IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v15y2024i2p247-259.html

A comparison of British and German parliamentary discourses on science diplomacy over time

Author

Listed:
  • Anna‐Lena Rüland
  • Nicolas Rüffin

Abstract

How do members of parliament of different political parties discuss ‘science diplomacy’ – broadly speaking all activities at the intersection of science and foreign policy – on the parliamentary floor over time? We address this question against the backdrop of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and analyse 72 speeches on science and Russia from the German and British parliament between February 2014 and December 2022. Our analysis reveals similarities and differences in how science diplomacy is discussed in the German Bundestag and the British House of Commons, how party views on science diplomacy in relation to Russia differ and how said views change over time. In so doing, our study shows that national science and policy ecosystems with their specific institutions and actors shape science diplomacy debates, including in times of war.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna‐Lena Rüland & Nicolas Rüffin, 2024. "A comparison of British and German parliamentary discourses on science diplomacy over time," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(2), pages 247-259, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:15:y:2024:i:2:p:247-259
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.13338
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13338
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.13338?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dakowska, Dorota, 2009. "Networks of Foundations as Norm Entrepreneurs: Between Politics and Policies in EU Decision-making," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 201-221, August.
    2. David H Guston, 1996. "Principal-agent theory and the structure of science policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 229-240, August.
    3. Peter Weingart & François van Schalkwyk & Lars Guenther, 2022. "Democratic and expert legitimacy: Science, politics and the public during the COVID-19 pandemic," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 499-517.
    4. Putnam, Robert D., 1988. "Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 427-460, July.
    5. Pierre-Bruno Ruffini, 2017. "Science and Diplomacy – A New Dimension of International Relations," Post-Print hal-02970666, HAL.
    6. Tim Flink & Ulrich Schreiterer, 2010. "Science diplomacy at the intersection of S&T policies and foreign affairs: toward a typology of national approaches," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(9), pages 665-677, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Derya Buyuktanir Karacan, 2021. "Science diplomacy as a foreign policy tool for Turkey and the ramifications of collaboration with the EU," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Rüffin, Nicolas & Rüland, Anna-Lena, 2022. "Between global collaboration and national competition: Unraveling the many faces of Arctic science diplomacy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 58((Art. No.), pages 1-12.
    3. Simone Turchetti & Roberto Lalli, 2020. "Envisioning a “science diplomacy 2.0”: on data, global challenges, and multi-layered networks," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, December.
    4. Marta Abrantes & Raquel Vaz-Pinto, 2024. "Science diplomacy in the European Union: mapping the Portuguese case (1986–2021)," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Pierre-Bruno Ruffini, 2020. "Conceptualizing science diplomacy in the practitioner-driven literature: a critical review," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Clark, William & Mitchell, Ronald & Cash, David & Alcock, Frank, 2002. "Information as Influence: How Institutions Mediate the Impact of Scientific Assessments on Global Environmental Affairs," Working Paper Series rwp02-044, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    7. Simone Arnaldi & Alessandro Lombardo & Angela Tessarolo, 2021. "A preliminary study of science diplomacy networks in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan, 2015. "International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 537-556, October.
    9. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    10. Ethan B Kapstein, 2006. "Architects of stability? International cooperation among financial supervisors," BIS Working Papers 199, Bank for International Settlements.
    11. Lukas Rudolph & Fabian Haggerty & Paul W. Thurner, 2026. "Examining public support for Ukraine’s defense against autocratic aggression," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 17(1), pages 1-20, December.
    12. Patrick James & John R. Oneal, 1991. "The Influence of Domestic and International Politics on the President's Use of Force," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(2), pages 307-332, June.
    13. Alberto Alesina & Guido Tabellini, 2003. "Bureaucrats or Politicians?," Working Papers 238, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    14. Martijn Huysmans, 2018. "Heterogeneity, Vetoes, and Exit Clauses in Federal Systems," CESifo Working Paper Series 7178, CESifo.
    15. Carlo Carraro & Carmen Marchiori & Alessandra Sgobbi, 2005. "Applications of Negotiation Theory to Water Issues," Working Papers 2005.65, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    16. Dreher, Axel & Vaubel, Roland, 2000. "Does the IMF cause moral hazard and political business cycles? : Evidence from panel data," Discussion Papers 598, Institut fuer Volkswirtschaftslehre und Statistik, Abteilung fuer Volkswirtschaftslehre.
    17. Braun, Dietmar & Benninghoff, Martin, 2003. "Policy learning in Swiss research policy--the case of the National Centres of Competence in Research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1849-1863, December.
    18. Balint, T. & Lamperti, F. & Mandel, A. & Napoletano, M. & Roventini, A. & Sapio, A., 2017. "Complexity and the Economics of Climate Change: A Survey and a Look Forward," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 252-265.
    19. Eising, Rainer, . "Interest groups in EU policy-making," Living Reviews in European Governance (LREG), Institute for European integration research (EIF).
    20. Kari Irwin Otteburn, 2023. "All in favour? Indian business interests and the India-EU FTA," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 311-329, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:15:y:2024:i:2:p:247-259. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.