The Effectiveness of Science Diplomacy between Adversarial States: Insights from US–Cuban and US–Iranian Science Collaborations

IF 0.9 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Anna-Lena Rüland
{"title":"The Effectiveness of Science Diplomacy between Adversarial States: Insights from US–Cuban and US–Iranian Science Collaborations","authors":"Anna-Lena Rüland","doi":"10.1163/1871191x-bja10147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe American Association for the Advancement of Science and the British Royal Society’s science diplomacy taxonomy has received much criticism. Some argue that there is a lack of empirical evidence to underpin the taxonomy’s three science diplomacy dimensions. This particularly applies to the third dimension, science for diplomacy, and its effectiveness. Others criticise the taxonomy for painting the picture of compliant scientists who would discard their academic ideals to support foreign policy objectives. Against the backdrop of these two points of criticism, this study investigates if scientists are willing to support political objectives through science collaborations. It also examines under which conditions science for diplomacy is effective. Using the epistemic community approach, expert interviews and a case study, the study argues that science for diplomacy is effective if it is promoted by a close-knit epistemic community and shows that scientists oppose the instrumentalisation of scientific collaboration for political purposes.","PeriodicalId":44787,"journal":{"name":"Hague Journal of Diplomacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hague Journal of Diplomacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-bja10147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The American Association for the Advancement of Science and the British Royal Society’s science diplomacy taxonomy has received much criticism. Some argue that there is a lack of empirical evidence to underpin the taxonomy’s three science diplomacy dimensions. This particularly applies to the third dimension, science for diplomacy, and its effectiveness. Others criticise the taxonomy for painting the picture of compliant scientists who would discard their academic ideals to support foreign policy objectives. Against the backdrop of these two points of criticism, this study investigates if scientists are willing to support political objectives through science collaborations. It also examines under which conditions science for diplomacy is effective. Using the epistemic community approach, expert interviews and a case study, the study argues that science for diplomacy is effective if it is promoted by a close-knit epistemic community and shows that scientists oppose the instrumentalisation of scientific collaboration for political purposes.
敌对国家之间科学外交的有效性:来自美国-古巴和美国-伊朗科学合作的见解
美国科学促进会和英国皇家学会的科学外交分类法受到了很多批评。一些人认为,缺乏实证证据来支撑该分类法的三个科学外交维度。这尤其适用于第三个维度,即外交科学及其有效性。其他人则批评该分类法描绘了顺从的科学家的形象,他们会抛弃自己的学术理想来支持外交政策目标。在这两点批评的背景下,本研究调查了科学家是否愿意通过科学合作来支持政治目标。它还考察了科学外交在何种条件下有效。该研究利用认识共同体的方法、专家访谈和案例研究,认为如果由紧密联系的认识共同体推动,科学外交是有效的,并表明科学家反对将科学合作工具化用于政治目的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hague Journal of Diplomacy
Hague Journal of Diplomacy INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
28.60%
发文量
55
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信