Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation

International Relations Public Diplomacy
by
Ellen Huijgh, Bruce Gregory, Jan Melissen

Introduction

Public diplomacy is a relatively young, though popular, concept and field of study, with a deluge of literature since the turn of the century. The practice of public diplomacy, or diplomatic engagement with people, preceded the integration of its terminology within governments and ministries of foreign affairs. Public diplomacy as a practice and field of study is subject to wider evolutions occurring in diplomacy, international relations, and societies. Public diplomacy is traditionally considered to be different from traditional government-to-government diplomacy because it engages nonstate actors. Although many policymakers and scholars associate public diplomacy primarily with “soft power” (the power to persuade by attraction), it is relevant to both soft and hard power. In recent decades, public diplomacy has become increasingly central to the practice of diplomacy. Public diplomacy is a multidisciplinary field of study with little in the way of a theoretical body and uniform definition, and it is characterized by conceptual confusion. With hundreds of diverging descriptions, there is no one-size-fits-all definition of public diplomacy, and the debate on what it is and is not remains robust. But this debate also distracts from deeper issues in the field and broad international agreement on public diplomacy’s evolution and significance. Despite definitional issues, two common conceptual frameworks recur in the literature: “old” (unidirectional government communication) and “new” (network relational multi-actor) public diplomacy. In effect, these analytical categories are scholarly attempts to adjust public diplomacy’s concepts and key functions (actors, publics, means, goals) to the changing international environment. They do not replace one another but are complementary to each other. The latest round of scholarship seeks to move beyond these categorizations by emphasizing the integration of old and new in public diplomacy as well as public diplomacy’s integration within diplomacy. US writings once dominated the literature, but contributions from other regions are increasing rapidly. The study of and literature on public diplomacy is no longer confined to the West, with works now coming from and on Asia, particularly China. This article’s aim is to guide readers in their comprehension of public diplomacy through a selection of sources from various viewpoints. Beginning with works and online resources that offer a General Overview, the article further suggests key Journals to consult on public diplomacy. Its next section (A Multidisciplinary Field of Study) recommends a selection of literature coming from major disciplines and viewpoints in which public diplomacy has been studied (public diplomacy and Communication, Diplomacy Studies, Soft Power). Following this, it presents a selection of literature on public diplomacy’s conceptual frameworks from different time frames (20th-century, 21st-century, and future public diplomacy). Finally, it recommends literature from and on different geographical regions.

General Overviews

Because public diplomacy literature relates to a myriad of issues and is studied within various conceptual, disciplinary, and geographical points of view, works that provide an all-inclusive overview simply do not exist. There are, however, special issues of journals, such as Cowan and Cull 2008 and Special Issue: Credible Public Diplomacy, and edited compendiums that provide strong and varied overviews of the broad scope of public diplomacy. Three edited works—Cowan and Cull 2008, Melissen 2007, and Snow and Taylor 2009—provide essential field knowledge. For newcomers and experts alike, these sources give the reader a particularly fine overview of public diplomacy by bringing together writings on different topics, cases, and approaches. These standard works are accessible to students, scholars, and practitioners. They are recommended to those searching for a straightforward means of expanding their fluency on the topic and as good starting points for delving more deeply into specifics. For the reader interested in more literature on public diplomacy, an overview of publications, bibliographies, discussions, and events can also be found online at different institutes’ and universities’ websites. These vary in quality, and most are subject to change and differ in political angle. A few sites are of fine quality, recommendable and of particular use to students, scholars, and practitioners searching for interactive forums, events, databases, and publications, such as the website of the University of Southern California Center on Public Diplomacy. There is also an extensive archive of lists of literature online from Bruce Gregory’s Public Diplomacy Resources, and Phil Taylor’s Website.

  • Bruce Gregory’s Public Diplomacy Resources. Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication, George Washington University.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    An extensive annotated overview of public diplomacy books, articles, government reports and websites. Useful for teachers, students, scholars and practitioners. Updates readers every two months on the newest literature. Archive (from 2003) available online.

    Find this resource:

    • Cowan, Geoffrey, and Nicholas J. Cull, eds. Special Issue: Public Diplomacy in a Changing World. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616.1 (2008).

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Provides broad insight into public diplomacy theory, tools, case studies, and scholarship development. Approaches public diplomacy from different angles, such as soft power, the public sphere, place branding, international relations theory, and new technologies. Its conceptual section is somewhat reliant on US thought, but also includes Chinese and South American cases.

      Find this resource:

    • Melissen, Jan, ed. The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An edited collection of articles on the new environment, changing perspectives, and improving practices of public diplomacy. Contributed to putting the notion of the “new public diplomacy” on the map. First published in 2005.

      Find this resource:

    • Phil Taylor’s Website. Institute of Communication Studies, University of Leeds.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Discontinued after its creator’s death in 2010 but still very valuable for its overview of three hundred sources on public diplomacy and related fields, with a slight focus on US publications. Many references have full articles or in-text executive summaries and hyperlinks attached.

      Find this resource:

    • Snow, Nancy, and Philip M. Taylor, eds. Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy. New York: Routledge, 2009.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This handbook generously adds to the literature, with twenty-nine essays by scholars and former practitioners. It brings together various perspectives (strategic communication, historical, public opinion, etc.), facets (cultural and citizen diplomacy), and cases (Asian, American European). It is slightly oriented to the United States, but is broad in scope.

      Find this resource:

    • Special Issue: Credible Public Diplomacy: A Lesson for Our Times. Fletcher Forum of World Affairs 32.3 (2008).

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Less frequently cited, this special edition provides useful articles and speeches given at the Fletcher School’s 100th Anniversary Edward R. Murrow Memorial Conference. It is available in hard copy and online and contains contributions on key issues such as credibility, definitions, and the use of culture and broadcasting in public diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • University of Southern California Center on Public Diplomacy.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Continuously updated website with extensive information. Contains public diplomacy publications from staff and fellows as well as from international public diplomacy scholars and practitioners. Includes: blogs, PDiN (Public Diplomacy in the News), book review collections, literature list, and archive from 2004.

      Find this resource:

    Journals

    Rather than having academic journals solely dedicated to the topic of public diplomacy, there are some that publish articles on the topic on a regular, systematic basis, within the broader scope of diplomacy, such as Diplomacy and Statecraft, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, and of branding, such as the Journal of Place Branding and Public Diplomacy. Recently, a few high-quality student-run public diplomacy journals with editorial boards have published interesting work through special issues, such as the PD Magazine of the University of Southern California, and Exchange: The Journal of Public Diplomacy of the University of Syracuse. In China, where literature on public diplomacy is booming, an academic journal Public Diplomacy Quarterly (cited under Chinese Public Diplomacy) is solely dedicated to Chinese public diplomacy, but it largely remains accessible only to scholars with knowledge of Mandarin. Several papers on public diplomacy, which frequently get reworked into journal publications, can also be found in the International Studies Association database, in particular its annual conferences website.

    A Multidisciplinary Field of Study

    There is a rich body of literature written by historians and scholars in other disciplines on the ways in which groups throughout history have sought to comprehend, engage, and influence the thoughts and actions of others, such as Lasswell, et al. 1979–1980. These works were the roots of early public diplomacy writings. It was not until the 20th century that academic writings on topics such as propaganda and the public sphere began to develop as direct precursors to the study and practice of public diplomacy. Janis and Smith 1965 and Fisher 1972 address the value of social science research for public diplomacy, from the behavioral sciences and international relations subfield of constructivism in particular. However, as Lord 2005 indicated, most of these writings did not make this connection. This changed in the first decade of the 21st century, with a growing number of scholars and former practitioners writing on public diplomacy as a multidisciplinary field of scholarship, such as Gilboa 2008 and Gregory 2008. Today, academic literature on public diplomacy is flooded with contributions from a wide variety of disciplines, including communication studies, political science, international relations, diplomacy studies, public relations, branding, sociology, anthropology, psychology, security studies, and computer science. Scholars are mining these disciplines to create analytical frameworks and analyze case studies. The domains of Communication, Diplomacy Studies, and Soft Power have provided the majority of the insights in the public diplomacy literature.

    • Fisher, Glen H. Public Diplomacy and the Behavioral Sciences. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1972.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A pioneering study on the relevance of the social sciences to public diplomacy, by a sociologist and cultural anthropologist who was also a career diplomat. Describes what practitioners can learn from academic research on such topics as perception, cognition, identity, ethnic diversity, social structures, language, reasoning, and social psychology.

      Find this resource:

    • Gilboa, Eytan. “Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy.” ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616.1 (2008): 55–77.

      DOI: 10.1177/0002716207312142Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Influential overview of public diplomacy as a multidisciplinary field of scholarship in which relevant disciplines include international relations, strategic studies, public relations, and communication. Summarizes and evaluates conceptual models and research methodologies. Provides a framework for comparative public diplomacy research based on time dimensions, instruments, and degrees of government involvement.

      Find this resource:

    • Gregory, Bruce. “Public Diplomacy: Sunrise of an Academic Field.” ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616.1 (2008): 274–290.

      DOI: 10.1177/0002716207311723Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Surveys scholarship with relevance, often unintended, to the study of public diplomacy and literature derived from diplomatic practice. The article suggests that this growing multidisciplinary body of literature and an achievable consensus on public diplomacy’s analytical boundaries hold promise for an emerging academic field. Includes a lengthy bibliography.

      Find this resource:

    • Janis, Irving L., and M. Brewster Smith. “Effects of Education and Persuasion on National and International Images.” In International Behavior: A Social-Psychological Analysis. Edited by Herbert C. Kelman, 190–235. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A summary of social science research findings during the decades following World War II relevant to government communication directed at foreign and domestic populations. Examines a range of promising hypotheses relating to attitude formation, images, and persuasive communication with implications for public diplomacy practice. Includes an extensive annotated bibliography.

      Find this resource:

    • Lasswell, Harold D., Daniel Lerner, and Hans Speier, eds. Propaganda and Communication in World History. 3 vols. Honolulu: University Press of Hawai‘i, 1979–1980.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Volume 1, The Symbolic Instrument in Early Times, 1979; Volume 2, Emergence of Public Opinion in the West, 1980; Volume 3, A Pluralizing World in Formation,1980. Chapters by fifty scholars from a variety of disciplines and countries that put diplomatic engagement with people in historical perspective. An overview of social, cultural, and political communication by groups (tribes, empires, kingdoms, cities, and states) in all regions of the world from early Mesopotamia to the late 20th century.

      Find this resource:

    • Lord, Kristin M. “What Academics (Should Have To) Say about Public Diplomacy.” Paper presented at the American Political Science Association’s Political Communication Conference on International Communication and Conflict, Washington, DC, August 2005.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The author finds surprising scholarly silence on public diplomacy given its growing prominence among policymakers and diplomatic practitioners. Provides examples of ideas relevant to public diplomacy practice in research on constructivism, in-group and out-group identity, contact hypothesis, social cognition, persuasion and attitude change, media framing, and discourse theory.

      Find this resource:

    Communication

    Among the different disciplines that have influenced the public diplomacy literature, the field of communication has played a leading role. Communication studies provides insights into all aspects of public diplomacy practice, including opinion research, advocacy, engagement, and evaluation. A few particular sources have inspired, influenced, and been integrated into public diplomacy writings, allowing scholars and students to place public diplomacy into a broader perspective and understand its foundations. Shortly after World War I, Walter Lippmann published his book Public Opinion (Lippmann 1997, first published in 1922), a seminal work on public opinion and “the pictures in our heads,”which is routinely assigned in public diplomacy courses today, This work served as a precursor to other crucial writings, such as Fisher 1988, on cognitive framing and understanding mindsets, and Entman 2008, on media framing. These studies of public opinion and mediated communication played an important role in the development of public diplomacy’s analytical frameworks and writings on “top-down” elite-driven communication strategies and “bottom up” dialogic models of engagement and collaboration. In the 21st century, Castells 2008, a canonical work on the public sphere, has also nourished public diplomacy thought on networks and global civil society. Today, communication disciplines continue to contribute to the public diplomacy literature. Recent illustrations of such writings include studies of public diplomacy through the lens of, and on its relation with, other fields, as seen in Fitzpatrick 2007 on public relations, Manheim 2011, Corman, et al. 2007 on strategic communication, and Szondi 2008 on nation branding.

    • Castells, Manuel. “The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance.” ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616.1 (2008): 78–93.

      DOI: 10.1177/0002716207311877Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Summarizes thinking by a leading scholar of networks and society on definitions and evolving relationships between governance, civil society, and the public sphere. Its clarity and brevity make it useful for students. Includes his view, contested by many, that public diplomacy is the diplomacy of the public, not government.

      Find this resource:

    • Corman, Steven R., Angela Tretheway, and Bud Goodall. A 21st Century Model for Communication in the Global War of Ideas: From Simplistic Influence to Pragmatic Complexity. CSC Report 0701. Tempe: Consortium for Strategic Communication, Arizona State University, 2007.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A well-argued critique of strategic communication and public diplomacy efforts that rely on a message-influence model. The authors advance a pragmatic model that deemphasizes control, embraces complexity, substitutes variation for repetition, interprets actions and motivations, and expects for failure.

      Find this resource:

    • Entman, Robert. “Theorizing Mediated Public Diplomacy: The U.S. Case.” International Journal of Press/Politics 13.2 (2008): 87–102.

      DOI: 10.1177/1940161208314657Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Building on his acclaimed earlier work, Projections of Power (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), Entman develops a theoretical framework for mediated US public diplomacy grounded in his cascading network activation model of media framing. He argues his model can be applied to the public diplomacy of other countries.

      Find this resource:

    • Fisher, Glen. Mindsets: The Role of Culture and Perception in International Relations. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press, 1988.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Fisher, an experienced scholar and public diplomacy practitioner, draws on anthropology, social psychology, and other disciplines to argue the importance of understanding cultures and “mindsets” in diplomacy and international engagement. Contains chapters on perception and reasoning, cultural patterns, and practical advice for diplomats in “diagnosing mindsets.” Well written.

      Find this resource:

    • Fitzpatrick, Kathy R. “Advancing the New Public Diplomacy: A Public Relations Perspective.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 2.3 (2007): 187–211.

      DOI: 10.1163/187119007X240497Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Examines the relationship management model in public relations and its potential to advance the study and practice of public diplomacy. The author contends the model is relevant to relational approaches in public diplomacy, a management alternative to traditional communication mindsets, and important for actions that support diplomatic practice.

      Find this resource:

    • Lippmann, Walter. Public Opinion. New York: Free Press Paperbacks, 1997.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Lippmann’s masterpiece is still widely used in public diplomacy studies for its insights into cognitive framing; mediated knowledge; the role of elites and dialogue in the public sphere; and the importance of enlisting interest, building common ground, and political symbols in communication strategies. Originally published in 1922.

      Find this resource:

    • Manheim, Jarol B. Strategy in Information and Influence Campaigns: How Policy Advocates, Social Movements, Insurgent Groups, Corporations, Governments, and Others Get What They Want. New York: Routledge, 2011.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Used as a reference in communication and public diplomacy studies. Systematically explores assumptions, strategies, and tactics of public and private actors that initiate and defend against strategic communication campaigns. Writing for scholars and practitioners, Manheim combines closely argued theoretical analysis with numerous cases and examples.

      Find this resource:

    • Szondi, György. “Public Diplomacy and Nation Branding: Conceptual Similarities and Differences.” Discussion Papers in Diplomacy 112. The Hague: Clingendael: Netherlands Institute of International Relations, November 2008.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Examines public diplomacy and nation branding as fields of study and practice. Places public diplomacy at the intersection of international relations, communication studies, and nation branding. Szondi develops five conceptual models to analyze their degrees of congruence, strengths, and limitations.

      Find this resource:

    Diplomacy Studies

    Public diplomacy literature has also derived its shape as a subset of diplomacy studies. This literature can be grouped into three historical phases in which the importance dedicated to public diplomacy has grown from being a footnote to a central component of diplomacy. Early and mid-20th-century histories of diplomacy and theories of diplomatic practice, such as those examined in Hamilton and Langhorne 2011, acknowledged the roles of image cultivation and propaganda in diplomacy, but only as footnotes to studies focusing primarily on diplomacy as negotiation and government-to-government relations. Globalization, communication technologies, and the 20th century’s hot and cold wars led to a second phase. In what might be called “traditional public diplomacy” literature, scholars and diplomats began systematically to examine the diplomacy of governments aimed at publics, not just other governments (see Roberts 2006, for example). In the third phase, the “new public diplomacy” became a central focus of scholarly and practitioners’ writings on 21st-century diplomacy. A growing body of literature came to view diplomacy’s public dimension as essential to understanding diplomatic theory and practice, as well as changes within this theory and practice. An important overview of the literature correlated changes in diplomatic practice to the context in which it operated. Cooper, et al. 2008 drew attention to new forms of global governance; Kerr and Wiseman 2012 and Cooper, et al. 2013 to changes in contemporary diplomacy; Hamilton and Langhorne 2011, Fisher 2013, and Pigman 2011 to the rise of digital communication technologies and expansion of government and nonstate diplomatic actors and their interplay; and Cowan and Arsenault 2008 to the advantages and disadvantages of messaging and relational models of public diplomacy.

    • Cooper, Andrew F., Jorge Heine, and Ramesh Tahkur, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Fifty chapters by scholars and practitioners frame challenges and changes in 21st-century diplomacy’s context, actors, and methods. Includes essays on network diplomacy, public diplomacy, media and diplomacy, cultural diplomacy, digital technology, soft power, smart power, and civil society.

      Find this resource:

    • Cooper, Andrew F., Brian Hocking, and William Maley, eds. Global Governance and Diplomacy: Worlds Apart? London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.

      DOI: 10.1057/9780230227422Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This rich collection of theoretical essays and case studies by twenty-one leading scholars and practitioners of diplomacy explores relationships between diplomatic practice and multilayered global governance. Includes sections on multistakeholder, public, and network diplomacy, implications of globalization, and perceptual and contextual challenges.

      Find this resource:

    • Cowan, Geoffrey, and Amelia Arsenault. “Moving from Monologue to Dialogue to Collaboration: The Three Layers of Public Diplomacy.” ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616.1 (2008): 10–30.

      DOI: 10.1177/0002716207311863Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A brief, accessible, and frequently cited introduction to core concepts of public diplomacy. Examines strengths, limitations and appropriate circumstances relevant to “monologue” (one-way communication), “dialogue” (multidirectional communication), and “collaboration” (joint ventures).

      Find this resource:

    • Fisher, Ali. Collaborative Public Diplomacy: How Transnational Networks Influenced American Studies in Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.

      DOI: 10.1057/9781137042477Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Bridges study of 20th- and 21st-century public diplomacy by combining deep research on networks of scholars, foundations, and government actors instrumental in developing American Studies in Europe during the Cold War with innovative analysis of implications for understanding multihub, multidirectional networks in the age of social media.

      Find this resource:

    • Hamilton, Keith, and Richard Langhorne. The Practice of Diplomacy: Its Evolution, Theory, and Administration. 2d ed. London: Routledge, 2011.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This classic textbook, originally published in 1995, and written for scholars and practitioners, gives ample space to diplomacy’s role in shaping public opinion from ancient societies to the present. The second edition includes new material on forces shaping diplomacy, new diplomatic actors, electronic communication, and the “new public diplomacy.”

      Find this resource:

    • Kerr, Pauline, and Geoffrey Wiseman, eds. Diplomacy in a Globalizing World: Theories and Practices. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Twenty-three chapters by luminaries in diplomacy studies provide insights into traditional and contemporary developments, practices, and theories. Public diplomacy scholars can benefit from articles on public diplomacy, track-two diplomacy, e-diplomacy, and the national diplomatic systems. Pedagogical tools accompany each chapter, and separate online companion websites for students and instructors are available.

      Find this resource:

    • Pigman, Geoffrey A. Contemporary Diplomacy: Representation and Communication in a Globalized World. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2011.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A textbook that places public diplomacy in a multi-actor, multifunctional context. Part one focuses on diplomatic actors: state and substate governments, multilateral institutions, supranational and regional polities, firms, civil society organizations, and celebrity diplomats. Part two focuses on process: new technologies, public, economic, military, and cultural diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Roberts, Walter R. “The Evolution of Diplomacy.” Mediterranean Quarterly 17.3 (Summer 2006): 55–64.

      DOI: 10.1215/10474552-2006-015Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Short, well-written piece that examines the rise of public diplomacy during the mid-20th century. Compares emerging practices of government-to-people diplomacy with traditional government-to-government diplomacy. Discusses US adoption of the term “public diplomacy.” Includes examples from US, British, Austrian, German, and Soviet diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    Soft Power

    Joseph Nye originated the term “soft power” in the late 1980s, defining it as “the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payments” (Nye 2004, p. x), which he categorizes as hard power. His writings on wielding public diplomacy through soft power, particularly Nye 2004 and Nye 2011, have influenced diplomatic practice worldwide and contributed substantially to public diplomacy literature. Some debates in a large body of literature on soft power focus on conceptual issues, such as a need to sharpen analytical distinctions between public diplomacy and soft power, an agent-centric emphasis on the notion of wielding soft power, and insufficient attention to the social construction of soft power and to relational and network-centric approaches in public diplomacy. Hayden 2012, van Ham 2010, and Zaharna 2007 provide excellent insights on these issues. Others, such as Hall and Smith 2013 and Watanabe and McConnell 2008, emphasize empirical research in support of analytical concepts and the growing importance of soft power in the public diplomacy of Asian countries. This scholarship is expanding and strengthening what can be learned from the Western tradition (see also Public Diplomacy in Asia-Pacific).

    • Hall, Ian, and Frank Smith. “The Struggle for Soft Power in Asia: Public Diplomacy and Regional Competition.” Asian Security 9.1 (2013): 1–18.

      DOI: 10.1080/14799855.2013.760926Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Examines the competition for soft power through public diplomacy in Asia. Uses qualitative and quantitative data to illustrate little positive correlation between Asian states’ investments in and effects of public diplomacy. Argues that the struggle for soft power might have detrimental rather than beneficial effects on regional tensions.

      Find this resource:

    • Hayden, Craig. The Rhetoric of Soft Power: Public Diplomacy in Global Contexts. Lanham, MD: Lexington, 2012.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A thoughtful inquiry into concepts of soft power and its implementation in the public diplomacy perspectives and practices of international actors. Hayden examines how public rhetoric shapes efforts to leverage soft power in comparative case studies of China, Japan, Venezuela, and the United States. Includes an extensive bibliography.

      Find this resource:

    • Nye, Joseph S., Jr. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs, 2004.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This book best connects Nye’s influential soft power scholarship to public diplomacy. Introduces the term “smart power” and provides numerous examples of problems in wielding soft power in the public diplomacy of the United States, countries in Europe and Asia, and nonstate actors.

      Find this resource:

    • Nye, Joseph S., Jr. The Future of Power. New York: Public Affairs, 2011.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Nye synthesizes his theoretical work and insights as an occasional government practitioner. Updates his thinking on smart power strategies and using public diplomacy to leverage soft power. Includes a penetrating analysis of cyberpower. The narrative style is broadly accessible. Detailed footnotes provide an in-depth analytical structure for scholars.

      Find this resource:

    • van Ham, Peter. Social Power in International Politics. London: Routledge, 2010.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An innovative study that defines and develops a constructivist interpretation of social power. Explores conceptual distinctions between social, soft, hard, and “sticky” power. Chapters systematically examine the relevance of social power to public diplomacy, place branding, and traditional and new media. Includes an extensive bibliography.

      Find this resource:

    • Watanabe, Yasushi, and David L. McConnell, eds. Soft Power Superpowers: Cultural and National Assets of Japan and the United States. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 2008.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The editors combine their thoughtful critique of Nye’s concept of soft power, an equally thoughtful foreword by Nye, and fifteen essays on strengths and limitations in the soft power strategies of Japan and the United States. Chapters discuss contrasting perceptions, educational exchanges, popular culture, and public diplomacy strategies.

      Find this resource:

    • Zaharna, Rhonda S. “The Soft Power Differential: Network Communication and Mass Communication in Public Diplomacy.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 2.3 (2007): 213–228.

      DOI: 10.1163/187119007X240505Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Compares struggling US efforts to wield soft power through state-based information and media-driven initiatives with NGOs that successfully create soft power through relational, network-centric public diplomacy. Concludes “new” public diplomacy strategies tailored to a relational-network model will be more effective in today’s international context.

      Find this resource:

    Twentieth-Century Public Diplomacy

    Although communication and cultural projection by leaders, diplomats, and soldiers directed at foreign publics can be found throughout history, beginning with ancient Greece, Egypt, and Rome, public diplomacy literature generally agrees that the term “public diplomacy” was coined by retired US diplomat Edmund Gullion, when creating the Edward R. Murrow Center for Public Diplomacy at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy in 1965. Public diplomacy writings began to use the term as a convenient umbrella for state-sponsored international information, cultural affairs, and broadcasting activities. Although the roots of modern public diplomacy can be found in the 20th century’s global wars, geopolitics, contested ideologies, and industrial-age communication technologies, the literature on its study and practice focused almost entirely on the US experience during the Cold War. Former practitioners and scholar diplomats provide much of this literature (e.g., Arndt 2005, Heil 2003, Tuch 1990). Think tanks and advisory panels, central players in the US foreign affairs tradition, are another important source. Taylor 1999 is an important discussion of British public diplomacy from World War I to the 1990s. More recently, historians and other scholars have engaged in in-depth research, as seen in Caute 2004, Cull 2008, Ninkovich 1981, and Osgood and Etheridge 2010. Their efforts reflect increased access to archival resources, the interest of some scholars in exploring gaps between theory and practice, the explosive growth of public diplomacy in the practice of diplomats and foreign ministries, and development of public diplomacy as an academic field of study.

    • Arndt, Richard T. The First Resort of Kings: American Cultural Diplomacy in the Twentieth Century. Dulles, VA: Potomac, 2005.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A detailed history of the politics, policies, professional activities, and bureaucratic struggles of US cultural and public diplomacy from World War I to the 21st century. Compares the American experience with that of other nations, and draws sharp analytical distinctions between long-term, interest-based cultural diplomacy and short-term, policy-oriented public diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Caute, David. The Dancer Defects: The Struggle for Cultural Supremacy during the Cold War. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Deeply researched history of Cold War cultural conflicts between the Soviet Union and the West shaped by ideology, global media, and rival claims to a shared Enlightenment tradition. Examines the influence of writers, dancers, playwrights, poets, artists, musicians, filmmakers, arts organizations, and government agencies in competing approaches to public diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Cull, Nicholas J. The Cold War and the United States Information Agency: American Propaganda and Public Diplomacy 1945–1989. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Historical account of US Cold War public diplomacy. Examines strengths and limitations of international information, broadcasting, and cultural activities within major foreign and domestic issues. Extensive bibliography of archival records, secondary sources, and interviews. Updated from 1989 to 2001 in The Decline and Fall of the US Information Agency (2012).

      Find this resource:

    • Heil, Alan L., Jr. Voice of America: A History. New York: Columbia University Press, 2003.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      In-depth history of the Voice of America and sixty years of US international radio broadcasting, by a former practitioner. Discusses policies, programs, editorial conflicts, reorganizations, evolving broadcasting technologies, and contested relations between broadcasters and diplomats in the context of global and domestic political issues.

      Find this resource:

    • Ninkovich, Frank A. The Diplomacy of Ideas: U.S. Foreign Policy and Cultural Relations 1938–1950. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An important study of the meaning and evolution of cultural diplomacy. Combines discussion of conceptual, political, and institutional issues, still contested by cultural and public diplomacy practitioners, with a carefully researched history of activities of philanthropic foundations and the US Department of State’s Division of Cultural Relations.

      Find this resource:

    • Osgood, Kenneth A., and Brian C. Etheridge, eds. The United States and Public Diplomacy: New Directions in Cultural and International History. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2010.

      DOI: 10.1163/ej.9789004176911.i-380Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      In this rich collection, fourteen US and European scholars examine the roles of governments, nongovernmental organizations, and individuals in 20th-century public diplomacy. Case studies of the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, The Netherlands, Ireland, Spain, and El Salvador explore public diplomacy sponsored by and directed at the United States.

      Find this resource:

    • Taylor, Philip M. British Propaganda in the 20th Century: Selling Democracy. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1999.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Provides a sweeping examination of British propaganda, public diplomacy, and psychological warfare concepts and practices from the First World War to the Gulf War of 1991. Includes in-depth analysis of film, radio, television, and the press, and argues Britain created a democratic model for propaganda worldwide.

      Find this resource:

    • Tuch, Hans N. Communicating with the World: U.S. Public Diplomacy Overseas. New York: St. Martin’s, 1990.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Practitioner’s survey of US public diplomacy from World War II to the Cold War’s end. Includes case studies on US-Soviet cultural relations and US public diplomacy strategies that focused on Brazil, Germany’s “successor generation” and NATO’s deployment of intermediate range nuclear missiles in Europe.

      Find this resource:

    Twenty-First Century: The “New Public Diplomacy”

    Scholarly writings on public diplomacy, described as the “new public diplomacy,” grew prevalent around the turn of the 21st century (e.g., Melissen 2007). The “new public diplomacy” embraces attempts in the literature to address public engagement practices of governments in the context of globalization, increased mobility, a growing number of diplomatic actors, and the involvement of both foreign and domestic publics. The “new” prefix has rapidly gained a foothold in the literature and has been applied to different contexts and cases. A more general examination of key characteristics associated with the “new public diplomacy” is provided in Cull 2009, Melissen 2007, and Welsh and Fearn 2008, a collection of more policy-oriented contributions. Other writings specifically address the new public diplomacy’s multi-actor nature, with many actors above and below the national government level, as well as with different types of nongovernmental actors, as seen in Ronfeldt and Arquilla 2009, an article drawing attention to the growing importance of nonstate organizations and civil society; and Huijgh 2010, an exploration of the public diplomacy of subnational governments. Leonard, et al. 2002 and Riordan 2007 provide greater insights into the network relational, dialogue, and collaborative nature of the “new public diplomacy,” moving beyond government informational activities, including digital applications. Zaharna, et al. 2013, an edited collection of articles, pushes more forward-looking multiperspective views on a relational approach to public diplomacy to the foreground. As there is a great deal of literature on the use of Social Media in public diplomacy, a separate subsection is dedicated to this topic.

    • Cull, Nicholas J. Public Diplomacy: Lessons from the Past. CPD Perspectives on Public Diplomacy 2. Los Angeles: Figueroa, 2009.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Easily accessible volume in terms of its content and acquisition (free to download online). Provides convenient overview of public diplomacy definitions, its evolution as a concept, and an exploration of cases illustrating effective and ineffective public diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Huijgh, Ellen. “The Public Diplomacy of Federated Entities: Examining the Quebec Model.” In Regional Sub-State Diplomacy Today. Edited by David Criekemans, 125–150. Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff, 2010.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Adds to thinking on the changing study and conduct of public diplomacy by examining substates. Begins with the Quebec case to discuss identity-related, institutionalized, and domestic public diplomacy of substates. Touches upon similar European and North American examples to reflect on future developments. Originally published in The Hague Journal of Diplomacy (2010).

      Find this resource:

    • Leonard, Mark, Catherine Stead, and Conrad Smewing. Public Diplomacy. London: Foreign Policy Centre, 2002.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Important examination of the goals to develop as well as the dimensions of collaborative and cooperative models, coordination issues, different actors, and networked approaches of public diplomacy. Builds on fieldwork in different countries, numerous interviews with practitioners, and contributions from academic experts. Offers practice-oriented suggestions for public diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Melissen, Jan, ed. The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Key source from this century’s first decade providing broader insights on “new public diplomacy,” with innovative thinking about its changing environment, views, and practices. Includes sections on differences between public diplomacy theories and practices, changes in conceptual frameworks, and cases such as China, Norway, Canada, the United States, and the European Union. First published in 2005.

      Find this resource:

    • Riordan, Shaun. “Dialogue-Based Public Diplomacy: A New Foreign Policy Paradigm?” In The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. Edited by Jan Melissen, 180–195. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Focuses on practical aspects of how to undertake public diplomacy within the new security agenda. Makes a practice-inspired case for a more collaborative approach to foreign policy, with dialogue-based public diplomacy at its center.

      Find this resource:

    • Ronfeldt, David, and John Arquilla. “Noopolitik: A New Paradigm for Public Diplomacy.” In Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy. Edited by Nancy Snow and Philip M. Taylor, 352–365. New York: Routledge, 2009.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Excursion into ways in which the changing nature of diplomacy and political communication are influencing public diplomacy. Examines features of three realms of information (cyberspace, infosphere, and noosphere), with special attention to the role of nonstate organizations and the growing strength of civil society.

      Find this resource:

    • Welsh, Jolyon, and Daniel Fearn, eds. Engagement: Public Diplomacy in a Globalised World. London: Foreign and Commonwealth Office, 2008.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Scholars and practitioners discussing public diplomacy’s role and potential in a globalized world. This fine collection contains crucial writings on key issues of public diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Zaharna, Rhonda S., Amelia Arsenault, and Ali Fisher, eds. Relational, Networked and Collaborative Approaches to Public Diplomacy: The Connective Mindshift. New York: Routledge, 2013.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Leading diplomacy and communication scholars analyze concepts and practice in the relational approach to public diplomacy. Chapters assess political, cultural, and ethical issues, network theory, uses of social media and collaborative strategies of state and nonstate actors. An essential resource for defenders and critics of the relational model.

      Find this resource:

    Social Media

    The term “Web 1.0” identifies a digital technology revolution in the 1990s driven by Internet expansion and widespread use of personal computers. Using “cyber diplomacy” and “public diplomacy 1.0” as terms of reference, scholars and practitioners addressed critical issues for diplomacy. Writings such as Potter 2002 dealt with the effects that global networks, greater transparency, low-cost new media, and empowered nonstate actors could have on foreign ministries and diplomatic practice. In the 21st century, “Web 2.0” and social media describe fundamentally different challenges for diplomacy, as new technologies have enabled governments and people to converse, mobilize, collaborate, and compete on a wide variety of social media platforms. With many adopting a “public diplomacy 2.0” frame, scholars and practitioners began to look at the implications of these technologies for strategies of governments and nonstate actors and for public diplomacy practice, as in Arsenault 2009, Fisher 2008, and Shirky 2011. Hanson 2012, Khatib, et al. 2012 focus on new ways for diplomats to plan, engage, and evaluate in online communities. Price, et al. 2008 explores the meaning of social media for one-to-many government international broadcasters, and Seib 2012 examines the role of social media in the Arab transitions of 2011 providing an important geopolitical context for public diplomacy research.

    • Arsenault, Amelia. “Public Diplomacy 2.0.” In Toward a New Public Diplomacy: Redirecting U.S. Foreign Policy. Edited by Philip Seib, 135–153. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.

      DOI: 10.1057/9780230100855Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Explores implications of social media for public diplomacy practice and potential in the context of three trends: the technological convergence of communication networks, problems of information delivery and visibility, and adoption of participatory and collaborative models of interaction.

      Find this resource:

    • Fisher, Ali. “Music for the Jilted Generation: Open-Source Public Diplomacy.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 3.2 (2008): 129–152.

      DOI: 10.1163/187119108X323655Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A public diplomacy approach that draws on open source software characteristics and metaphors of the cathedral (hierarchies, messaging) and the bazaar (peer-to-peer networks, multiple actors). Fisher argues a collaborative bazaar mindset that privileges civil society connections and engages online communities has significant advantages.

      Find this resource:

    • Hanson, Fergus. Revolution @State: The Spread of Ediplomacy. Sydney, Australia: Lowy Institute for International Policy, 2012.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Maps the increasingly broad spread of e-diplomacy across the US State Department and conceptually frames the full scope of its e-diplomacy. Pages 17–20, in particular, deal with public diplomacy as one of the largest developed components of the State Department’s e-diplomacy effort.

      Find this resource:

    • Khatib, Lina, William Dutton, and Michael Thelwall. “Public Diplomacy 2.0: A Case Study of the US Digital Outreach Team.” Middle East Journal 66.3 (2012): 453–472.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Based on interviews and content analysis of themes and rhetorical style, the authors examine strengths and limitations in the US Department of State’s Digital Outreach Team’s participation in Internet discussions of President Barack Obama’s 2009 Cairo speech. Includes an overview of literature on uses of social media in diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Potter, Evan H. ed. Cyber-Diplomacy: Managing Foreign Policy for the Twenty-First Century. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press, 2002.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Prescient essays by scholars and Canadian diplomats written in the World Wide Web’s first decade. Examines the impact of digital technologies and new media on diplomacy’s goals and processes, organizational cultures of foreign ministries, the rise of nonstate actors, and the increasing importance of public diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Price, Monroe E., Susan Haas, and Drew Margolin. “New Technologies and International Broadcasting: Reflections on Adaptations and Transformations.” ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616.1 (2008): 150–170.

      DOI: 10.1177/0002716207312033Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This article addresses the following questions: Are technologies transformative of organizational missions and structures in government international broadcasting? Is adaptation to new technologies a way to mask problems and support legacy institutions? The authors conclude transformation lies more in conceptions of fulfilling missions than superficial adaptation to technological change.

      Find this resource:

    • Seib, Philip. Real-Time Diplomacy: Politics and Power in the Social Media Era. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.

      DOI: 10.1057/9781137010902Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      With the Arab transitions of 2011 as context, the author analyses two questions: How have the speed and reach of information flows changed theories and practices of diplomacy? Are social media affecting political structures, changing networks, and creating ripple effects beyond politics and beyond the Arab world?

      Find this resource:

    • Shirky, Clay. “The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change.” Foreign Affairs 90 (January–February 2011): 28–41.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Argues the greatest potential of social media lies in their use as long-term tools to strengthen civil society (“environmental view”) rather than as tools to challenge state censorship (“instrumental view”) in the short term. Governments should focus on encouraging personal and social communication and freedom of assembly in civil societies.

      Find this resource:

    Beyond the “New Public Diplomacy”: The Future

    Though the concept of the “new public diplomacy” has become the norm and continues to be an important point of reference for conceptual frameworks in scholarly literature, the latest round of scholarship has also challenged it by drawing attention to its limitations and by questioning preexisting categories of “old” and “new.” Putting the notion of the “new public diplomacy” into perspective, particularly in reflections on the future of public diplomacy, recent writings aim to find ways to think beyond it, as in the contributions in Special Issue: Innovations in Public Diplomacy, Huijgh 2012, Melissen 2012, and Pamment 2012. These writings draw attention to its value-based meaning, relatively “new” nature, and a public diplomacy debate dominated by overemphasis on how “old” differs from “new,” and how “foreign” differs from “domestic,” which deviates from core questions on changes in diplomacy. Wiseman 2010 adds to this line of thinking on changes in diplomacy by introducing a third “polylateral” dimension with nonstates considered as (public) diplomacy actors. Hocking, et al. 2012; Hocking 2012; and Kelley 2010 also draw attention to the fact that public diplomacy has become so integrated into diplomatic practice that distinguishing it from diplomacy is increasingly counterproductive, and that the use of the term may actually be hampering its practice.

    • Hocking, Brian. “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the National Diplomatic System.” In Diplomacy in a Globalizing World: Theories and Practices. Edited by Pauline Kerr and Geoffrey Wiseman, 121–140. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Bird’s-eye analysis that puts the changing role and position of the foreign ministry and diplomatic practice into a broader governmental framework (the national diplomatic system). A short section deals with the public diplomacy practiced by many ministries other than foreign affairs.

      Find this resource:

    • Hocking, Brian, Jan Melissen, Shaun Riordan, and Paul Sharp. Futures for Diplomacy: Integrative Diplomacy for the 21st Century. Report 1. The Hague: Clingendael: Netherlands Institute of International Relations, 2012.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Comprehensively addresses the puzzles surrounding, and challenges confronting, contemporary diplomacy, including a section on public diplomacy. The report suggests a perceptual framework of “integrative diplomacy” in which categorical thinking is abandoned for a vision blending means, actors, context, and values into a unique whole consisting of both “old” and “new.”

      Find this resource:

    • Huijgh, Ellen, ed. Special Issue: The Domestic Dimension of Public Diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 7.4 (2012).

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Challenges public diplomacy as solely an international project. Collection of conceptual and empirical academic papers and practitioners’ perspectives that provide greater insight into domestic citizens as governmental publics, partners, and independent public diplomacy actors. Examples from Australia, Canada, China, Croatia, Australia, Israel, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Available online by subscription.

      Find this resource:

    • Kelley, J. Robert. “The New Diplomacy: Evolution of a Revolution.” Diplomacy & Statecraft 21.2 (2010): 286–305.

      DOI: 10.1080/09592296.2010.482474Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Accessible article that implicitly places public diplomacy at the core of diplomacy through analysis of diplomacy as a pluralized activity. Kelley views diplomacy as a behavior rather than an institution, with nonstate diplomatic actors complementary to state diplomatic actors.

      Find this resource:

    • Melissen, Jan. “Public Diplomacy.” In Diplomacy in a Globalizing World: Theories and Practices. Edited by Pauline Kerr and Geoffrey Wiseman, 192–208. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Textbook overview of public diplomacy’s evolution as part of changes in diplomacy. Gives comprehensive insight into the rise of public diplomacy as a practice and field, its (non)governmental dimensions, developments in and outside the West, and ways in which its concepts move beyond the “new public diplomacy.”

      Find this resource:

    • Pamment, James. “What Became of the New Public Diplomacy: Recent Developments in British, US and Swedish Public Diplomacy Policy and Evaluation Methods.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 7.3 (2012): 337–349.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Challenges “new public diplomacy” concepts through case study analysis. Finds that practice shifts from old to “new public diplomacy” are grounded in domestic and organizational concerns rather than in ideals of increased public engagement. Pamment expands his argument in New Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century (New York and London: Routledge, 2012).

      Find this resource:

    • Special Issue: Innovations in Public Diplomacy. PD Magazine 8 (2012).

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Themed issue. Broad in scope, it enlightens emerging trends and a cornucopia of current developments that are shaping public diplomacy’s future. Features articles on innovations in the European Union, as well as digital, citizen, corporate, substate, cultural, water, and sport diplomacy. Available in hard copy and online.

      Find this resource:

    • Wiseman, Geoffrey R. “Polylateralism: Diplomacy’s Third Dimension.” PD Magazine 4 (2010): 24–39.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Offers a solid, easy to follow framework that examines the proliferation of nonstate (public) diplomacy actors. Analysis of three categories of diplomatic relations: bilateral diplomacy (between two states), multilateral diplomacy (between three or more states), and “polylateralism” (relations between at least one official entity and nonstate actors).

      Find this resource:

    Public Diplomacy in the Americas

    Studies of US public diplomacy dominate overwhelmingly in the literature on public diplomacy in North and South America (see also US Public Diplomacy). However, there is a relatively large and influential literature on Canadian public diplomacy, and a few case studies exist on public diplomacy in South America. Bátora 2006 and Henrikson 2007 look at Canada as a model for understanding niche public diplomacy strategies of medium-sized states. Potter 2009 and Stein 2011 examine the processes and instruments of Canadian public diplomacy and its history of innovation in public diplomacy practice. Case studies of Cuba and Venezuela, such as Bustamante and Sweig 2008 and Hayden 2012, and of Mexico, as in Starr 2009 and the special issue of the Journal Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior (Villanueva Rivas 2008) on public and cultural diplomacy, foreshadow the promise of this under-researched region in public diplomacy studies.

    • Bátora, Jozef. “Public Diplomacy at Home and Abroad: Norway and Canada.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 1.1 (2006): 53–80.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Discusses public diplomacy concepts and strategies of small and medium-sized states. Detailed case studies of Norway and Canada explore similarities and differences. Useful for its imaginative approach to public diplomacy as an activity that engages both foreign and domestic publics, as well for as its case studies.

      Find this resource:

    • Bustamante, Michael J., and Julia E. Sweig. “Buena Vista Solidarity and the Axis of Aid: Cuban and Venezuelan Public Diplomacy.” ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616.1 (2008): 223–256.

      DOI: 10.1177/0002716207311865Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Overview of similarities in Cuban and Venezuelan public diplomacy (international assistance, film and music, solidarity against the United States), as well as significant differences. Compares Cuba’s successful victimization narrative and medical and cultural diplomacy with Venezuela’s less successful cultural diplomacy and perceptions that it uses foreign aid to purchase influence.

      Find this resource:

    • Hayden, Craig. “Venezuela: Telesur and the Artillery of Ideas” In The Rhetoric of Soft Power: Public Diplomacy in Global Contexts. By Craig Hayden, 131–167. Lanham, MD: Lexington, 2012.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Insightful account of Venezuela’s international influence strategies and projection of Bolivaran soft power through foreign aid, oil diplomacy, cultural exchanges, and international broadcasting. Includes a case study of the Telesur broadcasting network and an extensive bibliography.

      Find this resource:

    • Henrikson, Alan K. “Niche Diplomacy in the World Public Arena: the Global ‘Corners’ of Canada and Norway.” In The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. Edited by Jan Melissen, 67–87. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Assessment of niche public diplomacy strategies in which medium-sized countries concentrate resources and engage civil society to realize significant gains. Case studies of Canada’s and Norway’s soft power, collaboration with NGOs, and focus on conflict resolution and transnational issues.

      Find this resource:

    • Potter, Evan H. Branding Canada: Projecting Canada’s Soft Power through Public Diplomacy. Montreal and Kingston, Jamaica: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2009.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Detailed overview of Canada’s public diplomacy. Analyzes conceptual and professional practice issues. Frames Canada’s “image problem” and the history of its public diplomacy. Separate chapters assess instruments: media relations, cultural relations, international education, international broadcasting, business promotion, and tourism. Includes case studies.

      Find this resource:

    • Starr, Pamela K. “Mexican Public Diplomacy: Hobbled by History, Interdependence, and Asymmetric Power.” PD Magazine 2 (Summer 2009): 49–53.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Brief discussion of Mexico’s efforts beginning late in the 20th century to improve its image in the context of its economic and demographic interdependence with the United States.

      Find this resource:

    • Stein, Janice Gross, ed. Diplomacy in the Digital Age: Essays in Honour of Ambassador Allan Gotlieb. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 2011.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Essays by scholars, diplomats, and journalists reflect on diplomacy’s future in an age of new media. They celebrate Allan Gotlieb, Canada’s ambassador to the United States (1981–1989), whose work and ideas (“effective diplomacy is public diplomacy”) influenced a generation of Canadian diplomats.

      Find this resource:

    • Villanueva Rivas, César, ed. Special Issue: Diplomacia pública y cultural. Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior 85 (2008).

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Edited collection covering different aspects of public diplomacy (propaganda, theoretical aspects, celebrities, United Nations), with most articles dedicated to Mexico and related to the cultural component of public diplomacy. Articles are free to download online, but are only available in Spanish.

      Find this resource:

    US Public Diplomacy

    The terrorist attacks of 9/11, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a desire to win “hearts and minds” in Arab and Muslim countries sparked renewed US attention in public diplomacy in the 21st century. Gregory 2011 draws attention to episodic commitment as an enduring characteristic of US public diplomacy in which cycles of attention correlate with perceived external threats and war. Despite a long history of support for exchange programs, US public diplomacy strategies typically emphasize advocacy, information messaging, and “wars of ideas.” Manheim 1994 draws on political communication theories and electoral campaign strategies to interpret both US public diplomacy and its use by other countries in campaigns directed at the United States. Lord 2006 frames public diplomacy as strategic influence in a battle for hearts and minds. This study also reflects the priority given to organizational restructuring in the US approach. The term “strategic communication” has gained traction during the past decade in the White House and the US Department of Defense. For some authors it is analogous to public diplomacy, whereas for others it is conceptually different but overlapping. Paul 2011 offers an excellent discussion of these issues. Academic writings on “new public diplomacy,” digital technologies, and practitioner concerns about deficiencies in messaging models have combined recently to focus attention on relational approaches characterized as “global public engagement,” on which Fisher and Lucas 2011, Fitzpatrick 2010, Seib 2009, and Zaharna 2010 provide relevant analysis.

    • Fisher, Ali, and Scott Lucas, eds. Trials of Engagement: The Future of US Public Diplomacy. Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff, 2011.

      DOI: 10.1163/ej.9789004179400.i-309Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      International relations and communication scholars assess limitations in US public diplomacy strategies that privilege winning hearts and minds and assertions of leadership. Substantive essays offer collaborative alternatives: co-creation in networks, relationship building strategies, digital media interaction, language and narrative skills, perceptions of stakeholder influence, and new understandings of power.

      Find this resource:

    • Fitzpatrick, Kathy R. The Future of U.S. Public Diplomacy: An Uncertain Fate. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2010.

      DOI: 10.1163/ej.9789004177208.i-314Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Combines insights from public relations theory, public diplomacy scholarship, and an author-designed survey of former US practitioners. Assessments of US public diplomacy precede arguments about the promise of a relational approach. Chapter 6 (pp. 129–151), on public diplomacy and nation branding, and chapter 8 (pp. 179–201), on evaluation, are particularly useful.

      Find this resource:

    • Gregory, Bruce. “American Public Diplomacy: Enduring Characteristics, Elusive Transformation.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 6.3–4 (2011): 351–372.

      DOI: 10.1163/187119111X583941Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Explores characteristics of a US public diplomacy modus operandi: episodic resolve correlated with wars, systemic tradeoffs in American politics, competitive practitioner and civil society actors, and late adoption of communication technologies. US global public engagement strategies, achieving a culture of understanding, social media challenges, and multiple diplomatic stakeholders provide context.

      Find this resource:

    • Lord, Carnes. Losing Hearts and Minds? Public Diplomacy and Strategic Influence in the Age of Terror. Westport, CT: Praeger Security International, 2006.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Examines historical, conceptual, and operational issues in US public diplomacy and strategic influence seen as related instruments of power in the “war on terror.” Focuses primarily on rethinking public diplomacy structures and functions of the White House, State Department, Defense Department, and international broadcasting.

      Find this resource:

    • Manheim, Jarol B. Strategic Public Diplomacy and American Foreign Policy: The Evolution of Influence. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Scholarly study of public diplomacy as strategic political communication practiced by governments, often in association with private consulting firms. Includes a communication-based analytical framework, an assessment of US public diplomacy, and detailed case studies of public diplomacy strategies directed toward the United States by Kuwait, Pakistan, Mexico, Japan, and South Korea.

      Find this resource:

    • Paul, Christopher. Strategic Communication: Origins, Concepts, and Current Debates. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2011.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Systematic examination of definitions, actors, and issues in US strategic communication and its overlap with public diplomacy. Focuses on the White House and Department of Defense. Chapter 2 (“What is Strategic Communication, and What Should it Be,” pp. 17–70), chapter 3 (“History of US Public Diplomacy and Strategic Communication,” pp. 71–110), and chapter 6 (“Improving Strategic Communication,” pp. 136–173) are particularly relevant.

      Find this resource:

    • Seib, Philip, ed. Toward a New Public Diplomacy: Redirecting U.S. Foreign Policy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.

      DOI: 10.1057/9780230100855Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An uneven collection of twelve essays. Scholars and practitioners appraise US public diplomacy and explore how it might be more effective. Contains useful chapters on “public diplomacy 2.0,” privatized public diplomacy, cultural diplomacy, religion and public diplomacy, and the US military as a public diplomacy actor.

      Find this resource:

    • Zaharna, Rhonda S. Battles to Bridges: U.S. Strategic Communication and Public Diplomacy after 9/11. Basingstoke, UK, and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

      DOI: 10.1057/9780230277922Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Enriching intercultural and communication-based study. Influential in public diplomacy’s relational turn. Assesses US initiatives since 9/11. Provides a conceptual framework in which networks and culture shape communication. Contrasts information and relational models. Argues public diplomacy approaches that rely only on one strategy will not be effective.

      Find this resource:

    Public Diplomacy in Europe

    References to public diplomacy in Europe exist in writings on the European Union and in several country-specific and substate government case studies. Writings analyzing the public diplomacy of case studies of EU member states are frequent. Leonard, et al. 2005 provides analysis of the United Kingdom; Noya 2006 is a conference report that provides views from countries such as Spain and Germany, and the EU together; and Brown 2012 sheds light on the more comparative approach of the public diplomacy of the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. All of these works are equally inspiring. An earlier work, Gouveia and Plumridge 2005, set the foundation for developing a public diplomacy strategy for the EU, while later works such as La Porte 2011 (application of a concept of power), Rasmussen 2010 (application of discourse theory), and Szondi 2010 (application of a communication perspective) offer their own angles on the public diplomacy of the supranational institution of the European Union, including views on its obstacles and potential. They find common ground in concluding that its public diplomacy is not only relatively young compared to that of nation-states, but also that it differs from its members in terms of message, scope, purposes, and complexity. Cross and Melissen 2013 bundles the latest insights on both the public diplomacy of the EU institution and its members in an edited collection of articles on public diplomacy in Europe. These scholarly writings indicate that, of necessity, Europe encompasses multiple levels of public diplomacy; namely, subnational, national, and supranational. In their discussion of the relations between these levels, they point to profound issues in, and question traditional notions of, public diplomacy based on sovereignty and national interests, as well as “new public diplomacy” ideals embodied in multi-actor models.

    • Brown, Robin. “The Four Paradigms of Public Diplomacy: Building a Framework for Comparative Government External Communications Research.” Paper presented at the International Studies Association Conference, San Diego, CA, April 2012.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Though subject to debate on specific criteria and assessments, this useful addition to the literature offers four public diplomacy varieties (extension of diplomacy, national projection, cultural relations, political warfare) applied in different cases. Allows for the comparative framing of organizational differences in different countries without normative connotations.

      Find this resource:

    • Cross, Mai’a, and Jan Melissen, eds. European Public Diplomacy: Soft Power at Work. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Simultaneously provides an overview of public diplomacy in Europe and offers diverse approaches as the contributors tackle their subjects from different angles. Chapters cover network, social and normative power perspectives, the domestic dimension, the public diplomacy of cities, Western and new European Union members, and the European External Action Service.

      Find this resource:

    • Gouveia, Philip F. de, and Hester Plumridge. European infopolitik: Developing EU Public Diplomacy Strategy. London: Foreign Policy Centre, 2005.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An earlier work often cited in later writings. Contributes also to existing literature by pointing out the obstacles in, and clarifying the potential of, public diplomacy for the European Union.

      Find this resource:

    • La Porte, Teresa. The Power of the European Union in Global Governance: A Proposal for a New Public Diplomacy. CPD Perspectives on Public Diplomacy 1. Los Angeles: Figueroa, 2011.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A comprehensive report that discusses “new public diplomacy” ideas relevant to the European Union within the context of globalization. Applies concepts of power to different settings, such as cooperation in development, conflict prevention, and human rights. Includes recommendations for the European Union on improving its public diplomacy practices.

      Find this resource:

    • Leonard, Mark, Andrew Small, and Martin Rose. British Public Diplomacy in the “Age of Schisms.” London: Foreign Policy Centre, 2005.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A plea to rethink Britain’s public diplomacy approaches and consequent perceptions adopted following its role in the Iraq War. Sets out three types of cultural divides (political, religious, economic) and suggests “a new public diplomacy” strategy based on trust and relationship-building practices to bridge these “schisms.”

      Find this resource:

    • Noya, Javier, ed. “The Present and Future of Public Diplomacy: A European Perspective.” Remarks presented at the 2006 Madrid Conference on Public Diplomacy, 29 November 2006–30 November 2006, Elcano Royal Institute for International and Strategic Studies, Madrid.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A collection of short, accessible and innovative writings by European scholars and practitioners on the future of public diplomacy, theories, and practices. Zooms in on practices from Germany, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, and compares US and European Union practices.

      Find this resource:

    • Rasmussen, Steffen B. “The Messages and Practices of the European Union’s Public Diplomacy.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 5.1 (2010): 121–123.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An original contribution that examines the relevance of discourse theory to the practice of public diplomacy and applies it to the European Union context. Concludes that despite norm and identity diffusion, the European Union’s intrinsic network relational organization offers the best structure for pursuing diplomatic interaction and strategic objectives.

      Find this resource:

    • Szondi, György. “Communicating with the World: An Interdisciplinary Approach to European Union Public Diplomacy.” In Public Communication in the European Union: History, Perspectives and Challenges. Edited by Chiara Valentini and Giorgia Nesti, 335–362. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars, 2010.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Applies a communication-inspired perspective to analysis of the European Union’s public diplomacy. Draws attention to more contemporary views of public diplomacy facing inwards and outwards simultaneously.

      Find this resource:

    Public Diplomacy in Asia-Pacific

    Long dominated by the West, Asian public diplomacy contributions have increased dramatically since the early 1990s. Chinese public diplomacy literature in particular is gaining greater attention (see Chinese Public Diplomacy). Given some exceptions in the Asia Pacific region—such as Australia, as examined in Chitty 2009—the literature on Asian public diplomacy reveals differences from Western cases, and a significant amount can be gleaned from public diplomacy’s unfolding in a variety of regions and cultural settings. Lee and Melissen 2011, Ogawa 2009, and Rockower 2011 provide insights on this characteristic of public diplomacy. Sukma 2011 draws attention to the fact that public diplomacy, particularly Indonesia’s, is also developed to bridge cultural and religious diversity and as part of broader foreign policy democratization processes. Moon and Plott 2012 provides insight on how “soft power” and “public diplomacy” are often used interchangeably and developed as a remedy to governments’ perceived national identity and historically shaky regional relationships. Hall 2012 sheds light on how significant investments in public diplomacy, particularly India’s, is partly a response to the perceived importance and growth of soft power, as well as burgeoning competition for publics between Asian countries. These writings also indicate that East Asian public diplomacy is characterized by being state-centered, and by civil society’s curbed role in it. They also discuss how most East-Asian countries’ international reputations and application of soft power lag behind the remarkable economic growth of the region.

    • Chitty, Naren. “Australian Public Diplomacy.” In Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy. Edited by Nancy Snow and Philip M. Taylor, 314–322. New York: Routledge, 2009.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A shorter piece that examines Australia’s public diplomacy against the background of a more holistic approach to diplomacy. Discussion is built upon the 2007 Australian Senate’s report on public diplomacy and calls for implementation of an “intermestic” (a blend of international and domestic) approach to public diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Hall, Ian. “India’s New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power and the Limits of Government Action.” Asian Survey 52.6 (2012): 1089–1110.

      DOI: 10.1525/as.2012.52.6.1089Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Critically assesses India’s significant investments in public diplomacy, its motivations, its traditional and more innovative means, and its effects and effectiveness within the changing international and Asian environment. Argues investments are partly responses to concern about Chinese soft-power growth and elite policymakers’ social media beliefs.

      Find this resource:

    • Lee, Sook J., and Jan Melissen, eds. Public Diplomacy and Soft Power in East Asia. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Collection of eleven conceptual and empirical contributions providing insight in public diplomacy and East Asian soft power. Each case stands on its own and approaches the overall theme from a country-specific perspective. The introductory and concluding sections sketch the region’s broader tendencies and commonalities.

      Find this resource:

    • Moon, Chung-in, and David Plott, eds. Special Issue: Soft Power, Smart Power and Public Diplomacy in Asia. Global Asia, A Journal of the East Asia Foundation 7.3 (Fall 2012).

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This special issue succeeds in bundling works, largely from Asian scholars, in an approachable fashion. Contributions approach public diplomacy from different angles (economic, cultural, nation branding, middle power) and through various case studies (Korea, Japan, China, Australia). Students will appreciate the easy-to-follow articles and trendy examples.

      Find this resource:

    • Ogawa, Tadashi. “Origin and Development of Japan’s Public Diplomacy.” In Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy. Edited by Nancy Snow and Philip M. Taylor, 270–281. New York: Routledge, 2009.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Satisfactory placement of Japanese public diplomacy into its broader modernization processes, and compares it to the West. Rich in information (historical background, traditional, new actors) but also analytical in its discussion of combining cultural diplomacy with economic power and global partnerships with multilateral approaches.

      Find this resource:

    • Rockower, Paul S. “Projecting Taiwan: Taiwan’s Public Diplomacy.” Outreach Issues & Studies 47.1 (2011): 107–152.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Adds to scarce literature on Taiwan’s public diplomacy by providing an overview of its strategies, institutions, means and instruments employed. Approaches the case from a middle power perspective, comparing it to similar examples while dedicating special attention to public diplomacy strategies in niche areas.

      Find this resource:

    • Sukma, Rizal. “Soft Power and Public Diplomacy: The Case of Indonesia.” In Public Diplomacy and Soft Power in East Asia. Edited by Sook J. Lee and Jan Melissen, 91–115. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Allows for easily catching up on Indonesia’s development of public diplomacy, putting it into broader foreign policy democratization processes and shedding light on practices at home and abroad and their interrelatedness. Reveals that Indonesia has used public diplomacy to make clear that modern society, democracy, and Islam can coexist.

      Find this resource:

    Chinese Public Diplomacy

    Similar to writings on the United States in Western literature, writings on China increasingly dominate Asian public diplomacy literature. Scholarly literature on Chinese public diplomacy has grown rapidly in scope and depth. While such literature was initially written by Sinologists making the Chinese case internationally accessible, more Chinese scholars have joined the fray and are providing particular insights and broadening conceptions of public diplomacy with Chinese perspectives. D’Hooghe 2007, Wang 2008, and Zhang 2008 provide greater insights into the rise and evolution of the government’s public diplomacy. Rawnsley 2009 and Wang 2011 also cover topics such as image building and soft power strategies, discrepancies between economic growth and international reputation, and culture-related aspects to public diplomacy with Chinese characteristics. The CPD Reader (USC Center on Public Diplomacy 2012) is a handy compilation of shorter works from fellows and associates of the University of Southern California Center on Public Diplomacy, covering various public diplomacy topics on China. Scholars and students with knowledge of Mandarin have the advantage of being able to access a much wider variety of prominent journals and books, such as Zhao 2007 and articles published in the Public Diplomacy Quarterly.

    • d’Hooghe, Ingrid. “Public Diplomacy in the People’s Republic of China.” In The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. Edited by Jan Melissen, 88–105. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Comprehensive overview of the discovery and development of public diplomacy in China. Sheds light on the broader context of foreign policy and diplomacy, structures, goals, assets and liabilities, target groups, instruments, activities, strategies, and limitations. Dedicates attention to the value of culture in Chinese public diplomacy.

      Find this resource:

    • Public Diplomacy Quarterly.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Highly recommendable for scholars and students with knowledge of Mandarin. Leading academic journal published by the Beijing-based Charhar Institute, focusing on practical and theoretical issues of Chinese public diplomacy at home and abroad. Includes reflection on events, topical contributions, case studies, interviews, and book reviews. Hard copy and online versions available.

      Find this resource:

    • Rawnsley, Gary D. “China Talks Back: Public Diplomacy and Soft Power for the Chinese Century.” In Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy. Edited by Nancy Snow and Philip M. Taylor, 282–291. New York: Routledge, 2009.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Tackles essential issues in Chinese public diplomacy. Argues that the multifaceted strategy of using public diplomacy and soft power interchangeably is limited, and that China’s international reputation and culture have not evolved with Chinese economic growth. Includes a section on economics and culture in public diplomacy and its strategies.

      Find this resource:

    • USC Center on Public Diplomacy. The CPD Reader: China and Public Diplomacy. Los Angeles: USC Center on Public Diplomacy at the Annenberg School, 2012.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Convenient compilation of earlier publications on China’s public diplomacy from the Center of Public Diplomacy’s contributors, bloggers, and fellows from October 2009 to August 2012. Bundled into four sections: “China’s Public Diplomacy,” “Cultural Diplomacy,” “Shanghai Expo 2011,” and “China in the News.”

      Find this resource:

    • Wang, Yiwei. “Public Diplomacy and the Rise of Chinese Soft Power.” ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616.1 (2008): 257–273.

      DOI: 10.1177/0002716207312757Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Advocates that the public diplomacy of China is in need of a Chinese grand strategy that is less state-centered, uses modern media, and keeps a balance between Chinese and Westernized trends. Sections on the Chinese understanding, practice, and strategy of public diplomacy, and China’s peaceful rise through soft power.

      Find this resource:

    • Wang, Jian, ed. Soft Power in China: Public Diplomacy through Communication. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

      DOI: 10.1057/9780230116375Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This rich collection contains thirteen chapters, allowing for greater understanding of soft power through public diplomacy. Public diplomacy is broadly interpreted, with contributors providing analyses of practices of international broadcasting, image management and projection, activities of the Chinese government’s spokesperson system, corporations, diaspora, and intellectuals.

      Find this resource:

    • Zhang, Juyan. “Making Sense of the Changes in China’s Public Diplomacy: Direction of Information Flow and Messages.” Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 4 (2008): 303–316.

      DOI: 10.1057/pb.2008.19Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Qualitative analysis of changes in communication patterns (information flow and messages) in China’s public diplomacy from 1949 to 2008. Typifies current information flows as a blend of one-way and two-way communication and demonstrates changes in messages (strategies, intended audience effects, symbolic nature of language, motivation and strategic consideration by government).

      Find this resource:

    • Zhao, Kejin. Gonggongwaijiao de lilun yu shijian. Shanghai: Shanghai Cishu, 2007.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Though only available in Mandarin, this outstanding book deals with theories and practices of public diplomacy in China and abroad. Addresses contemporary questions surrounding public diplomacy on its core objectives, behavior, universal values and what can be learned for its future from history.

      Find this resource:

    LAST MODIFIED: 11/27/2013

    DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199743292-0018

    back to top

    Article

    Up

    Down