Science Diplomacy at the intersection of post-truth movements, populism, and tech-nationalist science. Interview with Stéphanie Balme
Since 2017, 7 March has been recognised as the Stand Up for Science movement day in response to the anti-science actions of the first Trump administration. The movement advocates for science-based policymaking, scientific integrity in public discourse, and the protection of academic freedom. The beginning of Trump's second term has exacerbated these issues, with staff layoffs, budget cuts, cancelled diversity programmes, and cancelled conferences. In this context, Stéphanie Balme (Director of the Centre for International Studies) joins us to discuss the evolution of science diplomacy in recent years, highlighting the challenges faced by a field that was initially designed to address the Sustainable Development Goals but is now caught up in post-truth movements, anti-science rhetoric, and the increasing politicisation of science by various external actors.
How would you define science diplomacy today, in a few words?
While the term science diplomacy is relatively recent, the role of science in diplomacy has existed for centuries. Science, technology, and innovation (STI) have become crucial to understanding international relations and are now a fundamental part of them. As defined by Bruno Latour, science diplomacy is a typically interdisciplinary field that emphasises the relevance of the social sciences and humanities in a science, technology-driven environment and vice versa. (...)
