and Congressman Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) introduced the Global Science Program for Security, Competitiveness, and Diplomacy Act, [77] which proposed an increase in the application of science and scientific engagement in America's foreign policy.
Additionally, several non-profit organizations in the United States have continued science diplomacy practices in their work. CRDF Global, in partnership with the U.S. Department of State, launched the Global Innovation through Science and Technology (GIST) [51] initiative in 2010 in Egypt with follow-up meetings in Malaysia and Morocco in 2011. In addition to the GIST Initiative, CRDF Global has been active in both the United States and in the Middle East on promoting science diplomacy through conferences, panel discussions and programs including the Iraqi Virtual Science Library, Maghreb Virtual Science Library, and the Afghanistan Virtual Science Library.
The Malta Conferences Foundation seeks to provide a bridge to peace in the Middle East through science diplomacy. [78] Starting in 2001, Dr. Zafra Lerman began working with the American Chemical Society Subcommittee on Scientific Freedom and Human Rights to develop a scientific conference that would bring together researchers from many different, often mutually hostile, nations in the Middle East so they could cooperatively work toward solving problems facing the region. With support from the American Chemical Society (ACS), International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC), the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC - England), and the Gesellschaft Deutscher Chemiker, the first conference was held on the island of Malta from December 6 to 11, 2003. [79] [80] Attendees included six Nobel Laureates and scientists from 15 Middle Eastern Countries ( Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Palestinian Authority, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, and United Arab Emirates). [80] The conference included five workshops to foster cross-border collaborations:
The organizers followed up by hosting a second meeting two years later, Malta II. [81] The meeting was honored by United States Senator Dick Durbin in a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate entitled "Chemists Working Cooperatively". [82] Lerman led the initiative to continue with the conferences and founded the Malta Conferences Foundation to support them. She secured the support of UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. The American Association for the Advancement of Science awarded Zafra Lerman the 2014 Award for Science Diplomacy. [83]
In Spain, in December 2018, a group of stakeholders and experts on science diplomacy from around the world coming together at a global conference in Madrid defined several principles and highlighted the benefits of science diplomacy. As a result, the “Madrid Declaration on Science Diplomacy” was signed by a group of high-level experts who contributed to the conference. It proclaims a common vision of science diplomacy in the future, emphasises the benefits science diplomacy can bring to tackling the global challenges of our time and outlines the principles needed to foster science diplomacy worldwide. [84]
Global organizations, researchers, public health officials, countries, government officials, and clinicians have worked together to create effective measures of infection control and subsequent treatment. They continue to do so through sharing of resources, research data, ideas, and by putting into effect laws and regulations that can further advance scientific research. Without the collaborative efforts of such entities, the world would not have the vaccines and treatments we now possess for diseases that were once considered deadly such as tuberculosis, tetanus, polio, influenza, etc. Historically, science diplomacy has proved successful in diseases such as SARS, Ebola, Zika and continues to be relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic today.
During epidemics and pandemics, vaccines and drugs are an effective method for reducing incidence and mortality from diseases. Economically underdeveloped countries often face obstacles that hinder timely development and deployment of vaccines during times of crises, including structural barriers (which make transport more difficult) and monetary barriers. As a result, the collaboration with international institutions are important to develop and distribute treatments that can mitigate the effects of the outbreak. In the past, institutions including large pharmaceutical corporations have donated vaccine doses to underdeveloped countries, and charitable organizations have funded trials to test the efficacy of the vaccine. [85] [86] These collaborations are exemplified in various nations’ responses to the malaria, rotavirus, HIV/Aids, HPV, and COVID-19 outbreaks. [87]
With the rise of privatized space exploration and the growing competition with nations across the globe in the new age space race, space diplomacy refers to a globalized effort by scientists, national officials, and private corporations to reach a consensus on what is safe, effective, and sustainable space travel. In addition to possible space jurisdictions to each country interested in space travel, science diplomacy and space, or space diplomacy, can involve considerations towards environmental pollution or a set of international laws and legislations, such as the Outer Space Treaty.
Instead of showcasing military power in international relations, public relations have become the core of public diplomacy. With the fragile and complex political realities among nations, through leveraging global challenges, e.g., climate change, terrorism, and recent pandemics, public diplomacy becomes a strategic trigger to position a nation or tackle some critical challenges. As such, branding, seen as a creative tool used by policymakers towards individual projects, national policy sectors, or nation-states, can be used as a tool for science diplomacy. Three layers of branding have been identified: place branding, policy branding, and policy tool branding. Place branding is often used in policy-making, as is the case of countries like Singapore, Taiwan, and the United Arab Emirates, which use education policies to attract foreign universities and position their countries as science-oriented. Also, public health policy during pandemics uses policy branding, especially for social campaigns. Despite the paucity of research on how branding can aid science diplomacy, it can be part of the equation to advance science diplomacy. [88] [89] [90]
Part of a series on |
Science |
---|
This is a subseries on philosophy. In order to explore related topics, please visit navigation. |
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
:13
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Science & Diplomacy2
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)