The central role of science diplomacy in Arctic governance necessitates careful reflection on the social organization of such diplomacy. To leverage the collective expertise of Arctic networks, we need to better understand the social lives of these networks: how they work at the level of interpersonal interaction alongside institutional procedure. To do so, we must consider not only the content of what is said but also the context in which it is said: the social milieu of the discussion and the dispositions that underpin it. Thought and action happen in context: the structuring of the context enables particular kinds of thought and action.
This essay foregrounds the intangible resources like curiosity or trust that can facilitate inclusive, constructive, and indeed creative discussions in Arctic networks. I will first accentuate these facets of Arctic science diplomacy that transcend traditional profession-based understandings of expertise, I will then highlight the value of curiosity and trust in Arctic networks, and I will finally underscore the practical import of the argument. The piece is about science diplomacy but not of science diplomacy; it is a social science argument that blends multiple academic fields with my long-term ethnographic or ‘peopled’ study of diplomatic expertise. My goal is not to make policy recommendations but to invite further reflection on the set up and ethos of Arctic science diplomacy. The networks in focus here are those that bridge science and diplomacy, but the implications extend to Arctic governance more broadly.
By Dr. Merje Kuus