There are many illustrations from recent history of what we now call science diplomacy; for example,
where nations have advanced scientific collaboration to build relationships and smooth hostilities in
the period post World War II. However, compared to other fields such as cultural diplomacy,
academics and policy makers have only recently begun to investigate and develop frameworks and
tools for ‘science diplomacy’. We are still in the process of testing the limits of the concept, which can
most readily be explained as actions that exist at the interface of scientific practice and foreign policy.
Science is often considered alongside culture as a tool of soft power (Nye, 1990) but there are several
critical differences between the two fields and they should not be given a false equivalence as a
diplomatic tool. Cultural practice and knowledge are by their very nature fundamentally linked to a
particular nation or group; it can be shared without diminution in value and is very difficult to lose.
Science knowledge and practices on the other hand, can be transferred, sold or stolen, and used for
the economic benefit or advancement of others. Intellectual property has independent economic
value and must be protected; its loss can diminish competitiveness, influence and lead to conflict
between states (as we see in contemporary US, China relations). Its application leads to tradeable
technology and goods and hard economic advantage. Taking liberties with Nye’s (1990) classic
terminology, if cultural diplomacy is the runny egg of soft power, then scientific diplomacy is much
harder boiled
