Science diplomacy

Science diplomacy describes how scientific exchanges and the cross-border collaboration of scientists and scientific organizations can perform diplomatic functions as part of international relations. Most often this diplomacy happens as part of scientific cooperation as a means of building relationships between states and within international organizations. Science diplomacy is a process by which states, international organizations and non-state actors represent themselves and their interests. It is a global phenomenon.

Science diplomacy includes a number of formal or informal technical, research-based, academic or engineering exchanges. It typically involves interactions between researchers and officials involved in diplomacy. Science diplomacy aims to address common problems. However, especially in times of international conflict, it is sometimes unclear if and how the actual policies and associated organizations can meet the expectations placed on science diplomacy.

Definitions
The concept of "science diplomacy" is of relatively recent origin: Attempts to define and classify practices as science diplomacy date from the beginning of the 21st century. Before the concept became popular, which happened in the West notably during the Obama administration, science diplomacy initiatives were often called "smart power" or "soft power". Along with e.g. economic, cultural, digital, data or para-diplomacy, science diplomacy can be understood as a subcategory of the so-called new diplomacy, as opposed to the traditional diplomacy known to date.

Today, historians use the term science diplomacy retrospectively as an analytical category to examine past forms and earlier developments, while the debate on contemporary science diplomacy initiatives is attended by scholars who treat it as an empirical object as well as by actors who are or have been involved in science diplomacy practices. These are often career diplomats, science counsellors/advisers, or experts to national and international decision-making bodies and politicians. Whether scientist diplomats or diplomat scientists are more effective is an open question. Science diplomacy was and is an area of work in which multiple actors present diverse interests and interpretations. However, recent scholarship criticizes that the Global South is still underrepresented in many aspects of the science diplomacy discourse.

There exists neither a clear-cut definition nor a consensus on science diplomacy's stakeholders, instruments and activities. The definition of science diplomacy 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. In 2010, the Royal Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have coined a widely used theoretical framework that describes three main types of activities:
 * "Science in diplomacy": Science can provide advice to inform and support foreign policy objectives
 * "Diplomacy for science": Diplomacy can facilitate international scientific cooperation
 * "Science for diplomacy": Scientific cooperation can improve international relations

Yet the focus on these three activities can lead to an under-representation of the use of science for competitive purposes or even to a mystification of science as a complexity-reducing enterprise. The theoretical framework of science diplomacy is under scrutiny as it grapples with the tension between idealistic goals and practical imperatives in an era characterized by new international conflicts and global crises. Most critics have emphasized the significant vulnerability of science as a public good.

History
Cross-border scientific negotiations on the environment, global health crises, or scientific intelligence gathering are not recent concerns. International affairs and scientific exchange have a long history together. Even if not called "science diplomacy" at the time: early forms were evident in the great voyages of exploration and especially colonization brought with it science-based diplomacy and influence.

An early and widespread practice of science diplomacy is advisory work to governments. In Australia, this process was formalised on the recommendation of Sir Frank Heath to the Australian Government in 1926. Heath was the Secretary of the UK Department of Scientific Industry. He recommended that the Government establish the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research with the function to carry out research to support Australian primary and secondary industry but with the additional function "to act as a means of liaison between the Commonwealth and other countries in matters of scientific research". The Australian Government agreed with all recommendations and appointed Frank Lidgett McDougall its Scientific Liaison Officer in London in 1927 to deal with questions of scientific progress and policy.

Notable developments in science diplomacy also arose as the result of scientific conferences and featured the creation of international organizations. In the 19th century, the increasing specialization of disciplines prompted experts to achieve more coordination. Hence they held international meetings to discuss the standardization of scientific methods, practices, nomenclature or units. The International Association of Academies (IAA) was created in 1899 as a result of such efforts. At that time, European scientists played formal or informal diplomatic roles by using their networks to gain competitive advantage in discussions on the colonization of distant territories, e.g., during the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885. By the end of World War I, the academies of the Entente Powers reorganized the IAA to deliberately exclude their colleagues from the Triple Alliance, especially German scientists, who had massively supported military actions, including by signing the Manifesto of the Ninety-Three. The IAA's successor, the International Research Council (IRC), was formed in 1919 and succeeded in keeping German scientists at margin. There were attempts to restablish contacts, particularly through transforming the IRC into the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) in 1931. However, the onset of World War II compromised cooperation in the Global North. Durable links were only re-established when the war was over. The first major post-World War II science-based diplomatic initiative was the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission to stop an atomic arms race. The initiative failed, the Cold War begun, and in the 1950s the United States developed a separate program, the Atoms for Peace initiative, made famous by a conference held at the UN office at Geneva in 1955. Most importantly, the Atoms for Peace initiative provided the basis for the founding of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 1957. The IAEA engaged quickly in the promotion of science diplomacy initiatives. The IAEA's function since then has been to encourage cooperation while providing safeguards of nuclear technologies. However, the United States was far from being the only state pursuing diplomatic initiatives related to either nuclear weapons or the peaceful use of nuclear energy. For example, Atoms for Peace and the 1954 Castle Bravo thermonuclear weapons test contributed to Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs intensifying its diplomatic activities on nuclear issues as part of a wider range of science-related activities, including initiating a science attaché program in 1954 and creating a dedicated Science Division in 1958.

The Cold War involved the development of strategic scientific relations as a way to promote cooperation to the extent that it could hedge against diplomatic failures and reduce the potential for conflict, with hegemonic interests informing science diplomacy practices. Collaborations linked the two Cold War blocs when official diplomatic connections were stalled. However, scientific exchange also offered an opportunity for intelligence gathering, including by the United States in Western Europe. Cold War science diplomacy was often to mediate the circulation of knowledge and materials, but also to create or rebuild exchange: In 1961, John F. Kennedy established a science and technology cooperation agreement with Japan 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. Yet, even in the immediate post-World War II period, there were examples of US-Japan exchange, such as in the co-production and cooperation between Japanese scientists and American science administrators in the founding of the Science Council of Japan.

The emergence of two Cold War power blocs also saw the deployment of science and technology as a means of peacefully influencing other countries in areas such as space exploration, geography, or the development of fission reactors. Technical assistance programs flourished for the so-called "Third World", economically developing countries, and potential allies. For instance, the Sino-Hungarian cooperation in geophysics evolved against the backdrop of the radicalization of Chinese politics and growing tensions between the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China after 1956.

Developing countries also engaged in science diplomacy as part of cross-bloc competition, such as the People’s Republic of China using everything from the development of new flood control techniques in the 1950s to the launch of its first artificial satellite in 1970 as part of its “people’s diplomacy” strategies. Such science-related outreach was an important part of China’s foreign relations during the decades before its entry into the United Nations in 1971 and accompanying rapid expansion in its normalized diplomatic relations with other countries. Henry Kissinger requested, and took, several science initiatives to his talks with China. Scientists featured prominently in the early exchanges and initiatives that were a part of the Sino-American rapprochement process leading to normalization of relations in 1979. Exchanges related to science and technology were explicitly mentioned in the Shanghai Communiqué. The increasing participation of recently independent, de-colonizing countries in international technoscientific affairs illustrate fundamental but yet underexplored transitions in international affairs during and since the 1970s.

Science diplomacy and international organizations
Science diplomacy involves the promotion of a country's interests and/or it is taken to involve the meeting of global challenges and needs. Science as a tool for diplomacy has been and is used by many countries around the world. However, international organizations are also relevant promoters and actors of science diplomacy. It can therefore be seen as a form of networked and transnational governance, including via the United Nations system, especially via bodies such as UNESCO. Through partnerships with international science unions and national science members, the International Science Council (ISC) (a merger of the ICSU with the International Social Science Council (ISSC) in 2018) focuses resources and tools towards the development of scientific solutions to the world's challenges.

In Continental Europe, two international organizations with a scientific mission are widely considered as models for science diplomacy: At the end of World War II, Europe had to rebuild itself politically, economically, and in terms of scientific exchange. In this context, 12 countries joined to create the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in 1954, now hosted in Switzerland. At present, CERN is run by 23 member states, but many non-members are also involved in different ways. The second example is the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), an engineering megaproject in France, which will be the world's largest magnetic confinement experiment when it begins plasma physics 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, with the post-9/11 era posing a challenge on its continuation.

In the Middle East, a relevant example of science diplomacy put in practice is the Synchrotron-light for Experimental Science and Applications in the Middle East (SESAME). In the late 1990s, several countries joined to establish SESAME with the intention to foster scientific cooperation in a region of the world that has been torn by persistent conflicts. In 2019, the early promoters of SESAME received the AAAS Award for Science Diplomacy.

In some cases, science diplomacy is not the obvious preliminary goal of an international body but used as an important tool: for example, the European Union fosters science collaboration as a way to make diplomacy through "parallel means". Several EU-funded projects are currently exploring and conducting research on the topic of science diplomacy. Another example is the intergovernmental military alliance of NATO, which in 1958 established a Science Committee and the position of a Science Advisor. NATO officials sought to use the promotion of science as a diplomatic channel (or "backchannel"), especially in critical moments of the alliance’s history.

Science diplomacy and non-state actors
Non-state actors who are not connected with governments also practice science diplomacy. For example, in 1957, philanthropist Cyrus Eaton hosted a meeting in Pugwash, Canada. The stimulus for the gathering was a 1955 Manifesto issued 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 new thermonuclear weapons. Scientists continued to meet at what became known as the Pugwash Conferences. These gatherings eventually grew and attracted the attention of high level government officials. For example, in 1958 "Pugwash" sougth to influence policies of the IAEA and thus the formation of the international nuclear order. Since then, Pugwash national committees were formed in the East and the West.

Such informal, non-governmental initiatives illustrate Track II science diplomacy, which is based on the informal transnational exchange of information without an official national negotiating mandate. Track II consists of informal dialogues among actors that can bring new ideas or relationships to the official process of diplomacy. Public pressure groups or individuals can have an impact on governmental decisions: For example, the work of Norman Cousins, editor of The Saturday Review of Literature, helped move the 1963 Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty forward. A specific form of Track II science diplomacy is activism and advocacy "from below" the elitist sphere of government advice. Such grassroots initiatives, e.g, Science for the People, were evident during the Vietnam War, when many Western academics protested against the missuse of science for warfare, campaigning for principles of global social justice. Scientists and physicians were also acting beyond state regulation and outside of official diplomatic arenas by researching and exposing the extent of harm done to the Vietnamese people in the war zones.

Similar to the initiative of non-state actors, non-profit organizations can exercise science diplomacy practices. For example, the Malta Conferences Foundation seeks to provide a bridge to peace in the Middle East through science diplomacy. A relevant African science diplomacy actor is the African Scientific Institute, created in 1967 to help scientists reach others through published materials, conferences, seminars and to provide tools for those who lack them. A similar initative has been launched by CRDF Global in partnership with the U.S. Department of State, the Global Innovation through Science and Technology (GIST). CRDF Global has been active in 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. Another examples is the Center for Science Diplomacy, established by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). It provides a forum for scientists, policy analysts, and policy-makers to share information and explore collaborative opportunities. In March 2012, the center launched the quarterly publication Science & Diplomacy. Others non-profit organizations, such as the Science and Development Network (SciDev.Net) have dedicated an entire portion of their website for science diplomacy related articles and events.

Science diplomacy applied to health and pandemics
The mission of the World Health Organization (WHO) is a thoroughly science diplomacy act. Together with other organizations, and including researchers, public health officials, countries, government officials, and clinicians, the WHO has worked together to create effective measures of infection control and subsequent treatment. International organizations and non-state actors share resources, research data, ideas, and put 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 continued to be relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic. Misinformation about the origin of viruses is inherently political and has a long history in the global threat landscape. This is well documented for HIV.

During epidemics and pandemics, vaccines and drugs are an effective method for reducing incidence and mortality. 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. These collaborations are exemplified in various nations’ responses to the malaria, rotavirus, HIV/Aids, HPV, and COVID-19 outbreaks.

Science diplomacy applied to space, oceans, and the polar regions
Science diplomacy not only concerns the inhabited and civilized land, but is also a means of expressing interests in relation to space, the oceans and the polar regions. In the 1950s, the Eisenhower Administration favoured the thesis that increased international collaboration would strengthen the Free World, placing relevance on Oceanic Science. Another case in point is the race to the Moon, especially following the Sputnik shock, which in turn led to the founding of NASA. 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.

The usefulness of coordinating polar science efforts was already recognized in 1879. In 1996, countries with interests in the Arctic came together to form the Arctic Council to discuss sustainable development and environmental protection.

Science diplomacy in the 21st century
Many of the global challenges related to health, economic growth, and climate change lay at the intersection of science and international relations. There are numerous patterns via which scientific and technological advances influence international relations, including as a juggernaut or escaped genie with rapid and wide-ranging ramifications for the international system; as a game-changer and a conveyor of advantage and disadvantage to different actors in the international system; as a source of risks, issues and problems that must be addressed and managed by the international community; as key dimensions or enablers of international macro phenomena; as instruments of foreign policy or sources of technical information for the management of an ongoing international regime; as the subject of projects and institutions whose planning, design, implementation and management provide grist for the mill of international relations and diplomacy.

There is a long list of specific themes 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”. Other areas of interest include space exploration; the exploration of fundamental physics (e.g., CERN and ITER ); the management of the polar regions; health research; the oil and mining sectors; fisheries; and international security, including global cybersecurity, as well as enormous geographic areas, such as the transatlantic and Indo-Pacific regions. 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 ); international NGOs, especially UN bodies; and various science-policy interfaces, such as the U.S. National Academies system.

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, with the International Panel on Climate Change alone constituting a science-diplomacy nexus. 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. 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. Science diplomacy challenges the way international relations operates as a field of human endeavor, presenting a ‘boundary problem’ involving actors from different social worlds.

In 2009, President Barack Obama called for partnership during his “A New Beginning” speech in Cairo, Egypt. These partnerships would include a greater focus on engagement of the Muslim world through science, technology, and innovation connecting scientists from the United States to scientists in Muslim-majority countries. Other strategies that evolved at that time involved the development of 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. 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, which proposed an increase in the application of science and scientific engagement in US foreign policy.

In December 2018, the “Madrid Declaration on Science Diplomacy” was signed by a group of high-level experts. 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.

Whereas science diplomacy is frequently considered a soft power tool which helps to keep dialogue lines open between states in conflict and can contribute to peacekeeping and international understanding, in times of war, science diplomacy seems to fall within the arsenal of hard power: this became most evident in the war in Ukraine. Sanctions are an important part of the arsenal of science diplomacy aimed at intervening in conflicts: CERN, for example, has announced the termination of its exchange programs with Russia and Belarus in 2024.