Emotional policies: Introducing branding as a tool for science diplomacy

While the link between science and diplomacy is gaining academic attention, how individual science projects effectively contribute to science diplomacy (SD) remains largely unaddressed. This paper aims to bridge this gap by introducing the concept of branding – the deliberate process of imbuing political phenomena with emotional meaning – as a tool to influence perceptions of nation-states. Existing research focuses on nation branding to enhance international relations or policy branding to garner support for specific policies. However, the application of branding within SD remains unexplored. This paper connects SD to branding, examining its added value and limitations in achieving SD objectives. The increasing internationalization, marketization, and profit orientation of science and education sectors highlight the significance of national science sector reputation. Transnational education (TNE) projects are integrated into various policy fields, and branding is presented as a tool to align these sectors with foreign policy agendas, enhancing visibility and attractiveness. The paper introduces a framework for analyzing branding in SD and foreign policy, addressing who is targeted by SD activities and how different audiences are influenced.

The paper draws upon existing literature on science diplomacy, place and policy branding, and public diplomacy. It reviews studies focusing on nation branding to improve international relations, enhance tourism, or create support for policies (often termed 'soft power'). The literature also acknowledges various forms of 'soft' diplomacy, including cultural, science, water, sports, and global health diplomacy. The authors note a surprising lack of research on how branding can support SD and other forms of soft diplomacy, despite the increasing connection between science, education, internationalization, and marketization. This gap necessitates an examination of the role of branding in shaping the reputation of scientific institutions and national science sectors, particularly within the context of cross-border science and higher education projects.

The research employs an explorative case study approach, comparing two science-based branding processes differing in efficiency: German transnational higher education (TNE) and the Dutch Delta Approach (DDA). The German TNE case illustrates challenges and possibilities within SD, drawing on publicly available documents (strategy plans, websites, media interviews, public speeches) and expert interviews. The DDA case reinterprets an existing dataset of Dutch government policy documents and interviews with policymakers, experts, and academics. The data analysis compares branding activities across three layers: place branding (nation-state image), policy branding (specific policy image), and policy tool branding (specific project image). The analysis examines the purposes of branding (reputation enhancement, differentiation, agenda-setting) and the process of brand creation (brand definition, target audience identification, brand communication, brand management). The study also investigates the limitations of branding, such as image-reality gaps, information overload, and governance structure challenges.

The comparison of the German TNE and Dutch DDA cases reveals significant differences in branding effectiveness. In the German case, branding activities are fragmented across three ministries (Foreign Office, Ministry of Education and Research, Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development), lacking coordination and a unified strategy. Place branding efforts to promote Germany as a science nation are inconsistent. Policy branding is weak, focused more on domestic political competition than on external communication. Policy tool branding is limited, with individual projects lacking a unified identity. The Dutch DDA case presents a stark contrast. The Dutch government adopted a comprehensive and coordinated branding strategy, successfully linking the DDA to existing national water-related brands. Place branding effectively connects Dutch water expertise to national pride and identity. Policy branding is strong, with consistent messaging across ministries. Policy tool branding utilizes a variety of projects under a unified 'Dutch Water Sector' umbrella, although inconsistencies at the individual project level exist. The study identifies three key limitations: the 'image-reality gap' where reality falls short of projected brand image, information overload through overly complex messaging, and governance challenges arising from unclear responsibility for brand maintenance. The findings show a need for coordinated branding and brand management by nation-state actors and an effective brand manager capable of overseeing the process.

The findings highlight the importance of coordinated branding activities across all three layers (nation, policy, tool) for successful science diplomacy. The German TNE case demonstrates how uncoordinated efforts lead to ineffectiveness, while the Dutch DDA example showcases the benefits of a strategically planned and managed branding campaign. The study underscores the changing role of foreign ministries, highlighting the need for them to become effective coordinators of multi-stakeholder branding processes. The politicization of science through branding is a potential concern that needs careful consideration. The study acknowledges that while branding can enhance science diplomacy, it is not a simple solution to all international relations challenges.

This paper introduces a novel framework for analyzing branding in science diplomacy, identifying three distinct branding layers and their interconnections. The case study comparison demonstrates the crucial role of coordinated branding efforts for effective science diplomacy. Uncoordinated branding may negatively impact diplomatic goals, emphasizing the need for strategic planning, resource allocation, and clear responsibilities. Future research should explore the implications of branding across different scientific fields and in the context of global crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, to further refine understanding of this tool's potential and limitations.

The study is limited by its focus on only two case studies, potentially restricting the generalizability of the findings. Further research with a broader range of cases is needed to validate the framework and conclusions. The research also focuses primarily on the brand creation process, with less emphasis on audience reception and the effectiveness of branding in achieving specific diplomatic goals.