CULTURAL DIPLOMACY AS DISCIPLINE AND

PRACTICE:
CONCEPTS, TRAINING, AND SKILLS

Final Report

November 2016

Report prepared under the Partnership Agreement between the University of Siena,
Department of Social, Political and Cognitive Sciences, and the European Union National
Institutes for Culture / EUNIC Global under the framework of Crossroads for Culture:
Enhancing EU Member states transnational and international cooperation, Working Package 1
Culture Policy Dialogue and Research.

With the support of the

Creative Europe Programme
of the European Union
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement
of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible
for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

I. INTRODUCTION 7

II. MAPPING CULTURAL DIPLOMACY TRAINING 7

II.1. Cultural diplomacy training: Where we stand 8

II.2. Concluding remarks 9

III. CULTURAL DIPLOMACY: WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT SHOULD BE 10

III.1. What cultural diplomacy means and who makes it 10

III.2. The cultural diplomat of the future: Training and skills 15

III.3. European Union and cultural diplomacy 18

IV. CONCLUSIONS 20

APPENDIX 1. Methodology for Data Collection 21

APPENDIX 2. List of Institutions 23

APPENDIX 3. Descriptives of the Training Data set 30

APPENDIX 4. Online Survey 34

1
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents the results of an analysis of the present state of cultural diplomacy training and
competencies and makes recommendations for improving cultural diplomacy training in the future.
It is based on the opinions of academics and practitioners currently working in the field.

Key conclusions

What is the present state of cultural diplomacy training?

A look at existing training in cultural and public diplomacy offered in English, Chinese and
Russian, shows the breadth and diversity of the topic: More than 40 academic and non-academic
institutions in ten countries offer 44 different programs in public and cultural diplomacy.
American universities and institutions lead the field, with Europe second. The US and Europe,
however, emphasize different elements of the topic: in the US, cultural diplomacy is mostly
embedded in public policy or international communications programs, whereas in Europe
programs devoted to cultural diplomacy are tied to many other subjects, from economics and
business administration to arts and culture.

On the whole, cultural diplomacy at the academic level is still relatively uncharted territory, and
there is a lack of training specific to the subject. Programs that explicitly deal with cultural
diplomacy usually borrow content from more consolidated disciplines, including political
science, international relations, and public communication.

What is cultural diplomacy and what is needed to be a cultural diplomat?

Through interviews with academics and practitioners, a number of definitions of the term emerged,
along with a list of the qualities necessary for future cultural diplomats.

Approaches to cultural diplomacy: Three main ways to understand cultural diplomacy were
identified: the public diplomacy approach, according to which the government has a monopoly
on the practice and goals of cultural diplomacy; the strategic communications approach, which
does not necessarily entail the involvement of the government but implies its role in fostering a
specific strategic interest; and the cultural relations approach, which looks at cultural
diplomacy as a practice based on dialogue and collaboration, detached from a soft power
framework. A majority of respondents subscribed to the last definition, and preferred cultural

2
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

diplomacy be based on dialogue, collaboration, and co-production, whose main purpose is not to
influence decision makers but rather to change attitudes and behaviors.

Tools of cultural diplomacy: While subscribing to the idea that the cultural relations approach
offers the most appropriate analytic framework, a majority of respondents still said that the core
of modern cultural diplomacy is nation branding; among the tools available, strategic
communication, public relations, and nation branding took precedence over cultural management
and cultural relations. Cultural diplomacy is perceived as a pillar of public diplomacy, or at least
a parallel activity thus the most appropriate institutional framework to implement and
coordinate cultural diplomacy activities is a country's ministry of foreign affairs, in cooperation
with its ministry of culture.

Main actors: States are still perceived as the main actors carrying out cultural diplomacy, though
they have lost some of their monopoly as other stakeholders become more active.

What the future characteristics of cultural diplomacy should be: A consensus emerged on the
basic characteristics that will be necessary for successful cultural diplomacy in the future:

Long-term approach. Bridging cultural gaps between countries through mutual

understanding and cultural exchange takes time, much more than direct negotiation between
state actors.

Multilevel engagement. Cultural diplomacy should involve many independent stakeholders

at different levels of engagement, including non-state actors, among them non-governmental
organizations, multinational corporations, cities, provinces, and regions.

Country specificity. Cultural diplomacy should be characterized by a plurality of practices

and institutional approaches. Just as each country has its own culture, each country has its
own approach to cultural diplomacy.

Skills and competencies of a cultural diplomat: A cultural diplomat is expected to possess cross-
cultural sensitivity, openness to diversity, an ability to listen, and intellectual curiosity.

Training for cultural diplomacy: A majority agreed that formal training in cultural diplomacy is a
necessity. Respondents stressed the importance of implementing full-fledged graduate programs
in cultural diplomacy, as well as life-long learning provided by external institutions. Training
3
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

programs should include: international relations, international/strategic/public communication,

foreign languages, cultural heritage, internships and exchanges, arts and creative industries,
cultural anthropology, media studies, globalization studies, and development studies.

Future challenges

This analysis also highlighted some obstacles cultural diplomacy will face as it transforms itself into
a full-fledged approach to international relations. Three challenges merit discussion:

The first challenge is bridging the gap between academics and practitioners. Our survey shows
a remarkable consensus on both broad concepts and details; however, the evolving nature of
cultural diplomacy as a new field of study and research raises at least two issues for both
academics and practitioners.

The first issue is the tendency of academic work to approach new fields with traditional tools,
often referred to as Maslow's law of the instrument1. When it comes to the content of cultural
diplomacy training programs, our research shows a clear reliance on the research and the
methodology native to international relations, communications, and political science in general.
The relative novelty of cultural diplomacy as a field of activity and practice, however, implies
the existence of a lot of practical knowledge among practitioners operating in the field. This
knowledge has to be brought to the fore and systematized, which will require more robust
communication between practitioners and academics.

This is easier said than done, though. The gap between what researchers do in academia and
what diplomats, policy-makers, and practitioners do in their day-to-day work is not easy to
ford. The problem is further complicated by the difficulties of academically evaluating the
experiences developed by practitioners; methodological tools are still lacking. This implies a
growing role for pracademics activities, in which practitioners and academics work to
generate theoretically derived knowledge that is empirically sound and based on experience in
the field.

1 As Abraham Maslow put it, "I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it
were a nail.

4
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Second, this report reveals a perceptual and structural gap between agency and structure.
There is a gap between practitioners, who see cultural diplomacy as subject to the effects of
national foreign policy, and academics, who tend to perceive it as an independent flow shaped
by structural forces beyond the control of any single actor. Because of this difference in
perspective, the two groups tend to prioritize different variables and factors: academics tend to
emphasize structural factors and long-term processes, such as mutual understanding and cross-
cultural fertilization, while practitioners emphasize the role of actors.

A third challenge highlighted in this report concerns the proper balance between training and
selection, and, within training, between formal academic and life-long training. The majority of
experts surveyed endorsed graduate programs and training in cultural diplomacy. A few others
did, however, emphasize the superiority of an effective recruitment and selection process over
training as the best way to build a performance-enhancing cultural eco-system.

This report stresses two aspects of training: formal training, either at the undergraduate or
graduate level, is not enough to fulfill all the requirements of practical cultural diplomacy, and
must be supplemented with on-site experience. Both kinds of training should be provided to
practitioners those who are starting out and those already working in the field.

Recommendations

Based on the responses to the survey, the following recommendations are the most relevant for
policy-makers and practitioners:

Diversity and flexibility. There is a need for a firewall between cultural diplomacy actors and
their governments. The details of cultural programs cannot be subjected to day-to-day review.
Decentralization in cultural diplomacy policy-making is recommended. Cultural diplomacy is
most effective when it is shaped in the field, changing with the context. To achieve this,
cultural diplomacy must internalize diversity and flexibility.

Authenticity. For cultural diplomacy to be credible, it has to reflect an authentic artistic culture;
otherwise there is a risk that branding efforts will be too superficial to be effective.

Partnership. On a related note, an increasingly important element of cultural diplomacy is

partnership building. The most effective and dynamic approach to cultural diplomacy is one in

5
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

which cultural partnerships are built as a strategic asset for the future, as it is often more
productive to focus on issues of mutual concern (e.g. migration, integration, radicalization,
security, climate change, etc.). There is a need to work on credit sharing, the partner goal-
setting process, the ability to identify common projects, and the ability to work with people
from other cultures. Partnership and team-building skills should be according to our
respondents highly valued.

Cosmopolitanism. Cultural cooperation is strictly linked to the idea of cosmopolitan

constructivism, as suggested by one of the sources interviewed. This theoretical approach
first developed by Cesar Villanueva Rivas (2010) can be defined as the recognition that
governments must improve their cultural and public diplomacy capacities to cooperate through
a common understanding of their own cultures, diversities, and differences.

This study also shows the need for the more systematic development of theoretical and empirical
research in the field of cultural diplomacy. The absence of clear, robust theoretical schemes and
proper measurement instruments makes it difficult to foster effective cultural diplomacy practices
and assess the impact of cultural diplomacy on foreign policy. Further research is required to
provide evidence of the reliability and feasibility of this kind of practice to attract multi-level
political support. To this end, the following recommendations emerge from the report:

Working group on training and development: Cultural diplomacy is a field in which more
pracademics activities are needed. To achieve this, it would be useful to set up a working
group on training and development that brings together stakeholders, practitioners, and
academics to design a comparative training framework for both formal academic training and
the in-house training of practitioners.

Cultural Forum: To create opportunities to foster dialogue between stakeholders, practitioners,

and academics, a cultural relations forum should be planned as a platform to launch new policy
ideas and reflect upon past experiences.

Summer school: To foster growing attention and sensitivity to cultural diplomacy in academic
curricula, a summer school should be launched to allow students, practitioners, and academics
to interact in an open and informal way.

6
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

I. INTRODUCTION2
This report is the result of research the European Networks of Institutes of Culture (EUNIC Global)
commissioned the Department of Social, Political, and Cognitive Sciences of the University of
Siena to carry out mapping existing cultural diplomacy training and research activities and defining
the training needs of the cultural diplomat of the future. The report is organized into two main
chapters: The first chapter maps the cultural diplomacy training already offered at different
academic levels. This section is based on an extensive web scrap and search of BA, MA, and Ph.D.
courses that include formal training in cultural diplomacy as part of their curricula. This search was
conducted in three languages: English, Russian, and Chinese. The second chapter explores what
practitioners and academics operating in this field think are the main characteristics of cultural
diplomacy, and what kind of skills, training, and knowledge will be essential in the future. This
second section is based on a set of in-depth interviews and a larger online survey of approximately
160 people working in and studying the field.

II. MAPPING CULTURAL DIPLOMACY TRAINING

This chapter maps existing training and programs in cultural and public diplomacy; its results are
taken from an extensive internet search of courses that include cultural diplomacy as part of their
curricula.

Before starting, a brief caveat: the findings presented here do not provide either comprehensive or
exhaustive information on what is happening in cultural diplomacy worldwide. First, the web search
was limited to three languages English, Chinese, and Russian and therefore misses training
offered in other languages, such as French, German, or Spanish. Second, the main source of data
was internet scrapping and searching, using cultural and/or public diplomacy as key words.
However, the net was thrown wide, and the information gathered does make it possible to
realistically gauge the available programs in cultural and public diplomacy currently offered.

2 This report has been prepared by Alessandro Giovanni Lamonica with the help of Joanna Lopka, under the direction
of Pierangelo Isernia and Luca Verzichelli. Francesco Olmastroni and Rossella Borri at LAPS were responsible for the
CAWI survey. Erik Vlaeminck and Po-han Yang, under the supervision of Stuart McDonald at the Centre for Cultural
Relations at the University of Edinburgh, collected the data on China and Russia training programs in the original
languages.

7
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

II.1. Cultural diplomacy training: Where we stand3

This search, conducted between March 1, 2016 and April 15, 2016, found 45 institutions,
including 30 universities and 15 international institutes in 10 countries (Australia, China,
Cyprus, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, Poland, Romania, Russia, and the United States) that
offer 44 different programs covering, with varying levels of relevance, cultural and public
diplomacy.4 The programs touching on cultural diplomacy are diverse, including BA, MA, and
PhD programs.

This report focuses on the content of the courses offered to grasp what is currently taught in this
field. Altogether, these 44 academic programs include 519 individual courses.5 68% (n=353) of the
courses are offered in programs that are expressly labeled cultural diplomacy6; the remaining 166
courses (32%) are taught in programs that include cultural diplomacy as an elective topic, or which
provide enough courses in cultural diplomacy and related areas to be considered eligible for
inclusion in this inventory. Of these 519 individual courses, however, only 21% devote specific
attention to cultural diplomacy as an object of inquiry.

The relative scarcity of courses focusing on cultural diplomacy suggests that it is still relatively
uncharted academic territory. Furthermore, even those programs expressly concerned with cultural
diplomacy tend to focus on a curriculum whose core is not cultural diplomacy, but rather more
traditional topics such as international relations, communications, or public diplomacy.

3 This section draws upon an empirical work conducted in collaboration with the Centre for Cultural Relations at the
University of Edinburgh. For details on the methodological aspects of this sections research, see Appendix 1. Data
collection and management a. Methodology b. Data Formatting, p. 21

4 The report refers to the object of our inquiry as a training or program in cultural or public diplomacy, while the
basic unit of analysis here collected is the single course, sometimes called teaching, to make sure courses on topics
relevant for this report offered in programs with other names were not missed. For a more detailed description of the
framework, see Appendix 1. Data Collection and Management c. Framework, p. 21

5 This analysis is based only on BA and MA courses. See Appendix 3. Descriptives of the Training Data set, p. 30

6 Programs are categorized as strictly related to cultural diplomacy when they contain cultural diplomacy in the
title.

8
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

The programs that explicitly mention cultural diplomacy in their title are found exclusively in
Europe;7 the majority are partnerships with the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy in Berlin8, which is
particularly active in this field. Outside of Europe, cultural diplomacy training is almost exclusively
tied to public diplomacy or international communications, and mostly provided by academic
institutions located in the US and Australia.

II.2. Concluding remarks

This mapping of available courses in English shows two somewhat different trends. On the one
hand, there are a significant number of courses and programs that, directly or indirectly, relate to
public and cultural diplomacy; nevertheless, it is clear that cultural diplomacy is mostly seen as a
sub-topic of international relations, political science, and communications.

Reiterating that the findings presented here do not provide either comprehensive or exhaustive
information on what is happening in cultural diplomacy worldwide, there could be political as well
as historical reasons behind the fact that programs expressly devoted to cultural diplomacy seem to
be a European prerogative. First, the growth of this type of program coincided with an increased
emphasis on culture in the European Unions external relations. Moreover, culture is an
increasingly important feature of the foreign policies of several European countries, necessitating a
supply of academic programs in cultural diplomacy.

The fact that programs in English dedicated exclusively to cultural diplomacy are exclusively
European could also reflect a fundamental difference in how the field is seen in Europe and the
United States. In the US, cultural diplomacy is embedded in programs in public diplomacy and
international communications, suggesting a conception of cultural diplomacy as merely a tool of
public diplomacy (or public relations). Cultural diplomacy in Europe, on the other hand, is more
eclectic; while cultural diplomacy in the US is mostly embedded in public diplomacy and

7 Two exceptions: Sichuan International Studies University (Chongqing, China) offers a BA in Cultural Diplomacy in
English; and Lobachevskiy State University (Nizhniy Novgorod, Russian Federation) offers an MA in International
Tourism and Cultural Diplomacy Cultural Diplomacy in International Relations, in Russian.

8 In Europe, only two academic institutions offer programs strictly related to cultural diplomacy without the
collaboration of the ICD: Andrzej Frycz-Modrzewski - Krakw University (BA and a MA in International Relations
and Cultural Diplomacy) and Goldsmiths University of London (MA in Cultural Policy, Relations & Diplomacy)

9
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

international communications programs, in Europe it can also be found in programs that focus on
other disciplines, including economics and business administration, arts, culture, and philosophy.

In the next chapter, this report will examine what is needed, according to practitioners and
academics operating in the field, in order to make cultural diplomacy more effective in the future.

III. CULTURAL DIPLOMACY: WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT SHOULD BE

This sections results are based on a set of in-depth interviews and a larger online survey addressed
to a sample of academics and practitioners.9 The chapter will begin with a discussion of what the
term cultural diplomacy actually entails, then move on to the training requirements and skills most
in demand in the field. The last section briefly discusses what role cultural diplomacy could play in
EU external action.

III.1. What cultural diplomacy means and who makes it

There is not an agreed-upon definition of cultural diplomacy in the literature; its conceptualization
has proven to be complex, especially because it conflates two terms that are themselves difficult to
pin down. As one of the interviewees suggested, the proliferation of definitions could also reflect a
deep tension among different strategic interests with diverging views of what the role of
governments should be in cultural diplomacy.

A majority of the survey respondents shared the idea that cultural diplomacy is a pillar of public
diplomacy. Indeed, if one looks at the traditional taxonomy of public diplomacys components,
cultural diplomacy is listed together with listening, advocacy, exchanges, and international
broadcasting (Cull, 2008). However, other observers have conceived of cultural diplomacy as an
independent activity not linked to public diplomacy. As one of our interviewees put it: In public
diplomacy we have a crystal-clear definition of the actors involved the government being the
main player strategic interest is the motivating force, and its goals are policy-driven, while, on the
contrary, in cultural diplomacy the actors are less clearly defined and there is a closer relationship

9 The online survey included 163 respondents academics and practitioners with a response rate of 31% among valid
contacts. Respondents reside in 44 countries. The fieldwork took place from June 13 to July 12, 2016. For details about
the sample and the results of the survey, see Appendix 4. Online survey, p. 34

10
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

with civil society. To further complicate any attempt to define cultural diplomacy, there is also a
measurement problem, compounded by the lack of rigorous empirical research.

With no pretense to having the last word in this debate, on the basis of the in-depth interviews three
basic approaches to cultural diplomacy can be singled out as particularly relevant: the public
diplomacy, strategic communications, and cultural relations approaches.

The public diplomacy view of cultural diplomacy is characterized by an emphasis on state actors.
They have a monopoly on the practice of cultural diplomacy. To quote one of our sources, cultural
diplomacy should be something that is limited to what state actors do, that is what government,
government agents, or governmental institutions do to pursue diplomatic goals through cultural
tools

The contested nature of the concept of cultural diplomacy is in this reading an unintended result of
the blending of cultural and diplomatic relations. To separate them, cultural diplomacy should
designate essentially interest-driven governmental practice while cultural relations are
driven by ideals rather than interests and is practiced largely by non-state actors (Ang, Isar and
Mar, 2015). This approach found a scholarly systematization in the work of the former US diplomat
and scholar Richard Arndt, who claims that: Cultural diplomacy can only be said to take place
when formal diplomats, serving national governments, try to shape and channel this natural flow to
advance national interests" (Arndt, 2006: XVIII).

The strategic communications approach is currently a firmly established view of cultural

diplomacy. According to this approach, cultural diplomacy is basically international and strategic
communication. In this view, cultural diplomacy is closely related to nation branding practices and
to national image cultivation meant to achieve policy goals.

This approach shares the idea that state actors are important. However, it sees states as only one of
the players in the field, as a consequence of the growing democratization of global communications.
The communication approach is sensitive to the role of social media; as cultural diplomacy is based
on communication, any social media user could be considered a cultural diplomat.

According to the cultural relations conception, nation branding is an outdated practice. This
approach laments the fact that many scholars still think about cultural diplomacy in terms of soft

11
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

power, nation branding, and public relations. This insistence on including cultural diplomacy in a
classic soft power framework reflects an institutional will to retain influence and power.10

This approach stresses that in designing effective cultural diplomacy policies, culture should come
first and diplomacy second. In the words of Milton C. Cummings, Cultural diplomacy is the
exchange of arts, ideas, information, and other aspects of culture in order to foster a mutual
understanding. According to this approach, any actor can practice cultural diplomacy.

100%
80%
61%
60%
40% 26%
20% 8% 5%
0%
Formal diplomats shaping An actor's attempt to Cultural exchange in order Other
cultural flows to advance make its cultural resources to foster mutual
national interests known so to facilitate understanding
cultural transformation
abroad

Chart 1. A definition of cultural diplomacy

When asked which definition they preferred (Chart 1), 61% of our respondents chose the cultural
relations approach, while only a small minority (8%) agreed with the public diplomacy definition
of cultural diplomacy.11 Looking at the respondents countries of residence, a transatlantic divide
seems to emerge on this issue: Americans were more likely to agree with the latter, while
Europeans were more likely to agree with the cultural relations approach.

10 Some interviewees explicitly mentioned the British governments Great Britain campaign as an example of an
outdated approach to cultural diplomacy that has nothing to do with the mutuality and reciprocity that should
characterize it.

11 There is not a significant difference between the frequency distribution of academics and that of practitioners.

12
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Clearly, however, as some of our respondents suggested, cultural diplomacy can be seen as a
combination of these three approaches, being actor-specific and of a fluid nature. As one of our
interviewees suggested, public and cultural diplomacy can be parallel activities, but can also be part
of one another, depending on how they are conducted, by whom, and with what aims. The complex
and ambivalent nature of cultural diplomacy emerged further when we explored its tools, actors,
and nature in greater detail. When respondents were asked to name the main elements essential to
carrying out cultural diplomacy (Chart 2), traditional public diplomacy and strategic
communications elements were prioritized. Of the items provided, the top three selections were
standard elements of public diplomacy and strategic communications approaches, namely strategic
communication, nation branding, and public relations.

10
7.7
8 7.5 7.2 7.2
6.3
6

4 3

Chart 2. The components of cultural diplomacy. Note: the chart is based on means

Second, the fact that the public diplomacy and strategic communications approaches are rooted in
the community of practitioners is confirmed by another question about the relationship between
cultural and public diplomacy. When asked whether cultural diplomacy is a pillar of public
diplomacy or is an independent activity from public diplomacy, or if cultural and public
diplomacy are distinct but parallel activities, 53% of respondents agreed with the first statement,
while 32% saw the two as distinct but parallel activities.

When asked who the primary cultural diplomacy actors should be, respondents said that states
should and do retain a primary role, but no longer hold a monopoly. A plurality (44%) suggested
13
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

national foreign ministries as the proper institutions to coordinate cultural diplomacy activities, in
cooperation with ministries of culture (Chart 3).12 As one of the interviewees said:

In the case of a nation state: the appropriate place is sort of between the
foreign ministry and the cultural ministry, or with the cultural institutes
playing a major role (e.g. network of cultural institutes such as the British
Council or the Goethe Institute). The foreign ministry should talk to the
culture ministry, and this often doesnt happenAt the European level,
the European External Action Service would be the right place.

50% 44%

40%

30%
20%
20% 16%
9%
10% 4% 5%
2%
0%

Chart 3. Where cultural diplomacy should be located

Respondents also named other stakeholders involved in cultural diplomacy, including the
following: sub-state actors, including provinces, regions, cities, ethnic groups, and diaspora
communities (Van der Pluijm and Melissen, 2007); supra-state actors, including cultural
diplomacy regional organizations, organizations representing overlapping regions, and EUNIC
itself; multinational Corporations (Candace, 2015); a variety of private cultural actors (artists,

12 The options were: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in cooperation with the Ministry
of Culture; the Ministry of Culture alone; national institutes of culture; a department exclusively devoted to cultural
diplomacy; a national agency autonomous from the government

14
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

intellectuals, cultural operators), whether they are consciously engaged on behalf of their
government or pursuing independent goals. In the words of one participant, the set of actors
involved is essentially limitless.

This multi-layered network of actors can, however, have a detrimental effect on cultural
diplomacys effectiveness. Indeed, a majority of our respondents lament a present lack of
communication among key players 80% said that communication is at most episodic among
actors at different levels, and another 12% claimed that communication does not even take place.
While a majority of respondents seemed to converge on a cultural relations definition of cultural
diplomacy, a more traditional view emerged when one discusses the actors and components of a
successful cultural diplomacy capable of promoting national interests.

III.2. The cultural diplomat of the future: Training and skills

This section discusses what skills and competencies are the most essential for professionals in
cultural diplomacy, and what training should be offered to prepare a cultural diplomat.

Personal skills

According to our respondents, a cultural diplomat should possess certain personality characteristics,
values, and skills. The list is neither comprehensive nor precise, and each individual attribute is
neither essential nor sufficient by itself. Nevertheless, a consensus does exist among our
respondents that a good cultural diplomat should possess at least some of the following traits: a
cosmopolitan and multicultural attitude; assertiveness; orientation to mutual understanding;
attentive listening; interpersonal awareness; meditative attitude; tolerance; verbal and non-verbal
communication skills; negotiating skills; self-awareness and ability to evaluate and assess impact;
adaptability and creativity; ambition to achieve results; ability to moderate complex processes and
conflicts; pro-activism; emotional intelligence; and analytical skills. Cross-cultural sensitivity was
listed as most important (table 1).

15
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Freq. % of cases
Ability to listen 104 64
Ability to work in team 85 52
Active imagination 44 27
Aesthetic sensitivity 30 18.5
Openness to diversity 119 73
Intellectual curiosity 87 53.5
Cross cultural 142 87
sensitivity
Tolerance 34 21
Total 645 396
Table 1. Required interpersonal skills and qualities (more than one response was possible. Percentages do not
add up to 100.)

The results show a fairly close match between those qualities respondents think a cultural diplomat
should have and the ones they already possess themselves, manifesting a tendency to project on the
expected role their own personal experiences and self-evaluated capacities. As an example, the
majority (55%) of respondents who said they possess cross cultural sensitivity also listed it as the
most desirable skill; the same is true of those who described themselves as having openness to
diversity, ability to listen, and intellectual curiosity.

Training

Given the diverse array of skills required to be an effective cultural diplomat, the next important
question is whether they can be acquired as part of a formal or on-site training, or if their existence
should instead be seen as selection criteria. Most of the interviewees agreed that some of these skills
can be acquired during formal training, and they all stressed the importance of full-fledged training
programs.

There is a consensus that university and professional training are both necessary for cultural
diplomacy to be effective. 64% of respondents think that there is a need for a full-fledged graduate
program in cultural diplomacy. Many said, however, that formal academic training is not enough,
and stressed the important of a practical component. Beyond traditional learning methodologies,

16
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

respondents suggested several things that could make a training experience closer to reality and
more practical, including role playing games and socialization exercises.

One proposed approach envisioned a personal mobility program with two main elements: an
internship and visiting student programs along the lines of the Erasmus Program. One source
suggested structuring this program around two different modules: one cultural experience in a
country similar to the practitioners home country (e.g. a European country for a European student)
and another in a very different cultural context. Several respondents also stressed the importance of
stronger involvement with local communities. An overwhelming majority (85%) expressed the need
for a life-long learning program in cultural diplomacy (with 45% saying strongly agree).

Some of our respondents also stressed the importance of selection and recruitment. Instead of
designing a specific training in cultural diplomacy, some experts went as far as to suggest that the
focus should be on the recruitment and selection process of well-experienced practitioners as well
as on strategic partnerships. As one respondent stated: there is not a real need for a full-fledged
training program in cultural diplomacy, we cannot train someone in order to be a cultural diplomat.
We need to build an eco-system, a system based on a synergy of networks, skills, and approaches.

When asked directly whether the focus should be on recruitment and selection of experienced
practitioners and strategic partnerships, however, the sample was divided. Some of the interviewees
emphasized the necessity of rethinking the balance between full-time practitioners and external
partners who can be called on when specific skills and competencies are needed.

Regardless of the relative weight selection and recruitment should have compared to training, when
it comes to specific training needs our respondents expressed a clear idea of what is needed (chart
4). Among the disciplines required, international relations was the most cited (63% called it very
relevant), closely followed by foreign languages (62%) and international/strategic/public
communication (59%).

17
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Chart 4. The ideal training program in cultural diplomacy

III.3. European Union and cultural diplomacy

This last section discusses what role our interviewees see for cultural diplomacy in EU external
activities. Most of our respondents agreed there is considerable potential for a cultural element in
EU international relations to increase EU legitimacy and promote EU strategic interests. However,
competition between member states harms the EUs ability to project a coherent and effective
image of itself, and restrains its collective potential rather than improving it.

The following recommendations emerged from our interviews.

The EU should put a clear emphasis on the role and importance of cultural diplomacy in all its
programs and grant instruments. This process has to be based on a European discourse, and a
normative and constructivist approach is needed. In doing this, the standard proposed has to be
normatively ambitious but empirically sound.

In pursuing this goal, the central challenge will be abandoning the pursuit of cultural diplomacy
as national branding and adopting instead a new understanding of mutual engagement.

Culture and cultural expression have undeniably already been deployed by European actors in
multiple relationships with their counterparts. The EU should improve the framework its
members have put in place. The creation of an additional supranational framework will be

18
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

difficult, but this could be overcome by fostering collaboration between existing stakeholders
and actors beyond the usual national official organizations.

At the supranational level, successful cultural diplomacy requires cross-sector, inter-

departmental cooperation and sufficient human resources. These two aspects represent
challenges for the EU. Some experts pointed to a lack of public awareness of the importance and
power of culture, both at the national level and in external relations. Civil society and the general
public should be more involved and motivated.

Finally, a greater understanding of how to assess the impact of EU cultural diplomacy is needed.
Research in the field and knowledge about its effectiveness are critical in order to increase
positive perception and to generate as much agreement as possible. A clear conceptualization is
required, as well as proper measurement instruments.

To assess the amount of support for the present efforts of European institutions, the survey
examined what respondents think of eight operational recommendations included in the final report
of the Preparatory Action for Culture in the EUs external relations13. Their responses showed a
remarkable level of agreement with every one of the eight elements listed14. Respondents called for
better communication to share European culture, more flexible EU structures, the creation of a
strategic EU framework, new fundraising methods, strengthening civil society and local actors, the
development of benchmarks, and, finally, a focus on cities.

Not everybody, however, agreed that the EU should play an active role in cultural diplomacy. Some
interviewees raised concerns about the role of the EU itself, and suggested that this role should be
very limited if not completely abandoned. As one respondent put it: if Europe does not know what
its identity is, how can it effectively convey its identity abroad? If cultural diplomacy is a strategic
communication process in which one makes use of cultural assets, the EU was seen by some as too
diverse to present a coherent narrative.

13 Isar et al. (2014). Preparatory Action Culture in EU External Relations. Engaging the World towards Global
Cultural Citizenship. EU 2014

14 See Appendix 4. Online survey, p. 34

19
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

IV. Conclusions

This analysis highlighted some obstacles cultural diplomacy will face as it transforms itself into a
full-fledged approach to international relations. First, there is still a gap between academics and
practitioners; the evolving nature of cultural diplomacy as a new field of study and research means
there is a great deal of practical knowledge in the field, but the academic world still lacks the
tools to properly systematize it. Second, there is a gap between agency and structure. Practitioners
see cultural diplomacy as subject to the effects of national foreign policy, while academics tend to
perceive it as an independent flow shaped by structural forces. Finally, our respondents could not
agree on the proper balance between training and selection, and, within training, between formal
academic and life-long training. The majority of experts surveyed endorsed graduate programs and
training in cultural diplomacy. A few others, however, emphasized the superiority of an effective
recruitment and selection process. A few recommendations for policy-makers and practitioners also
emerged:

Diversity and flexibility. There is a need for a firewall between cultural diplomacy actors and their
governments. The details of cultural programs cannot be subjected to day-to-day review.
Authenticity. For cultural diplomacy to be credible, it has to reflect an authentic artistic culture;
otherwise there is a risk that branding efforts will be too superficial to be effective.
Partnership. On a related note, an increasingly important element of cultural diplomacy is
partnership building. The most effective and dynamic approach to cultural diplomacy is one in
which cultural partnerships are built as a strategic asset for the future, as it is often more productive
to focus on issues of mutual concern.
Cosmopolitanism. Cultural cooperation is strictly linked to the idea of cosmopolitan constructivism.
This theoretical approach, first developed by Cesar Villanueva Rivas (2010), can be defined as the
recognition that governments must improve their cultural and public diplomacy capacities to
cooperate through a common understanding of their own cultures, diversities, and differences.

This study also shows the need for the more systematic development of theoretical and empirical
research in the field of cultural diplomacy. To this end, this study recommends the creation of
working groups to evaluate the field experience of practitioners and organize it into a teachable
framework; cultural forums to foster dialogue between stakeholders, practitioners, and academics;
and extended learning programs to allow students, practitioners, and academics to interact.
20
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

APPENDIX 1. Methodology for Data Collection

a. Methodology

To map the existing training in public and cultural diplomacy the report started, inductively, to
collect data related to all training programs in cultural diplomacy, worldwide and at any level that
could be accessed online. Data were mostly collected through a desk research, using the following
setting-out:

Keywords. The search started with some basic keywords: BA, bachelor; MA, master; certificate;
seminar; training; cultural diplomacy. From this first round of data collection the scope of the
investigation widened to detect relevant data in a most exhaustive way. As a consequence, the
following keywords were added: public diplomacy; cultural relations; intercultural relations;
international cultural relations; international communication.

Language. The search was conducted in three languages: English Russian and Chinese.15

Region. While the initial search had no geographic filter, an analysis of the preliminary result led to
limit the search to the European countries, United States, Australia, New Zealand, as well as Russia
and China.16

b. Data formatting

The data collected via the web search have been organized around the single course as basic unit of
analysis. This choice is meant to improve analytical clarity as well as to facilitate data analysis.
Courses are distinguished in Bachelor and Master degrees as well as those included in other
Certificates, E-learning trainings and seminars. The rationale underpinning this choice was the
different nature of their operating methods and content; nevertheless, - although separately- we
aggregated the latter using similar categories. For the Bachelor and Master courses, we created a
series of analytical tables providing for each course the following info: content; institution,

15
The data collection concerning Russian and Chinese programs was carried out by PhD Student Erik Vlaeminck and
Ph.D. Student Po-han Yang at the Centre for Cultural Relations at the University of Edinburgh

16
Other filters applied: last update (anytime); terms appearing (anywhere in the page); reading level: (firstly no reading
level displayed, then we focused on advanced results only); file type: (any format)

21
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

program, relevant term & location, type of course (mandatory/elective), teaching professor, number
of hours, number of credits (ECTS, American credits)17.

c. Framework

After data collection and reformat a number of documents were generated, using different levels of
aggregation, so to facilitate data consultation:

Detailed Outline.

The detailed outline contains all the programs collected, sorted by institution. Each program is
carefully described, as well as the courses offered. Each profile provides specific information
concerning: location, length, credits, qualification, level of qualification, language of instruction,
mode of study, general overview, structure of the curriculum.

Concise List.

The list includes basic information concerning all the programs collected, sorted by institution.

Analytical Tables.

The analytical tables contain the data collection, using the single course as basic unit of analysis.
For each course we make a number of info available: course title, content, institution offering the
course, title of the program providing the course, term and year, location, type of course
(optional/mandatory), professor/instructor, number of hours and number of credits.

Dataset.

A dataset was then created, using, again, the course as basic unit of analysis. The attributes or
variables provided are the following: course title, content, institution offering the course, title of
the program providing the course, term and year, professor, number of hours, number of credits,
course type (mandatory/optional), geographical location, related field, area of the program,
country, pertinence, country, degree level.

17
In case of lack of data empty cells were filled in by an em-dash. Institutions offering the same course have been
gathered, as well as the programs offered by each of them

22
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

APPENDIX 2. List of Institutions

This section contains a complete list of the 45 institutions on which data were collected. For each
institution the related programs in cultural diplomacy are provided. The Institute for Cultural
Diplomacy (ICD) opens the list, as it offers several programs in partnership with seven European
universities. Then come the academic institutions, followed by the non-academic ones.

The Institute for Cultural Diplomacy (ICD)

Certificate programs:

o Certificate Program in International Relations and Cultural Diplomacy

o Certificate Program in the Implementation of Cultural Diplomacy through the Arts, Music &
Cinema
o Certificate Program in Cultural Diplomacy and Conflict Zone Mediation
o Certificate Program in Cultural Diplomacy, Sustainable Development & the Global Market

E-learning programs in Cultural Diplomacy

o E-Learning Program in International Relations & Cultural Diplomacy

o E-Learning Program in Global Governance & Cultural Diplomacy
o E-Learning Program in Cultural Diplomacy, Sustainable Development & the Global Economy
o E-Learning Program in Cultural Diplomacy & the New Media
o E-Learning Program in Cultural Diplomacy & Conflict Zone Mediation
o E-Learning Program in Cultural Diplomacy for Diplomats

Weeklong seminars in Cultural Diplomacy

d. BA and MA, PHD programs in Cultural Diplomacy, in partnership with seven European
academic institutions: Furtwangen University (HFU), Germany; University of the West of
Scotland; Touro College, Berlin; Babes-Bolyai University, Romania; The University of
Bucharest, Romania; The University of Siena, Italy; University of Nicosia, Cyprus.

23
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Furtwangen University (HFU), Germany

o MA in International Economics, Business and Cultural Diplomacy (two year program)

o MA in International Economics, Business and Cultural Diplomacy (one year program)

o MA Program in International Relations and Cultural Diplomacy (two year program)

o MA Program in International Relations and Cultural Diplomacy (one year program)

o MBA in International Economics & Cultural Diplomacy (two year program)

3. University of West of Scotland (UWS)

o MA Program in Cultural Diplomacy and International Events (one year program)

o MA Program in Cultural Diplomacy and International Sport (one year program)

o MA Program in Cultural Diplomacy and International Music (one year program)

4. Touro College, Berlin

o Master of Business Administration (American MBA degree) in International Business Relations

with focus on Cultural Diplomacy (18-month program)

5. Babes-Bolyai University, Romania

o MA Program in International Relations and Cultural Diplomacy (two-year program)

6. The University of Bucharest, Romania

o PhD Program with concentration on Cultural Diplomacy & International Relations

o BA in Political Science with a concentration in Cultural Diplomacy (three-year program)

o MA Program in Analytic Philosophy with a Concentration in Cultural Diplomacy (two-year

program)

o MA Degree in Globalization Studies and Cultural Diplomacy with a Concentration on

International Relations (two-year program)

7. The University of Siena, Italy

o MA Program in International Relations and Cultural Diplomacy (one-year program)

24
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

o MA Program in Global Governance and Cultural Diplomacy (one-year program)

8. University of Nicosia, Cyprus

o MBA Program in Business Administration with a Concentration in Cultural Management (1,5-

year program)

o MA Program in Euro-Mediterranean Studies and Cultural Diplomacy (1,5-year program)

o International Relations and European Studies (MA) (Concentration in Cultural Diplomacy) (1,5-
year program)

9. Goldsmiths University of London

Department: Institute for Creative and Cultural Entrepreneurship:

o MA in Cultural Policy, Relations & Diplomacy

o MA in Arts Administration and Cultural Policy

o MA in Arts administration and cultural policy: Music Pathway

o MA in Tourism and Cultural Policy

o MPhil & PhD in the ICCE

10. Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

Master of International Public Diplomacy

11. Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University

o BA in International Relations and Cultural Diplomacy

o MA in International Relations and Cultural Diplomacy

12. USC (University of Southern California): Annenberg School for Communication and
Journalism

o Master of Public Diplomacy

25
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

13. Syracuse University Newhouse School of Public communications & Maxwell School for
Citizenship and Public Affairs

o Graduate Public Diplomacy dual degree program: MA in international relations and MS in

public relations

14. American University School of International Service (Washington, DC)

o MA in International Communication

15. The George Washington University Elliott School of International Affairs

o M.A. in Global Communication

16. The University of Leeds

o MA International Communication

o MA International Communication (Part-Time)

17. Saint Petersburg State University

o BA History of Civilizations Public Diplomacy of the United States of America

o Certificate in Intercultural Management

18. Lobachevskiy State University of Nizhniy Novgorod

o MA International Tourism and Cultural Diplomacy (two-years) Cultural Diplomacy in

International Relations

19. MGIMO University, Moscow

o International School of Youth Diplomacy

o School of Public diplomacy RSM

20. National Research University of Higher School of Economics, Moscow

o The course: Soft Power and Controlled Chaos Instruments of Current World Politics (in
the framework of BA and MA programs)

o BA International Relations Soft Power and the International Development Assistance

26
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

21. Ural State Economic University, Ekaterinburg

o School of Public Diplomacy

22. Lomonosov Moscow State University

o MA, Historical Analysis in Governmental (two-years) and Municipal Government Soft power
and Public Diplomacy

o MA, International Relations with focus on International Relations (two-years) Soft power and
Public Diplomacy

o Certificate in Language, Culture and Intercultural Communication

23. Russian Foreign Trade Academy, Moscow

o BA, Economics (three-years) Basics of Intercultural Relations in International Business

24. Beijing Foreign Studies University

o MA in Public Diplomacy Cultural Diplomacy Study

o MA in East-West Relations Soft-power Strategies: China and U.S.A

25. Sichuan International Studies University

o BA in English Cultural Diplomacy

26. Duke Kunshan University

o Globalization and cultural Trends in China (framed in BA program, not specified)

27. China Foreign Affairs University

o BA in Diplomacy and Foreign Affairs Management Intercultural communication (taught in

Chinese and English)

28. Jilin University

o MA in Public Diplomacy Intercultural Communication

o MA in Public Diplomacy for Senior Officials in Developing Countries Soft Power and
National Image Building
27
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

29. Guangdong University of Foreign Studies

o PhD in English Language Intercultural communication

30. The university of Nottingham, Ningbo

o International Symposium on "China's soft power in Africa: emerging media and cultural
relations between China and Africa" (conference)

31. Diplomatic Academy of Ministry of Foreign Affairs

o MA International Humanitarian Relations (two-years) Intercultural Communication; Soft

Power in World Politics

o Certificate in Public Diplomacy

32. UNITAR United Nations Institute for Training and Research

o Course in Cultural Diplomacy in a Multipolar World (online)

33. The Institute of World Politics, Washington

o Certificate in Public Diplomacy and Strategic Influence

o Certificate in Strategic Soft Power

34. Rossotrudnichestvo (The Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States,
Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation)

o Public Diplomacy. The Truth about Russia

35. The Gorchakov Fund

o The Diplomatic Seminar

36. Russian International Affairs Council

o Summer School: Interactive resources for Public and Corporate Diplomacy

37. PICREADI (Russian non-governmental organization)

o School of Eurasian Public diplomacy

28
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

o The Public Diplomat Course

38. National Youth Council of Russia

o Public Diplomacy Corps

39. Institute for Economic Strategies, Moscow

o International Forum for Creative Youth Cultural Diplomacy in 21st century: new challenges,
new decisions

40. Institute of Cross-Border Cooperation and Integration, Belgorod

o International School of Cross Border Cooperation

o Expert Forum: Public Diplomacy. Regional Dimensions

41. Business Seminar (Russia)

o Certificate in Public Diplomacy and Official Diplomacy (e-learning program)

42. Indina-Consulting. Agency of Business Communication - Russia

o Global Leadership (training)

43. Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy China

o China's cultural diplomacy: Strategy, Policy and Implementation (seminar)

44. China Public Diplomacy Association

o Conference on Cultural Diplomacy and Creative Industries in China and Italy (conference)

45. The Charhar Institute China

o Conference on International Communication of National/Local Culture

29
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

APPENDIX 3. Descriptives of the Training Data set

This Appendix reports the frequency distribution for all variables created in the mapping training
dataset discussed in Appendix 1 and 2.
Course Type: Mandatory/Elective

Elective 232 52%

Mandatory 215 48%

Sum 44718 100%

Geographical Location19

n %

NA North America 75 14%

SA South America -- --

EU Europe 411 79%

AF Africa + Middle East -- --

AS Asia 7 1%

AU Australia 15 3%

EURAS Eurasia 11 2%

Sum 519 100%

18
The sum (=447) differs from the total amount of courses (=519) because of lack of data for some of them

19
EU (Europe) is meant to include all the EU countries plus Norway, Switzerland, Bosnia, Serbia, Montenegro,
Albania. EURASIA includes: Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldavia, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan

30
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Related field of each single course

n %

PS Political Science 71 14%

IR International Relations 235 45%

Economics (Business,
EC 63 12%
Management, Marketing)

LW Law 12 2%

ART Arts & Literature 9 2%

COM Communications 49 9%

PSY Psychology 1 0%

History, Geography,
HST 33 6%
Anthrophology

MET Methodology & Research 31 6%

PHIL Philosophy 7 1%

LAN Languages 4 1%

EDU Education 4 1%

Sum 519 100%

31
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Area of the program each single course is framed in

n %

IR International Relations 266 51%

IC International Communication 69 13%

EBA Economics, Business & Administration 85 16%

AC Arts & Culture 27 5%

PS Political Science 59 11%

APHI
Analytic Philosophy 13 3%
L

Sum 519 100%

Strictly cultural diplomacy course. This is meant to set whether a single course includes the
words cultural diplomacy in its title:

CD reference to "cultural diplomacy" 107 21%

NO CD no reference to "cultural diplomacy" 412 79%

Sum 519 100%

Strictly cultural diplomacy program. This is meant to set whether a program includes the words
cultural diplomacy in its title:

CD reference to "cultural diplomacy" 353 68%

NO CD no reference to "cultural diplomacy" 166 32%

Sum 519 100%

32
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Country

N %

GE Germany 104 20%

US United States 75 14%

PL Poland 29 6%

CYP Cyprus 33 6%

AU Australia 15 3%

IT Italy 30 6%

RO Romania 118 23%

GB Great Britain 97 19%

RU Russia 11 2%

CN China 7 1%

Sum 519 100%

Degree Level

N %

BA Bachelor 83 16%

MA Master 423 84%

Sum 50620 100%

20 The sum (=506) differs from the total amount of courses (=519) because some of them, being provided by
international institutes in certificate programs, are neither BA nor MA courses.

33
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

APPENDIX 4. Online Survey

The online survey includes 163 respondents out of 528 survey contacts (response rate 31% of the
valid contacts), residing in 44 countries (Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil,
Bulgaria, Canada, China, Chile, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,
Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Morocco, Mozambique,
Netherlands, Palestine, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russia, Scotland,
Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Thailand, Turkey, UK, USA, Uruguay). The
survey was fielded from June 13 to July 12, 2016. The survey was designed, scripted and managed
by the LAPS (Laboratorio Analisi Politiche e Sociali), the survey center at the University of Siena,
under the supervision of Dr Francesco Olmastroni (LAPS field manager) and the responsibility of
Dr Rossella Borri (PI for this portion of the project).

Approximately 59% of the respondents were female, and 41% male. 46 of them (28%) were
academics, 47 (29%) were officials in a cultural institute, 19 (11.5%) were diplomats in the
Ministry of F.A., 16 (10%) were NGO officials, 8 (5%) were International Governmental
Organization officials, and one was an official in the Ministry of Culture. The remaining 26 (16%)
had different employment. The educational background of respondents spans all the levels of higher
education, with 8 (5%) holding a BA/BS, 72 (44%) a MA/MS, 17 (10%) a M. Phil, 55 (34%) a
PhD/D. Phil.

Below are reported the frequency distributions of all variables in the questionnaire. Percentages are
computed including those who answered do not know. We also report the verbatim of the open-
ended questions.

34
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

1. vQ1. The concept of Cultural Diplomacy has been defined in different ways. Below there
are some common definitions. Please, choose the one that is closer to your view of what
Cultural Diplomacy is about.
CD is about Freq. % Cum.
1. CD takes place when formal diplomats, serving national
governments, try to shape and channel this natural flow to advance 13 8 8
national interests.
2. CD is an actors attempt to manage the international environment
through making its cultural resources and achievements known 42 26 34
overseas and/or facilitating cultural transformation abroad.
3. CD is the exchange of arts, ideas, information and other aspects of
99 61 95
culture in order to foster mutual understanding.
4. Other 9 5 100
Total 163 100

vQ1_txt. If 4.Other please specify:

Cultural Diplomacy is the use of culture by governments to advance national interests.

[C.D. is] talking directly to the people of other nations with the goal of finding common grounds,
countering misinformation and advancing national strategic objectives.
C.D. is about the use and sharing of cultural products, practices and interactions to influence
other nations for mutual understanding and problem solving.
[C.D. is] a way to improve a flow of cultural coproduction and co-distribution to raise and foster
a common vision about issues of interest regarding a global landscape.
[C.D. is] the deployment of a States culture in support of national interests.
[C.D. is] a combination of the above <the three definitions offered>. Diplomats do get involved
in activities to make cultural resources and achievements known overseas and this is done to
advance national interest.
[C.D. is] all the three above <the three definitions offered> plus international cultural
collaboration and cooperation.
Cultural Diplomacy is an actor's attempt to manage the international environment by engaging
with foreign publics in the cultural realm
The three options [offered in the questions] are valid.

35
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

2. vQ2. Cultural Diplomacy, as a concept, includes several components. In your opinion how
much each of the following elements is relevant to define it? Please position yourself on a scale
from 0 to 10, where 0 means that the element is not relevant at all, while 10 means that the
element is very relevant.

Media Standard
Mean n
n Deviation
Nation Branding 7.2 8 2.6 163
Cultural Relations 6.3 7 2.9 163
Strategic
7.7 8 2.1 163
Communication
Public Relations 7.5 8 2.2 163
Cultural Management 7.2 8 2.4 163
Propaganda 3 2 3.1 163

3. vQ3. According to some, the main purpose of cultural diplomacy should be influencing
decision makers or the public opinion. Others think that cultural diplomacy should be aimed
at changing peoples attitudes or behaviors. What is your opinion about the purpose of
cultural diplomacy? Please position yourself on a scale from 0 to 10, 0 being not important at
all and 10 being very important.
Mean Median Standard Deviation N
Influencing decision makers 7.6 8 2.2 163
Influencing peoples attitudes and
8.6 9 1.6 163
preferences

4. vQ4. In your opinion, what is the relation between cultural and public diplomacy?

Relation CD and PD Freq. % Cum.

1. CD is a pillar of public diplomacy 86 53 53
2. CD and public diplomacy are distinct but parallel activities 52 32 85
3. CD is an independent activity from public diplomacy 19 12 97
4. Other 4 2 99
5. None of them 2 1 100
Total 163 100

36
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

vQ4_txt. If 4. Other, please specify:

CD is one of the instruments of public diplomacy.

CD is a subset of public diplomacy
[CD and public diplomacy] are distinct but interact.
Public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy can be parallel activities but also they can be a part of
one another, depending on how, who and with what aims is conducting them.

5. vQ5. Here you find a list of statements that have been made on cultural diplomacy. Please,
choose how much you agree/disagree with each of them on a scale from 1 (completely agree)
to 5 (completely disagree). (figures are percentage)

Completely Completely
2 3 4 % N
Agree Disagree
CD is the privileged domain
10 8 21 28 33 100 163
of State actors
CD is carried out by State as
58 26 8 6 2 100 163
well as by Non-State actors
The set of actors engaged in
41 20 21 10 8 100 163
CD is limitless
CD can be carried out
without the involvement of 20 22 19 23 15 100 163
States

6. vQ6. Based on your own experience, which of the following statements best describes how
communication among key players in cultural diplomacy is presently conducted?

Communication as presently conducted Freq. % Cum.

No effective communication 20 12 12
Episodic communication 131 80 92
Continuous communication 11 7 99
DK 1 1 100
Total 163 100

37
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

7. vQ7. And which of the following statements best describes how communication among key
players in cultural diplomacy should be conducted?

Communication as it should be conducted Freq. % Cum.

There should be communication 41 25 25
There should be Episodic communication 11 7 32
There should be Continuous communication 111 68 100
Total 163

8. vQ8. According to you, what interpersonal skills and qualities are required to be a
successful cultural diplomat? Please choose and list four options in priority order

Freq % Responses % of cases

Ability to listen 104 16.12 63.80
Ability to work in team 85 13.18 52.15
Active imagination 44 6.82 26.99
Aesthetic sensitivity 30 4.65 18.40
Openness to diversity 119 18.45 73.01
Intellectual curiosity 87 13.49 53.37
Cross cultural 142 22.02 87.12
sensitivity
Tolerance 34 5.27 20.86
Total 645 100.00 395.71
vQ8_txt: if Other, please specify:
opportunism; negotiation skills; self-awareness and ability to evaluate and assess impact;
adaptability and creativity; knowledge about the different systems (politic, artists, socio-politically);
ability to communicate with the various actors; strategic ability; ambition for achieving results;
ability to moderate complex processes and conflicts; pro-activity; supranational feeling; education
into the field of contemporary arts; emotional intelligence; active imagination; personal empathy;
respect for otherness; diplomatic skills; analytical skills.

38
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

9 A. vQ9A_M. Do you feel you have some of these skills and qualities? Please read the list
again and select the two most important skills you fell you have.

Respondents
Freq. %
skill
I dont have it 111 68
Ability to listen
I have it 52 32

Ability to work I dont have it 121 74

in team I have it 42 26
Active I dont have it 150 92
imagination I have it 13 8

Aesthetic I dont have it 151 93

sensitivity I have it 12 7

Openness to I dont have it 109 67

diversity I have it 54 33
Intellectual I dont have it 93 57
curiosity I have it 70 43
Cross cultural I dont have it 92 56
sensitivity I have it 71 44
I dont have it 157 96
Tolerance
I have it 6 4
Total 163 100 %

vQ9A_txt. If Other, please specify:

Understanding social relationship and the ability to use social influence; humility.

39
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

10. vQ10. Thinking of an ideal training program in cultural diplomacy, there are a certain
number of areas of study that could be included. Please, indicate to what extent each of the
following is relevant in designing an optimal training program in cultural diplomacy.

Totally Somewhat Somewhat Very D

% n
Irrelevant Irrelevant Relevant Relevant K
Political science 2 22 50 26 -- 100 163
International relations -- 1 36 63 -- 100 163
Ethnography 7 28 49 16 -- 100 163
Cultural anthropology 1 17 45 37 -- 100 163
Globalization studies 2 17 56 25 -- 100 163
Development studies 3 18 62 17 -- 100 163
Int./Strat./Public
1 5 35 59 -- 100 163
Comm.
Foreign languages -- 7 31 62 -- 100 163
Economics & Business
9 37 47 6 1 100 163
Adm.
Intern.
9 34 46 10 1 100 163
Business/Marketing
Arts & Creative
3 9 39 49 -- 100 163
industries
Media studies 1 18 53 28 -- 100 163
Cultural management 1 6 37 55 1 100 163
Internships/Exchanges 1 9 31 58 1 100 163
Statistics 13.5 43 41 2.5 -- 100 163
Qualitative methods 6 44 41 9 -- 100 163
Survey research 6 39 48 6 1 100 163
Cultural heritage 1 7 54 37 1 100 163
Archeology 11 43 36 10 -- 100 163
International law 5 35 47 12 1 100 163

40
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

11. vQ11. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following
statements

Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly

% n
disagree disagree agree agree
The idea of training in CD is
55 26 17 2 100 163
artificial and ineffective
Instead of designing a
training in CD, the focus
should be on recruitment and
20 36 36 8 100 163
selection of already
experienced practitioners or
strategic partnerships
There is a need for a full-
fledged graduate program in 4.5 31 38 26.5 100 163
cultural diplomacy
There is a need for a life-long
learning program in cultural 2 13 40 45 100 163
diplomacy
The staff training program in
CD should be internal and
16.5 54 24.4 5 100 163
managed by the organization
itself

41
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

12. vQ12. Cultural diplomacy, when conducted by states, needs to be located somewhere in
the state bureaucracy. Which of the following you think is the most appropriate Department
to host and coordinate cultural diplomacy activities?

Appropriate Department for CD Freq % Cum

. .
Ministry/Dep. of foreign affairs 14 9 9
Ministry/Dep. of foreign affairs + Ministry/Dep. of
72 44 53
Culture
Ministry/Dep. of Culture 4 2 55
National institutes of Culture 32 20 75
Ministry/Dep. exclusively devoted to CD 7 4 79
National Agency autonomous from the Government 26 16 95
Other 8 5 100
Total 163 100

vQ12_txt. If Other please specify:

The ideal situation would be an autonomous Agency operating in cooperation with the Ministries
of Foreign Affairs and Culture.
Independent producers.
A national agency based on a group of artists, government persons, NGOs, cultural workers.
An autonomous Agency but answerable to government. Cultural diplomacy must be accountable
and resourced by the government.
An agency autonomous from the government in close cooperation with the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Culture and NGOs.
A Department devoted only to Cultural Diplomacy in direct cooperation with the Ministry of
Culture and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
It depends on the country's administration. It could be a National institute (more neutral and less
political) but it could work well as well-being in the ministry of Foreign Affairs in cooperation
with the Ministry of Culture.

42
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

13. vQ13. The final report of the Preparatory Action for Culture in EUs external relations
presents a set of operational recommendations for a strategic approach by the EU. Please
indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with some of the most salient ones.

Strongl
Somewhat Somewhat Strongl D
y % n
disagree agree y agree K
disagree
A strategic framework,
dedicated staff and proper
1 4 43 52 -- 100 163
co-ordination need to be put
in place
The structures and modus
operandi of the EU
institutions need to be
-- 2 45 52 1 100 163
flexible enough to adjust to a
multi-layered and shared
system of governance
New methods of funding and
fundraising need to be
actively sought, such as co- -- 5.5 39 55 0.5 100 163
funding, pooled funding,
public-private partnerships
Better communication is
needed, which is able to
share European societies
-- 2 37 60 1 100 163
sense of commitment to the
flourishing of their cultural
sectors
Strengthening civil society in
countries where major social
and political transformations 0.5 8.5 31 59 1 100 163
are occurring should be a
cultural priority for Europe
A focus on cities: urban
cultural actors in all third
countries, in cities both large
1 16 50 32 1 100 163
and small, are particularly
keen to network with
European counterparts

43
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Alternative ways of
empowering local cultural
actors: the EU could attempt
to develop new modes of
cooperation between 1 8 44.5 44.5 2 100 163
established cultural
organizations and/or
foundations and local actors
in third countries
Monitoring and evaluation
also require a new culture,
as it were, of measurement 1 13 46 39 1 100 163
and benchmark based
assessment
14. vQ14A/Vq14B. For each of the following actors, please specify to what extent you consider
it successful in soft power. Please indicate your opinion on a 0-100 scale, being 0 Not
successful at all and 100 very successful. (Average score).

Soft Power Ranking

UAE 36
Russia 36
South Africa 38
Turkey 40
Mexico 42
Israel 43
India 44
China 47
Brazil 48
Australia 53
EU 56
Japan 56
Norway 57
Spain 58
Netherlands 58
Sweden 61
Italy 62
Canada 63
USA 65
UK 67
Germany 69
France 70
Note. Ranking is based on mean value. Actors are ranked from lowest to highest.
44
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

vQ15.A. What do you think is the most important issue or problem facing the EU when it
comes to implement cultural diplomacy within its external relations policies? (OPEN
QUESTION)

Thematic Blocks N
A. Lack of coordination and cooperation - CD still country-focused
63
(Nation branding).
B. Organizational problems between EU and MS and among MS
28
administrative and bureaucratic issues at EU level.
C. Internal cultural diversity Lack of a European cultural identity. 21
D. Lack of clear EU common cultural policies and long term
18
strategies.
E. Lack of communication [internal: to EU national publics lack
12
of awareness among EU public] [external: to foreign publics].
F. Conceptual conundrum Lack of empirical research Need to
8
assess effectiveness.
G. Concerns about EU integration process. 4
Other 3
DK/NA 6
Total 163

45
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

SOCIAL BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE

16. vQ16. How would you define your field?

Freq. %
Activity 112 69
Research 40 24
Other 11 7
Total 163 100

Activity field Freq. %

Cultural diplomacy 38 34
International cultural relations
39 35
Cultural engagement 2 2
International cultural exchange
16 14
Cultural collaboration 12 11
Cultural practice 5 4
Total 112 100
Research field Freq. %
Area studies 1 2
Foreign relations 2 5
Global studies 3 7
International affairs 1 2.5
International relations 7 17
International studies 1 2.5
Cultural studies 9 21
Public diplomacy 10 24
Public relations 2 5
International communication 6 14
Total 42 100
46
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

vQ16_other. If other, please specify:

Social psychology and social influence (with applications to social relationships).

The Creative Economy.
Think-tank (EU external action and development + Africa and Mediterranean).
Cultural heritage.
Philology.
Economics and finance - Research on corporate governance of SMEs.
As a practitioner I work in public diplomacy and strategic communications.
vQ16_1_txt. If selected Area studies, please specify:
Transatlantic relations
Foreign languages, arts and culture
Asian Studies (China, Japan, Vietnam)
History/ International Relations
Public and cultural diplomacy
Language, and then Literature and Culture in general
public diplomacy, international public relations, nation branding, country image studies
Architecture
performing arts, cultural policy
Cultural policy and economy with an international perspective
Digital diplomacy, cultural diplomacy in regions of conflict
global public diplomacy
European Cultural Policy
cultural relations, diplomacy and policy
Journalism
Languages
Culture, Media and Creative Industries
Foreign Languages and Linguistics
Cultural diplomacy, digital humanities, museology
Cultural Economics, Cultural Policy
china, South East Asia, Japan

47
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

vQ16_A. In the past five years have you taught a course in Cultural Diplomacy (or its
equivalent)? (for scholars)

Freq
%
.
Yes 46 28
No 117 72
Total 163 100

vQ16_B. In the past five years have you had any training in Cultural Diplomacy? (for
practitioners)

Fre
%
q.
Yes 52 32.50
No 108 67.50
Total 160 100

vQ16_B_1. If yes, who did offer this training?

Freq. %
Internally provided 18 35
University course 11 21
External non-academic
14 27
institution
Other 9 17
Total 52 100

vQ16_B_1_txt. If other please specify:

I received a training rather through practical work - as a specialist in the Cultural Institute to the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Bulgaria and as Blue Book Trainee at the European
Commission.
It was on a daily basis working with different cultures in many projects.
48
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Nobody 'offered' the training, it was learning through doing and reflecting.
part of international round-tables and conferences.
ICD.
Goethe Institute for Voice of Culture.
On the job training through working in extremely different cultural environments (Asia, Africa,
and Europe) required freelance self-training through desk research, learning, behavior
modification and real-life situational testing.
PhD in Cultural Diplomacy (self-developed academic path in an interdisciplinary PhD program).

vQ17. What is the highest educational degree you have completed?

Freq
%
.
BA/BS 8 5
MA/MS 72 44
M. Phil 17 10
PhD/D.
55 34
Phil
Other 11 7
Total 163 100

vQ20. Gender Freq. %

Female 96 59
Male 67 41
Total 163 100

49
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

vQ23. What is your present work?

Freq. %
Diplomat in Ministry of F.A. 19 11.5
Official in the Ministry of Culture 1 0.5
Official in a cultural institute 47 29
Official of an International Governmental
8 5
Organization
Official in a NGO 16 10
Academic 46 28
Other 26 16
Total 163 100

vQ23_txt. If other please specify:

Media researcher
consultant
EU Policy Advisor
Consultant and researcher in European studies and projects dealing with culture
Official in a regional government for Culture, Europe, Foreign Relations
Consultant
Contractual Officer in European Institutions
I am currently a master student, soon to graduate.
Diplomat in Embassy of Austria in Slovakia and Director of the Cultural Institute of Austria in
Bratislava
Executive Secretary of EUNIC London, and project manager across other UK based
organizations mainly in the field of digital arts, dance and European collaborations
Official of the Ministry of Culture working for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as Cultural
Attach and Director of the Portuguese Cultural Centre in Maputo
Non-diplomat in Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Retired MFA diplomat regularly recalled for short-term assignments, plus I teach a university
seminar.
Internship in an international non-governmental organization

50
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

Director of Goethe Institut

Project Manager
I work at an NGO and volunteer at a cultural institute.
Think tank
European Commission
policy officer in ministry of foreign affairs
Freelance International Cultural Consultant (evaluation, research, editorial work etc.)
contract worker Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Also, career diplomat in the MFA
Free-lance consultant and adviser

51
 DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE SOCIALI,
POLITICHE E COGNITIVE

REFERENCES

Arndt Richard T. (2006). The First Resort of Kings. American Cultural Diplomacy in the Twentieth
Century. Potomac Books Inc., Washington, D.C.
Cull Nicholas J. (2008). Public diplomacy: Taxonomies and Histories, The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science. 616 (1): 31-54.
Graham Sarah Ellen (2015). Culture and Propaganda. The Progressive Origins of American Public
Diplomacy, 1936-1953, Ashgate;
Hocking Brian 2006). Multistakeholder diplomacy: Forms, functions and frustrations
Ien Ang, Yudhishthir Raj Isar & Phillip Mar (2015). Cultural diplomacy: beyond the national
interest? International Journal of Cultural Policy. 21 (4): 365-381.
Isar R. I. et al. (2014). Preparatory Action Culture in EU External Relations. Engaging the
World towards Global Cultural Citizenship. EU 2014
Kaneva Nadia and Popescu Delia (2011). National Identity Lite. Nation Branding in post-
Communist Romania and Bulgaria. International Journal of Cultural Studies.
Snow Nancy (1998). Propaganda, Inc.: Selling Americas culture to the world. Seven Stories Press,
NY
Van der Pluijm Rogier and Jan Melissen (2007). City Diplomacy. The expanding role of Cities in
International Politics. The Hague, Netherlands Institute for International Relations Clingendael,
Clingendael Diplomacy Paper No.10
Villanueva Rivas Cesar (2009). Cosmopolitan Constructivism: Mapping a road to the future of
cultural and public diplomacy, Publicdiplomacymagazine.com, University of Southern California,
EEUU. [Available at: http:// publicdiplomacymagazine.com/cosmopolitan-constructivism-mapping-
a-road-to-the-future-of-cultural-and-public-diplomacy/]
White Candace L (2015). Exploring the Role of Private-sector Corporations in public diplomacy.
Public Relations Inquiry. 4 (3): 305321.

52