By Julian Dierkes

I am very pleased to be joining in on the DirectDiplomacy project and to try to build on the excellent work and established voice that was created by Ben Rowswell and his various collaborators in the first three years of the project.

As digital diplomacy is evolving there continues to be a need for scholars to understand what impact this evolution is having on international relations, but also to offer their experiences and analyses of existing efforts and initiatives under consideration. That is what I continue to hope to offer through posts to this site and activities of the project.

One of the particular contributions that the DirectDiplomacy project has made is that it offers a focus on Canadian participation in the evolution of digital diplomacy. That is an important feature to continue and is one of the reasons that I’ve wanted to join in on the project.

As I’ve been drawn into research on digital diplomacy from my focus of Canada’s bilateral relationship with Japan and Mongolia, I’ve been looking for an outlet for analyses and commentary that is of particular relevance to Canada while also speaking to a broader discussion. Rather than set up a site that would divert attention, I am very excited about joining an existing effort.

Some Ideas

While I am mostly pleased to join an existing effort, I also have some few ideas of additional activities for the DirectDiplomacy project.

Video

Video and visual representations are becoming a common feature to social media activities. Yet, as researchers, we’re only slowly adjusting to the apparent reality that large parts of the public prefer information to be delivered in video formats. That implies that we focus our research attention more on video, but also that we communicate via video ourselves. While video platforms that are integrated with social media are still emerging, I will be experimenting with blabs focused on digital diplomacy. See my recent preview of the April 2016 #Diplometrics conference with Mark McLaughlin and Jay Wang as an example.

This is an example of where I look at the use of social media as both, a practitioner (of communication about academic research) as well as a researcher/analyst.

Differentiation of Digital Diplomacy

As digital diplomacy has established itself as an element in many countries’ policies and efforts, activities are taking more and more forms and shape. That represents a challenge to researchers and practitioners alike in keeping up with innovations, patterns, and opportunities. One common response to that challenge is functional differentiation and specialization. Within the broader field of direct diplomacy that utilizes social media and other information and communication technologies, that means a distinction between broadcast of information and engagement, for example. This distinction could be paralleled by a distinction between public diplomacy and direct diplomacy in my mind.

For me personally, engagement and direct diplomacy are the much more interesting aspects of the broader field of digital diplomacy as they seem to represent more significant departures from analog diplomacy.

As I work myself more into the direct diplomacy subject matter, I suspect that some of the necessary differentiation will happen in my writing as well, perhaps through some posts that aim to clarify some distinctions, but also through the “categories” scheme for this blog.

Measurement

Clearly, evidence showing the impact of direct diplomacy efforts is somewhat of a holy grail, i.e. a goal that drives the field of practitioners and analysts alike, but that most likely will never be reached. This is another aspect that is shared between digital diplomacy and efforts of knowledge translation and dissemination by academics. While metrics of the impact of academic work were imperfect in an analog world (citation counts, journal impact factors, etc.), quantitative measures are even less convincing in a digital age. For diplomats, requests for measurement of impact are somewhat new in a digital era as such requests were not required to motivate/fund analog diplomacy efforts in the same way.

While measurements might remain elusive, striving for ways to capture some aspects of impact certainly is an important task for researchers and practitioners.

Better Policy Based on Stakeholder Engagement

The greatest promise of direct diplomacy remains – in my mind – that engagement of foreign policy stakeholders abroad and at home will make for better policy. That, however, remains a – very convincing – thesis and will not be tested until we find better platforms, communication tools, and mechanisms for engagement. Challenges that are often highlighted in discussions about engagement are limited resources (it appears to be less resource-consuming to speak to many than to listen to even a few stakeholders), “trolls”, and the need for secrecy and discretion.

One of the aspects of stakeholder engagement in policy making that I’m looking to develop further is governments and policy-makers “thinking out loud” more and more publicly. Rather than request input on a near-finalized policy, why not ask for views on different options that are under consideration? Obviously, this would only be feasible for diplomatic initiatives that do not include private/secret negotiations or even mild confrontations. But in those cases, it strikes me that an open process would be more likely to strengthen the results than consultation on a nearly-finalized policy.

Format

I will likely select a new theme for the blog simply to refresh the visual impression. I am looking at themes that maximize opportunities and visibility for comments.

I also find myself challenged by the high standard of bilingualism set by the project so far. While bilingualism is a huge Canadian asset, my French is passive (i.e. I don’t write, certainly not correctly, in French), it is not widespread in BC and thus is a challenge in recruiting graduate student collaborators who might post in French or translate to French. Something to continue to consider.

I do very much plan to continue to involve graduate students in the project. In my case, that will be primarily students in UBC’s Master of Public Policy and Global Affairs and in my course on “Communicating Policy” most directly.