Science diplomacy

The analysis presented here highlights following Schumpeter’s insights, the need for an open industrial transformation approach less based on old, national industrial policy notions but adopting a new vision on the role of place-based industrial innovation in strengthening Europe’s long-term resilience to political, economic and technological change.

One can only hope that the war imposed by Russia on Ukraine will be brought to an end swiftly, that reconstruction of Ukraine as a sovereign state moves forward unimpeded, and that Russia, with its population of 140 million, will make earnest attempts to rectify its pariah status and re-join the rules-based international community.

When or if this will happen is not clear, but the EU should nonetheless be well prepared for the eventuality. This is true for all policy domains, but in this note we will focus upon the science and technology programmes of the EU and make some suggestions on how to use the instruments of science diplomacy for rebuilding the Ukrainian science system and reintegrating Russian scientists in the world science system, including the support of renewed scientific cooperation between Russia and Ukraine.

We face global, existential threats. From health emergencies to climate change, we see and feel them now. These threats can be managed and reversed. But that will require political will, global collaboration, and scientific breakthroughs at a scale not yet seen. Three experts shine a light on the missing links between science and international diplomacy. They ask how we can grow consensus when public trust in science and politics is fragile. And they make the case for science diplomacy.

The world faces some stark, geopolitical challenges. To tackle them we will need to draw on new, multilateral systems of cooperation and collaboration. A fundamental redesign of these multilateral systems is overdue – one that prioritizes the protection of the planet, together with humanity’s very survival. To succeed, any such redesign must optimize our ability to share, understand and apply scientific insight and evidence. The application of that scientific insight and evidence is the starting point for science diplomacy.

War is an extremely polarizing phenomenon that divides nuances into black and white. As Russian forces rolled into Ukraine, the Western response was to shut Russia out of virtually all partnerships and areas of cooperation. It seemed a justified reaction to a country seeking to reintroduce war into Europe after decades of peace. But, as inexcusable as the actions of the Putin regime are, we risk being blind to the nuances of the situation as we respond. It is difficult to employ rationality in times of war, when emotion takes the driver’s seat, but it is nonetheless crucial to ask the following questions in assessing our response: Do these actions stifle the Kremlin’s war objectives? Do they help Ukraine? What is the impact on humanity at large?

Sir Peter Gluckman
Chair, International Network
for Government Science Advice

Sir Peter Gluckman and Prof. Jean Claude Burgelman consider the impact of COVID-19 and the mechanics and interface between science and policymaking at an international level

Sir Peter Gluckman

International Network for Government Science Advice

Sir Peter Gluckman, Chair, International Network for Government Science Advice speaks to Prof. Jean Claude Burgelman, Free University of Brussels about scientific advice and policymaking in the context of the COVID-19 response