Science diplomacy: Maintaining a global perspective 

7 March 2023 

The world faces some stark, geopolitical challenges. There are many views on them, but in ours, the most pressing of these challenges fall under three questions. [1]

First, how do we restore planetary health and successfully transition to a sustainable Anthropocene?

Second, how do we define and maintain the human values we want underpinning our rapid digitalization; not least as artificial intelligence evolves?

And third, how do we manage and avoid national and international conflict amid geopolitical disorder and reordering? 

To tackle these challenges, we will need, collectively, to generate and maintain a global perspective; while at the same time drawing on new, multilateral systems of cooperation and collaboration.  

Moreover, we think a fundamental ‘redesign’ of these multilateral systems is overdue – a redesign that prioritizes the protection of the planet and of the global commons, together with humanity’s very survival. 

To succeed, any such redesign must optimize our ability to share, understand and apply scientific insight and evidence. That application of scientific insight and evidence is the principal starting point for science diplomacy.  

How does science diplomacy play out now in foreign policy efforts, nationally and multilaterally?  

This is a substantial question. Answering it requires acknowledging that science is not an abstract, one dimensional or homogenous activity. We must look at the entire ‘science system’ that is made up of a conglomerate of actors – from state and private institutions to the scientific practices and policies that drive success.  

And of course, it comprises more than just the fields of natural science and engineering, given that social sciences and humanities can offer global solutions as vital as those of the so-called ‘hard’ sciences. 

And in turn we must consider how this science system interacts with a whole host of activity and actors across foreign policy and foreign affairs – from multilateral organizations to the diplomats and scientific advisors based at national embassies. 

Nonetheless, when successful, science diplomacy can mobilize science for better geopolitical outcomes. And it can do so from two, normative perspectives: that of the state and one founded on preserving the global commons.  

These perspectives are often antagonistic, even when preserving the global commons clearly benefits all, states included. And so, in that straightforward assertion, some of the complex dynamics of science diplomacy come to life.   

Look at the war in Ukraine, which presented the world with the tragedy of a humanitarian crisis and raised the perplexing question of whether to extend sanctions to Russia’s scientific efforts.  

Many countries reacted with economic sanctions, and many argued that the moral case for those sanctions was clear cut. But what of scientific sanctions, or the Russian scientists cut off from European funding, and the collaboration with Russian institutions cut short?  

Or look at the Sharm el-Sheikh Climate Change Conference of 2022 (COP 27). We saw leading edge scientific knowledge and technology proposed in broader efforts to manage and avert the climate crisis. But we also saw the COP series reaching the limits of its effectiveness in spurring agreement, commitment and action. 

Global challenges demand that we build consensus for action. The Frontiers Policy Labs assemble experts and new voices from the worlds of science, politics, and policy to help generate that consensus. 

We will develop this platform’s focus on science diplomacy and its potential to build that consensus, adding expert views from around the world to an already varied, rolling program of content and insight. We are open to campaign partners who are driving those efforts. We would welcome your thoughts, your insights and your contribution to this discussion. 

1. https://www.ynharari.com/book/21-lessons-book/