IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/pbapdi/v19y2023i1d10.1057_s41254-021-00217-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tool selection for public diplomacy flagships: toward an adaptive model

Author

Listed:
  • Biyun Zhu

    (The Ohio State University)

Abstract

The evolving relationship between nation-states and sub-national actors makes public policy a meaningful inside-out approach in public diplomacy (PD) research. This multi-level participation and complexity have also drawn attention to “flagship” as a particular mechanism that systematically coordinates and manages PD activities. Public diplomacy flagship, such as the Fulbright Program and the British Council, is an orchestra of various programs that serves the national agenda as well as personal and organizational goals. Yet, we seem to know little about the decision-making process of why the programs are selected and how they are fitted into a flagship. This article attempts to address this question from a public policy perspective. Viewing PD activities in various kinds as “tool options,” this article presents an adaptive model of tool selection to unpack the decision-making in public diplomacy flagships. Acknowledging the influence of human factors and the risk of over-generalization, the model aims to present one possibility among many and focus on the underlying relationships between the tools and their roles in a flagship. With examples from the Fulbright Program, the British Council, and Confucius Institute, this article explains how different users can adapt the model for their analytical, evaluative, and comparative purposes.

Suggested Citation

  • Biyun Zhu, 2023. "Tool selection for public diplomacy flagships: toward an adaptive model," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(1), pages 42-53, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:pbapdi:v:19:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41254-021-00217-3
    DOI: 10.1057/s41254-021-00217-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41254-021-00217-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41254-021-00217-3?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schneider, Anne & Ingram, Helen, 1993. "Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 334-347, June.
    2. Nicholas J. Cull, 2008. "Public Diplomacy: Taxonomies and Histories," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 616(1), pages 31-54, March.
    3. Eytan Gilboa, 2008. "Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 616(1), pages 55-77, March.
    4. Pierson, Paul, 2000. "Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 251-267, June.
    5. Lisa Tam & Jeong-Nam Kim, 2019. "Who are publics in public diplomacy? Proposing a taxonomy of foreign publics as an intersection between symbolic environment and behavioral experiences," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 15(1), pages 28-37, March.
    6. Linder, Stephen H. & Peters, B. Guy, 1989. "Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 35-58, January.
    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. Giliberto Capano & Andrea Lippi, 2017. "How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 269-293, June.
    2. David P Carter & Christopher M Weible & Saba N Siddiki & Xavier Basurto, 2016. "Integrating core concepts from the institutional analysis and development framework for the systematic analysis of policy designs: An illustration from the US National Organic Program regulation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 159-185, January.
    3. Steven L. Pike, 2023. "What diplomats do: US citizen perspectives on the work of public diplomacy," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(4), pages 442-455, December.
    4. Yelena Osipova-Stocker & Eulynn Shiu & Thomas Layou & Shawn Powers, 2022. "Assessing impact in global media: methods, innovations, and challenges," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 18(3), pages 287-304, September.
    5. Arnošt Veselý, 2021. "Autonomy of policy instrument attitudes: concept, theory and evidence," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(2), pages 441-455, June.
    6. Steven L. Pike & Dennis F. Kinsey, 2024. "Diplomatic identity and communication: using Q methodology to assess subjective perceptions of diplomatic practitioners," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(1), pages 66-75, March.
    7. Hendrik W. Ohnesorge, 2022. "The method of comparative-historical analysis: a tailor-made approach to public diplomacy research," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 18(3), pages 261-271, September.
    8. Nicole Lemke & Philipp Trein & Frédéric Varone, 2023. "Agenda-setting in nascent policy subsystems: issue and instrument priorities across venues," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(4), pages 633-655, December.
    9. Giliberto Capano & Jun Jie Woo, 2017. "Resilience and robustness in policy design: a critical appraisal," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(3), pages 399-426, September.
    10. Zhao Alexandre Huang, 2022. "A historical–discursive analytical method for studying the formulation of public diplomacy institutions," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 18(3), pages 204-215, September.
    11. Matthew T. Palmer & Eugene Bempong Nyantakyi & Jami A. Fullerton, 2023. "The US Peace Corps as a public diplomacy strategy," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(1), pages 15-29, March.
    12. Kadir Jun Ayhan & Efe Sevin, 2022. "Moving public diplomacy research forward: methodological approaches," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 18(3), pages 201-203, September.
    13. Carsten Daugbjerg & Adrian Kay, 2020. "Policy feedback and pathways: when change leads to endurance and continuity to change," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 253-268, June.
    14. Maddison, Jonathan & Watts, Richard, 2011. "The technological fix as a frame in media debates about tailpipe emissions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 294-303.
    15. Fritz Sager & Yvan Rielle, 2013. "Sorting through the garbage can: under what conditions do governments adopt policy programs?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 46(1), pages 1-21, March.
    16. Bruch, Sarah K. & van der Naald, Joseph & Gornick, Janet C., 2022. "Poverty Reduction through Federal and State Policy Mechanisms: Variation Over Time and Across the U.S. States," SocArXiv jz5xp, Center for Open Science.
    17. Fu, Tong & Jian, Ze, 2020. "A developmental state: How to allocate electricity efficiently in a developing country," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    18. Marie-Laure Djelic & Sigrid Quack, 2006. "Rethinking Path Dependency: The Crooked Path of Institutional Change in Post-War Germany," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/2b86iahfka8, Sciences Po.
    19. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    20. Frank R. Baumgartner & Christine Mahoney, 2008. "Forum Section: The Two Faces of Framing," European Union Politics, , vol. 9(3), pages 435-449, September.

    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:pal:pbapdi:v:19:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41254-021-00217-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave.com .

    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.