Strategic Publics in Public Diplomacy: A Typology and a Heuristic Device for Multiple Publics

Nishikawa-Pacher, Andreas

doi:10.1163/1871191x-13020004

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In an effort to address this issue, Pacher's (2018) work made one of the first attempts to include relational elements in a taxonomy of key publics for public diplomacy. The typology poses two dimensions to describe ideal types of diplomatic actors, with the purpose of exploring public diplomacy strategies.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In response to Pacher's (2018) work and call for more exploration of typologies, Tam and Kim (2019) proposed a taxonomy of foreign publics by using behavioral experience and symbolic environment (see Figure 1). In the taxonomy, behavioral experience refers to the direct experience of individuals in the host country, which are essential elements to evaluate individuals' relationships with the country (Tam & Kim, 2019).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Classifying foreign publics: Examining the relationships behavioral experience, symbolic environment, and communication behaviors among key foreign publics

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study applies Tam and Kim's 2019 taxonomy to alumni data for the Global Korea Scholarship in order to segment key foreign publics and understand their communication behaviors toward South Korea in the context of public diplomacy. In this study, key foreign publics refer to groups of foreign publics who are positioned to impact the public diplomacy goals of a nation. They have a direct behavioral relationship with a foreign host country and maintain communication and relationships with those in their home country. The findings of this study provide empirical results that identify four types of foreign publics, showing that the new segmentation taxonomy of foreign publics by Tam and Kim is applicable in public diplomacy. The results also indicate that each public type acts differently in terms of positive megaphoning, negative megaphoning, and likelihood of recommending of South Korea, further supporting the typology's behavioral descriptions. Related Articles in this Special Issue Ayhan, Kadir Jun, and Nancy Snow. 2021. “Introduction to the Special Issue—Global Korea Scholarship: Empirical Evaluation of a non‐Western Scholarship Program from a Public Diplomacy Perspective.” Politics & Policy 49(6): 1282–1291. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12440. Hong, Moon Suk, Minjeong Jeon, and Kadir Jun Ayhan. 2021. “International Scholarship for Social Change? Re‐contextualizing Global Korea Scholarship Alumni's Perceptions of Justice and Diversity in South Korea.” Politics & Policy 49(6): 1359–1390. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12435. Tam, Lisa, and Kadir Jun Ayhan. 2021. “Evaluations of People, Affection, and Recommendation for a Host Country: A Study of Global Korea Scholarship (GKS) Recipients.” Politics & Policy 49(6): 1292–1307. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12438.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classifying foreign publics: Examining the relationships behavioral experience, symbolic environment, and communication behaviors among key foreign publics

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Secondly, state awards do not only sustain governmental ties with the individual awardees. The targets of public diplomacy are conceptualised as 'strategic publics' (Fitzpatrick 2012) and can be disaggregated into at least two units of analysis, namely the immediately involved persons (individual award recipients) and the general public (Pacher 2018b). While the individual recipients may feel honoured and inclined to further support the Transnistrian cause, the publicity of award bestowals also sends signals to a more general audience.…”

Section: State Awards As Tools Of Public Diplomacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Transnistria’s Order of Friendship: Legitimacy Through Diplomatic Practice

Nishikawa-Pacher¹

2020

Europe-Asia Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What strategies do de facto states employ in conducting their diplomacy? This article examines Transnistria's Order of Friendship, a state award that primarily targets foreigners, by analysing the profiles of all known award recipients. The Order is found to be a political tool to enhance Transnistria's domestic and external legitimacy in the absence of recognised sovereignty. The findings confirm the literature on Transnistria's 'bandwagoning' with Russia, indicate that a patron's support must be actively sought rather than taken for granted, andsince many awardees are from jurisdictions other than the patron state Russia-point to the need to examine the foreign policy of de facto states more holistically. WHEN, IN 2012, TRANSNISTRIA ESTABLISHED THE ORDER OF FRIENDSHIP as its only state award primarily aimed at foreigners, 1 there were good reasons to doubt that the de facto state 2 still enjoyed a strong commitment from its patron state Russia. In the preceding year, Russia had backed a defeated candidate in the Transnistrian presidential election, pressuring the newly elected de facto government under the leadership of Evgenii Shevchuk to 'convince his Russian ally of the continuity of Transnistria's devotedness' (Istomin & Bolgova 2016, p. 12). The cooling of relations between Russia and Transnistria was indicated by, inter alia, the eruption of a dispute on gas prices in Transnistria, the closure of the Russian quasi-consulate in Tiraspol, and investigations regarding the son of a former Transnistrian de facto president for allegedly embezzling Russian aid (Devyatkov 2012, pp. 57-8).

show abstract

“…Thus, international exchanges should be placed in the framework of public diplomacy which studies the relationships enacted by states towards (often foreign) publics . These targets – called ‘strategic publics’ (Fitzpatrick, 2012) – can be (foreign) state officials, but they may also be businesspeople, journalists, students, labour migrants, refugees, or any other selected segment of the social environment (Pacher, 2017). These individuals are the units to be analysed primarily and not the polities they (presumably) represent.…”

Section: International Exchanges In the Framework Of Public Diplomacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While this sounds noble and magnanimous, a closer look reveals two caveats. First, governmental relationship-management is often only conducted with carefully selected strategic publics endowed with rich resources (Pacher, 2017). Second, a genealogy of the notion of relationship-management in public diplomacy hints at the Public Relations (PR) literature as its origins (Signitzer and Coombs, 1992; Vanc and Fitzpatrick, 2016).…”

Section: International Exchanges In the Framework Of Public Diplomacymentioning

confidence: 99%

The ritual creation of political symbols: International exchanges in public diplomacy

Nishikawa-Pacher¹

2018

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International exchange programmes have been previously conceptualised based on the ‘opinion leader model’. It expects participants to form positive attitudes towards the host country, and to become influential back home. However, the micro-processes through which this goal can be achieved remain undertheorised. Drawing from Interaction Ritual Theory, this article argues that international exchanges consist of a chain of rituals. They strategically immerse targeted individuals into personal experiences with a shared focus on the host country, transforming the latter into a symbol charged with emotional energy and (strategically devisable) cognitive content. The symbol (now affectively and cognitively laden) is then recurrently invoked to re-circulate through the networks of the participants. A case study of a programme in which the symbol ‘Poland’ became systematically charged with the content of ‘multiculturality’ illustrates this proposition. Practical and theoretical implications (e.g. for the literature on socialisation, norm-diffusion, and face-to-face diplomacy) in international relations are discussed.

show abstract

Strategic Publics in Public Diplomacy: A Typology and a Heuristic Device for Multiple Publics

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Classifying foreign publics: Examining the relationships behavioral experience, symbolic environment, and communication behaviors among key foreign publics

Classifying foreign publics: Examining the relationships behavioral experience, symbolic environment, and communication behaviors among key foreign publics

Transnistria’s Order of Friendship: Legitimacy Through Diplomatic Practice

The ritual creation of political symbols: International exchanges in public diplomacy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About