IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v49y2022i2p191-200..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Taking the pulse of science diplomacy and developing practices of valuation
[The Perverse Effects of Competition on Scientists’ Work and Relationships]

Author

Listed:
  • Tim Flink

Abstract

Science diplomacy has caught remarkable attention in public policy and academic research over the last fifteen years. However, the concept is plagued by a huge talk–action discrepancy: its public discourse has reached a problematic state of dazzling self-adulation, while it is unclear if and how the actual policies and associated organizations live up to these expectations. The article reconstructs three structural causes to explain the recent hype about science diplomacy. It further encourages actors to organize evaluations that ask whether and how actions of science diplomacy can be valuable. In this regard, a first set of fundamental principles is proposed for setting up an evaluative framework. In conclusion, the article advises science diplomacy actors from democratic states and institutions, from both academic research and public policy, to stop dreaming about soft power influence on authoritarian states and regimes but rather face new geopolitical realities.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:49:y:2022:i:2:p:191-200.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scab074
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. 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.
    2. Van der Meulen, Barend, 1998. "Science policies as principal-agent games: Institutionalization and path dependency in the relation between government and science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 397-414, August.
    3. Rigmar Osterkamp & Markus Eller, 2003. "How Decentralised Is Government Activity?," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 1(01), pages 32-35, February.
    4. Braun, Dietmar, 1998. "The role of funding agencies in the cognitive development of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 807-821, December.
    5. Nelson Phillips & Thomas B. Lawrence & Cynthia Hardy, 2000. "Inter‐organizational Collaboration and the Dynamics of Institutional Fields," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 1-1, January.
    6. Flink, Tim & Kaldewey, David, 2018. "The new production of legitimacy: STI policy discourses beyond the contract metaphor," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 14-22.
    7. Christoph Biester & Tim Flink, 2015. "The Elusive Effectiveness of Performance Measurement in Science: Insights from a German University," Springer Books, in: Isabell M. Welpe & Jutta Wollersheim & Stefanie Ringelhan & Margit Osterloh (ed.), Incentives and Performance, edition 127, pages 397-412, Springer.
    8. Rigmar Osterkamp & Markus Eller, 2003. "Functional Decentralisation of Government Activity," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 1(3), pages 36-42, 02.
    9. Charlotte Rungius & Tim Flink, 2020. "Correction: Romancing science for global solutions: on narratives and interpretative schemas of science diplomacy," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-2, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Alan Greenspan, 2002. "Corporate governance," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 3(03), pages 3-6, October.
    12. Mytelka, Lynn K. & Smith, Keith, 2002. "Policy learning and innovation theory: an interactive and co-evolving process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1467-1479, December.
    13. Edler, Jakob & Blind, Knut & Frietsch, Rainer & Kimpeler, Simone & Kroll, Henning & Lerch, Christian & Reiss, Thomas & Roth, Florian & Schubert, Torben & Schuler, Johanna & Walz, Rainer, 2020. "Technology sovereignty: From demand to concept [Technologiesouveränität: Von der Forderung zum Konzept]," Perspectives – Policy Briefs 02 / 2020, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    14. Rigmar Osterkamp & Markus Eller, 2003. "How Decentralised Is Government Activity?," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 1(1), pages 32-35, 02.
    15. Whitley, Richard, 2003. "Competition and pluralism in the public sciences: the impact of institutional frameworks on the organisation of academic science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1015-1029, June.
    16. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
    17. 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).
    18. Li Tang, 2019. "Five ways China must cultivate research integrity," Nature, Nature, vol. 575(7784), pages 589-591, November.
    19. Irwin, Alan & Vedel, Jane Bjørn & Vikkelsø, Signe, 2021. "Isomorphic difference: Familiarity and distinctiveness in national research and innovation policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    20. Charlotte Rungius & Tim Flink, 2020. "Romancing science for global solutions: on narratives and interpretative schemas of science diplomacy," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    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. 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.

    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. Andy Gouldson & Rory Sullivan, 2014. "Understanding the Governance of Corporations: An Examination of the Factors Shaping UK Supermarket Strategies on Climate Change," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(12), pages 2972-2990, December.
    2. Francesco Ramella, 2010. "Negotiating Local Development: The Italian Experience of ‘Territorial Pacts’," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 28(3), pages 512-527, June.
    3. Ardielli Eva, 2019. "Use of TOPSIS Method for Assessing of Good Governance in European Union Countries," Review of Economic Perspectives, Sciendo, vol. 19(3), pages 211-231, September.
    4. Alejandro Lara & Felipe Bucci & Cristobal Palma & Juan Munizaga & Victor Montre-Águila, 2021. "Development, urban planning and political decisions. A triad that built territories at risk," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 109(2), pages 1935-1957, November.
    5. Harriet Bulkeley & Andy Jordan, 2012. "Guest Editorial," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 30(4), pages 556-570, August.
    6. Jan Janosch Förster & Linda Downsborough & Lisa Biber-Freudenberger & Girma Kelboro Mensuro & Jan Börner, 2021. "Exploring criteria for transformative policy capacity in the context of South Africa’s biodiversity economy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 209-237, March.
    7. Daria Gritsenko & Matthew Wood, 2022. "Algorithmic governance: A modes of governance approach," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 45-62, January.
    8. Ma, Yiguan & Chiu, Rebecca L.H., 2018. "Governing rural redevelopment and re-distributing land rights: The case of Tianjin," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 533-546.
    9. Franco-Torres, Manuel & Kvålshaugen, Ragnhild & Ugarelli, Rita M., 2021. "Understanding the governance of urban water services from an institutional logics perspective," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    10. Dwi Amalia Sari & Chris Margules & Han She Lim & Jeffrey A. Sayer & Agni Klintuni Boedhihartono & Colin J. Macgregor & Allan P. Dale & Elizabeth Poon, 2022. "Performance Auditing to Assess the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-24, October.
    11. Juan Yan & Marietta Haffner & Marja Elsinga, 2021. "Inclusionary Housing: An Evaluation of a New Public Rental Housing Governance Instrument in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    12. Perrin, Coline & Nougarèdes, Brigitte & Sini, Laura & Branduini, Paola & Salvati, Luca, 2018. "Governance changes in peri-urban farmland protection following decentralisation: A comparison between Montpellier (France) and Rome (Italy)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 535-546.
    13. Lange, Marcus & Cummins, Valerie, 2021. "Managing stakeholder perception and engagement for marine energy transitions in a decarbonising world," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    14. Antoinette Laurent & Cécile Chanut-Guieu & Vincent Lhuillier, 2013. "Diversité des opérateurs et gouvernance locale de la petite enfance : quels enjeux pour le développement des territoires, les modes d'organisation des acteurs et la régulation de la qualité ?," Working Papers hal-02958290, HAL.
    15. Andrew Jordan & Rüdiger K. W. Wurzel & Anthony Zito, 2005. "The Rise of ‘New’ Policy Instruments in Comparative Perspective: Has Governance Eclipsed Government?," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53(3), pages 477-496, October.
    16. Kooper, M.N. & Maes, R. & Lindgreen, E.E.O. Roos, 2011. "On the governance of information: Introducing a new concept of governance to support the management of information," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 195-200.
    17. Rolien Willmes & Margit van Wessel, 2021. "The Construction of (Non-)Responsibility in Governance Networks," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    18. Christopher Nathan & Keith Hyams, 2022. "Global policymakers and catastrophic risk," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(1), pages 3-21, March.
    19. Stefan Greiving & Dietwald Gruehn & Christa Reicher, 2022. "The Rhenish Coal-Mining Area—Assessing the Transformational Talents and Challenges of a Region in Fundamental Structural Change," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, May.
    20. Smith, Göran & Hensher, David A., 2020. "Towards a framework for Mobility-as-a-Service policies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 54-65.

    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:oup:scippl:v:49:y:2022:i:2:p:191-200.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.