Higher education, research and geopolitics
Higher education and research institutions can no longer neglect, assume they stand apart from, or remain neutral in the face of, the increasingly turbulent geopolitics of today. The events of recent years have shown that, in general and despite some examples of good practice, many are ill-equipped to deal with these rapid changes and their consequences, from the challenges of research security to the student protest movement. There is a real sense that they are very often grappling with these challenges and the wider strategic questions they pose in isolation.
There is a need to strengthen the institutional capacity of universities to respond to geopolitical crises. On a practical note, universities should seriously consider embedding geopolitics into STEM PhDs, as the practice of these subjects can no longer be considered in isolation from the wider world in which they operate.
The response of the global higher education, research and innovation communities to support Ukrainian students, researchers and universities in the wake of the 2022 Russian invasion provides a good model of how to respond to future geopolitical crises. While much of it was developed rapidly, often in isolation, and there is a need for a more systematic evaluation of which efforts were most impactful and why, it demonstrates what can be achieved when institutions and their governments collaborate to address urgent geopolitical issues and is an excellent example of knowledge diplomacy in action.
There should be a recognition that knowledge diplomacy is wider than internationalisation and is a two-way process which seeks to influence geopolitics and how it impacts universities rather than to simply respond to it. Cultural diplomacy and science diplomacy, as well as older concepts of ‘soft power’, should be fully integrated into knowledge diplomacy strategies. They must also recognise the very different geopolitical roles and perspectives of different countries and regions, the variety in terms of autonomy and status of their key institutions, and the political polarisations of their societies, from ‘generational patriotism’ to ‘culture wars’.
Cross-sector collaboration
“We need a mechanism for ‘turning islands of excellence into archipelagos of impact’”
Effective knowledge diplomacy requires collaboration between different sectors involved in the production and exchange of knowledge. Arguably the most important of these are universities, governments and industry (with civil society also cited as an increasingly important sector). Such collaboration can help create and nurture an ecosystem in which governments invest in and support knowledge diplomacy to meet national objectives of prosperity and growth, universities lead in both producing the knowledge and practising the diplomacy that brings the stakeholders together, and industry provides the development which brings the end products to a global marketplace.
The various scientific treaty organisations such as CERN (Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire) or SKA (Square Kilometre Array) provide additional good examples of well defined, high impact international research collaborations, often involving scientific institutions and national governments with clear objectives, delineated roles and responsibilities, and shared infrastructure which in turn lead to greater efficiency and economies of scale across disciplines and borders.
Towards a ‘Knowledge Diplomacy Forum’
A forum should be established to continue this dialogue and to exchange ideas, information and best practice. This should be a confidential ‘safe space’ in order to bring out examples of individual expertise and allow discussion of sensitive issues in an age where social media and political polarisation make it difficult to have nuanced conversations in public. These include, for example:
- whether universities should take active positions on global issues, or provide a platform for their academics to do so individually;
- how to ensure vital research collaboration continues with leading scientific nations which are also authoritarian states on critical global challenges such as climate change, whilst at the same time understanding and mitigating the risks posed to the security of that research;
- how to reach a compromise across the generational and educational divides by listening to, empathising with and where appropriate, acting upon legitimate grievances about the shortcomings of HEIs and the societies in which they operate, whilst rejecting the extremes of some aspects of their very polarised politics;
- and rethinking the entire value proposition of higher education institutions when confidence in the worth of a university degree is falling, and there is increasing competition in the provision of higher education and research from industry.
Such a forum should be set up as an informal network to begin with. In doing so, it is critical to have ‘the right people in the room’, both in terms of stakeholders (and here developing a stakeholder map may be beneficial) but also in terms of geographic perspectives. It could take on a physical or virtual format and evolve as circumstances dictate.
Broad guidelines, shared values and principles of knowledge diplomacy should be developed into a clear ‘declaration of intent’. There is a need to agree clear guidelines and priorities for this work beyond the definitions highlighted in this report, and to communicate the utility and importance of knowledge diplomacy as a concept, while being action-oriented and not getting excessively caught up in theoretical definitions. These shared values include:
- utilising the considerable international influence of universities to improve international relations;
- the importance of speaking up for knowledge, truth and evidence in a world where they are increasingly under threat;
- the recognition of the importance of geographic positionality and different perspectives on critical challenges, which may be vary considerably between the Global North and South;
- and the fundamental importance of international research collaboration to tackle sustainability challenges that encompass the entire globe.
- They have the potential to form the basis of a major global leadership effort by universities, related stakeholders and their allies to meet the considerable demands of the present moment.
Beyond this, participating stakeholders have two key roles to play: firstly, to articulate, underline and promote their public policies on national and multilateral engagement, in order to facilitate greater understanding and collaboration with their counterparts around the world; and secondly to share internal policies around critical issues (e.g. on broad topics such as crisis management and risk assessment as well as specifics such as research security and student unrest).
In the medium to longer term, the Knowledge Diplomacy Forum suggested above and its principles could serve as the basis for a more formal “Knowledge Diplomacy Commission”, or a think tank with a mandate to consider longer term engagement (e.g. over the next 15-20 years), along with exercises in modelling and scenario planning, which could provide the basis for ‘Knowledge Diplomacy Goals’ along similar lines to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The Forum should have clear strategic objectives, be organised from the bottom up, and have the principle of equitable partnership at its heart.