IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v15y2024i5p928-936.html

Strengthening links between science and technology experts and frontline diplomats to address science diplomacy challenges

Author

Listed:
  • Blake Su
  • Jean‐Christophe Mauduit
  • Douglas Momberg
  • Lee E. Voth‐Gaeddert

Abstract

The boundaries of knowledge within science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) domains are continuously advancing resulting in dynamic diplomatic applications. These shifting and expanding boundaries have direct implications in foreign policy. However, frontline diplomats have demanding day‐to‐day priorities that make it difficult to acquire, retain, and employ cutting edge STEM knowledge to advance national interests to their full potential. To aid in this objective, diplomatic institutions utilize STEM domain experts and traditional dissemination routes to support diplomatic personnel in STEM diplomacy issues. Routes commonly used include reports, briefings, trainings, and consultations. However, these routes may not always align with the timelines, workflows, and information systems used by frontline diplomats serving overseas. While many organizations focus on innovation within science diplomacy topics, opportunity also exists in innovation around linking experts with diplomats. Here we examine current linking approaches used to connect STEM experts and information with frontline diplomats to advance national interests. We utilize the US diplomatic network as an example to categorize current information flows and linking approaches. We then provide examples of common, underutilized, and alternative approaches. Our aim is to provide a clearer understanding of common linkages between STEM expert knowledge and frontline diplomats while highlighting potential alternatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Blake Su & Jean‐Christophe Mauduit & Douglas Momberg & Lee E. Voth‐Gaeddert, 2024. "Strengthening links between science and technology experts and frontline diplomats to address science diplomacy challenges," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(5), pages 928-936, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:15:y:2024:i:5:p:928-936
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.13418
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13418
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.13418?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. Chris Tyler & K. L. Akerlof & Alessandro Allegra & Zachary Arnold & Henriette Canino & Marius A. Doornenbal & Josh A. Goldstein & David Budtz Pedersen & William J. Sutherland, 2023. "AI tools as science policy advisers? The potential and the pitfalls," Nature, Nature, vol. 622(7981), pages 27-30, October.
    2. Tim Flink, 2022. "Taking the pulse of science diplomacy and developing practices of valuation [The Perverse Effects of Competition on Scientists’ Work and Relationships]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 191-200.
    3. Vaughan Turekian, 2018. "The Evolution of Science Diplomacy," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 9(S3), pages 5-7, November.
    4. Luís Miguel Lacerda & Manuel Heitor & Jean‐Christophe Mauduit, 2023. "New architectures for bottom‐up science diplomacy: Learning from the evolving Portuguese diaspora in the UK," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(5), pages 847-857, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lee E. Voth‐Gaeddert & Mia Peterson & Douglas Momberg, 2025. "Operationalizing Science and Technology Initiatives for Conflict Mitigation: A Strategic Framework," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1125-1134, November.
    2. Lee E. Voth‐Gaeddert, 2025. "Maximizing STEM resources for diplomats: A framework for speed, depth, and accuracy," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 16(1), pages 213-217, February.

    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. Samuël Costa & Stuart Mills & Wouter Duyck & Nicolas Dirix, 2026. "Advancing applied behavioral science: the GAP framework," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Andrei Polejack & Sigi Gruber & Mary S. Wisz, 2021. "Atlantic Ocean science diplomacy in action: the pole-to-pole All Atlantic Ocean Research Alliance," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Linda C. Smith, 2024. "Reviews and Reviewing: Approaches to Research Synthesis. An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) paper," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 75(3), pages 245-267, March.
    4. Caroline S Wagner & Denis F, 2023. "China’s use of formal science and technology agreements as a tool of diplomacy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(4), pages 807-817.
    5. Rüffin, Nicolas, 2020. "EU science diplomacy in a contested space of multi-level governance: Ambitions, constraints and options for action," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    6. Boris Mattoš & Michaela Grinaj & Paskal Zhelev, 2025. "Science diplomacy in small states: a case study of global players’ engagement in Slovakia," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Rüffin, Nicolas, 2020. "EU science diplomacy in a contested space of multi-level governance: Ambitions, constraints and options for action," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 49(1), pages 1-1.
    8. Casper Andersen & Cristina Clopot & Jan Ifversen, 2020. "Heritage and interculturality in EU science diplomacy," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-8, December.
    9. Diego Lawler & Miguel Fuentes, 2022. "Presidential diplomacy meets science diplomacy," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(4), pages 606-613, September.
    10. Lee E. Voth‐Gaeddert, 2025. "Maximizing STEM resources for diplomats: A framework for speed, depth, and accuracy," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 16(1), pages 213-217, February.
    11. Alexander Raev & Ellen Minkman, 2020. "Emotional policies: Introducing branding as a tool for science diplomacy," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Elias G. Carayannis & John Draper & Balwant Bhaneja, 2021. "Towards Fusion Energy in the Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 Context: Call for a Global Commission for Urgent Action on Fusion Energy," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 1891-1904, December.

    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:5:p:928-936. 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.