IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v15y2024i2p247-259.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Pierre-Bruno Ruffini, 2017. "Science and Diplomacy – A New Dimension of International Relations," Post-Print hal-02970666, HAL.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    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. 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.
    2. Simone Arnaldi & Alessandro Lombardo & Angela Tessarolo, 2021. "A preliminary study of science diplomacy networks in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, December.
    3. Derya Buyuktanir Karacan, 2021. "Science diplomacy as a foreign policy tool for Turkey and the ramifications of collaboration with the EU," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Simone Turchetti & Roberto Lalli, 2020. "Envisioning a “science diplomacy 2.0”: on data, global challenges, and multi-layered networks," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Pierre-Bruno Ruffini, 2020. "Conceptualizing science diplomacy in the practitioner-driven literature: a critical review," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Ethan B Kapstein, 2006. "Architects of stability? International cooperation among financial supervisors," BIS Working Papers 199, Bank for International Settlements.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Simon Hug & Tobias Schulz, 2007. "Referendums in the EU’s constitution building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 177-218, June.
    13. Marcelo de Paiva Abreu, 2005. "The FTAA and the political economy of protection in Brazil and the US," Textos para discussão 494, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
    14. Hayashi, Takayuki, 2003. "Effect of R&D programmes on the formation of university-industry-government networks: comparative analysis of Japanese R&D programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1421-1442, September.
    15. Paul Poast, 2013. "Issue linkage and international cooperation: An empirical investigation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(3), pages 286-303, July.
    16. Heike Schroeder, 2010. "Agency in international climate negotiations: the case of indigenous peoples and avoided deforestation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 317-332, December.
    17. Koichi Hamada & Asahi Noguchi, 2005. "The Role of Preconceived Ideas in Macroeconomic Policy: Japan's Experiences in the Two Deflationary Periods," Working Papers 908, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    18. Schmidt, Susanne K. & Werle, Raymund, 1993. "Technical controversy in international standardization," MPIfG Discussion Paper 93/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    19. Gonzalo Escribano, 2006. "Europeanisation without Europe? The Mediterranean and the Neighbourhood Policy," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 19, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    20. Prakash Kashwan, 2016. "Integrating power in institutional analysis: A micro-foundation perspective," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 5-26, January.

    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.