Science Diplomacy Action
Latest Publications


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

5
(FIVE YEARS 0)

H-INDEX

0
(FIVE YEARS 0)

Published By Science Diplomacy Center

2573-976x, 2573-9751

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-122
Author(s):  
Konstantina Gota ◽  
Lucius Lichte ◽  
Paul Arthur Berkman

This fifth synthesis with the Science Diplomacy Action serial is the product of a capstone project for the Masters of Law and Diplomacy (MALD) degree through the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University that was completed in July 2020. This capstone project focuses on the diplomatic missions of 65+ nations in Boston, Massachusetts, United States, that have been operating collectively as the Science & Technology Diplomatic Circle (S&TDC) within the larger innovation ecosystem of Boston since 2013. Lessons of science diplomacy as an holistic (international, interdisciplinary and inclusive) process are illustrated with the S&TDC Boston, noting the large number of diplomatic missions in a city that is different than capitol of the nation. These local-global lessons with the S&TDC Boston reflect the jurisdictional spectrum with its subnational, national and international levels that are interconnected on a planetary scale. This capstone project applies an objective methodology, using the public websites of the 65+ diplomatic missions in Boston to generate the data from questions that can be replicated and expanded in other cities with diplomatic missions. These data include details about: continents represented; nations represented; types of consulates; office locations and contacts; website language(s); science diplomacy presence; science attaché; website science innovation; government ministerial representation; profit / non-profit representation; and S&TDC membership. The data are listed, mapped and graphed with interpretations to help reveal options (without advocacy), which can be used or ignored explicitly, respecting the relevant decisionmakers, who are self-defined. Engagement with the S&TDC Boston is represented by the Consul General of Greece in Boston, who stimulated this project, and by the S&TDC Co-Chairs, who have written the Foreword and contributed to the co-authorship of this Science Diplomacy Action synthesis. As noted in the Conclusion: “cultivating a network with strong foundations, Science Diplomacy has the potential to build on synergies and capacities that exist in a way that have a broader reach, not only in Boston but around the globe with a universal application.”


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-65
Author(s):  
Paul Arthur Berkman ◽  
Alexander Vylegzhanin

This fourth Synthesis of the Science Diplomacy Action series involves that pedagogy of common-interest building among allies and adversaries alike as a negotiation skill to apply, train and refine. This serial edition also represents a journey with science diplomacy and its engine of informed decisionmaking among friends who facilitated the first formal dialogue between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and Russia regarding security in the Arctic, which we co-directed at the University of Cambridge in 2010. The starting point for that NATO-Russia dialogue was science diplomacy, as an holistic (international, interdisciplinary and inclusive) process to balance national interests and common interests for the benefit of all on Earth across generations. Operation of this holistic process became clear in 2016 during the 1st International Dialogue on Science and Technology Advice in Foreign Ministries, when the ‘continuum of urgencies’ was identified from security time scales (mitigating risks of political, economic, cultural and environmental instabilities that are immediate) to sustainability time scales (balancing economic prosperity, environmental protection and societal well-being across generations). The following year, the theoretical framework of informed decisionmaking – operating across a ‘continuum of urgencies’ short-term to long-term – emerged with the case study published in Science about the 2017 Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation, which has entered into force among the eight Arctic states. With continuing acceleration, in 2020, Springer published the first volume in the new book series on INFORMED DECISIONMAKING FOR SUSTAINABILITY. The graduate course on “Science Diplomacy: Environmental Security and Law in the Arctic Ocean” was introduced in 2016 with the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, involving a Mock Arctic Council Ministerial Meeting as the culminating synthesis with the Student Ambassadors. Framed around their working papers for the Mock Arctic Council Ministerial Meeting, the Student Ambassadors negotiated a declaration, which they adopted by consensus and signed at end of that first semester. In subsequent years, additional holistic integration exercises were introduced into the course, including the Common-Interest Building – Training Game with the pedagogy of the seventeen United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, each of which has international, interdisciplinary and inclusive relevance at local-global levels (APPENDIX 1: Syllabus – Spring 2020). From 2017 through 2020, the graduate course was expanded to Science Diplomacy: Environmental Security and Law in the Arctic Ocean, involving The Fletcher School in Medford (Massachusetts, United States) and the International Law Programme at MGIMO University in Moscow (Russian Federation). Building on a Memorandum of Understanding between our institutions, this joint video-conferencing course was approved by the Russian Ministry of Education and involved Carnegie Corporation of New York funding that was directed by Prof. Paul Arthur Berkman, contributing to the soon-to-be Russia and Eurasia Program at The Fletcher School. Each year, Student Ambassadors from the United States and Russian Federation adopted and signed joint declarations by consensus, as an exercise in common-interest building. Results of training skills with common-interest building are reflected herein with the compilation of consensus declarations crafted by the Student Ambassadors in their Mock Arctic Council Ministerial Meetings from 2016 to 2020. The essence of common-interest building is to make inormed decisions that operate across time in view of urgencies, short-term to long-term, tactical and strategic. Urgencies are embedded across diverse time scales with local-global relevance, as demonstrated by accelerating impacts through: month-years with our global pandemic; years-decades with high technologies; and decades-centuries with global human population size and atmospheric carbon-dioxide concentration in our Earth system. The underlying process of informed decisionmaking involves holistic integration with science as the ‘study of change’, revealed with the natural sciences and social sciences as well as Indigenous knowledge, all of which characterize patterns, trends and processes (albeit with different methods) that become the bases for decisions. Contributing with research and action, the institutions involved with decisionmaking produce: governance mechanisms (laws, agreements and policies as well as regulatory strategies, including insurance, at diverse jurisdictional levels); and built infrastructure (fixed, mobile and other assets, including communication, observing, information and other systems that require technology plus investment). Coupling of governance mechanisms and built infrastructure contributes to progress with sustainability, which were weaved throughout the course with the Arctic Ocean as a case study. Outcomes of the joint-video conferencing course between The Fletcher School and MGIMO University have accelerated globally into the training initiatives with diplomatic schools among foreign ministries as well as with the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR). Our hope is science diplomacy and its engine of informed decisionmaking will lead to lifelong learning across the jurisdictional spectrum with its subnational-national-international legal levels for the benefit of all on Earth across generations.


2019 ◽  
pp. 1-58
Author(s):  

The Arctic Science Agreement entered into force on 23 May 2018 with the Kingdom of Denmark as the depositary is now the third binding legal agreement among all eight Arctic states since 2011, arising with shared leadership from the United States and Russian Federation as co-chairs of the three preceding task forces. The Arctic Science Agreement recognizes the “excellent existing scientific cooperation already under way in many organizations” with the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) as well as IASSA, UArctic and indigenous knowledge institutions among many others. However, as suggested in a November 2017 policy forum published in the journal Science: “effective implementation of the agreement will require its associated networks (including IASC, UArctic, IASSA, and partner organizations) to help strengthen research and education across borders.” Objective of this panel dialogue is to consider how the scientific community can best assist to achieve effective implementation of the Artic Science Agreement, with strategies such as: • Creation of a communication network with researchers that would aid government officials with their implementation of the Arctic Science Agreement; • Application of an information campaign to alert the broader Arctic research community about the Arctic Science Agreement; or • Development of case studies that might the trigger applications of the Arctic Science Agreement, such as with the Multidisciplinary Drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate – MOSAiC – project starting in 2019 with more than 120 M Euros across the international consortium. This session also builds on earlier dialogues, including with the International Science Initiative in the Russia Arctic (ISIRA) in Moscow (November 2017) and in Davos (June 2018) as well as in the Ambassadorial Panel on Arctic Science Diplomacy at the 2018 UArctic Congress last month in Oulu, leading into the 2nd Arctic Science Ministerial next week. The Arctic Science Agreement has the potential to be international, interdisciplinary and inclusive (aspiring to be holistic), bridging the natural sciences and social sciences as well as indigenous knowledge with their different methodologies, all of which reveal patterns and trends that are the bases for informed decision-making – integrating questions, data, evidence and options with science as the ‘study of change.’ Importantly, the Arctic Science Agreement reflects a common interest to enhance scientific cooperation even when diplomatic channels among nations are unstable, recognizing first "the importance of maintaining peace, stability, and constructive cooperation in the Arctic.” Such science diplomacy underlies decisions about governance mechanisms and built infrastructure that require close coupling to achieve progress with sustainable development, which is recognized as a ‘common Arctic issue’ by the eight Arctic states and six Indigenous peoples organizations in the Ottawa Declaration that established the Arctic Council in 1996. Translating the general language of the Arctic Science Agreement into enhanced action, however, requires continuous collaboration among diplomatic and scientific communities. This panel is at the early stages of this journey. Each of the panellists will provide 3-minute opening remarks with their written versions to be compiled in a publication of Science Diplomacy Action as a legacy of this dialogue. Following these opening interventions, there will be interactions among the panelists followed by their exchanges with the audience. The Arctic Science Agreement is a special step into OUR COMMON FUTURE with hope and inspiration across generations. It now gives me great pleasure to introduce the panelists in the order of their presentations.


2018 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  

The 2nd International Dialogue on Science and Technology Advice in Foreign Ministries was co-convened at the Tufts European Center in Talloires, France, from 15-17 September 2017 by the International Network for Government Science Advice (INGSA) and the Science Diplomacy Center (Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University). ‘The Talloires Dialogue’ engaged the Foreign Ministries Science and Technology Advice Network (FMSTAN) and other representatives from foreign ministries of sixteen nations to address developments in our globally-interconnected civilization that require science and technology advice for informed decision-making. Multi-stakeholder fora, including INGSA and FMSTAN, provide global and international venues for dialogues among allies and adversaries alike to build common interests with continuous progress, responding to crises and emergencies, disruptive technologies, global spaces and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals beyond 2030 on a planetary scale. Progress with science diplomacy was discussed as an evolving international, interdisciplinary and inclusive process that requires training to balance national interests and common interests for the benefit of all on Earth across generations.


2017 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  

This paper is a product of the International Dialogue on Science and Technology Advice in Foreign Ministries (Vienna Dialogue) in October 2016, involving more than twenty nations and several international organisations. The event was a key step to further develop the Foreign Minister Science and Technology Advisor Network (FMSTAN), growing from an initial group of five nations. The Vienna Dialogue was convened by the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) at the Vienna headquarters of IIASA, bringing together diplomats from foreign ministries to consider the value of evidence for informed decision‐making by nations with regard to issues, impacts and resources within, across and beyond national boundaries. The evidence comes from the natural and social sciences with engineering and medicine as well as other areas of technology. By building common interests among nations, science is a tool of diplomacy, promoting cooperation and preventing conflict in our world. Science diplomacy was discussed as an international, interdisciplinary and inclusive process to help balance national interests and common interests in view of urgencies today and across generations in our globally‐interconnected civilization.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document