The Mechanics of Cultural Diplomacy: A Comparative Case Study Analysis from the European Context

Abstract

The National Institutes for Culture have not attracted much scholarly attention examining their managerial practices. The aim of this article is to explore how the state expresses its agency over the Cultural Institutes of six European countries, namely the UK, Germany, France, Spain, Sweden and Greece. Agency presents varying modalities making instrumentalism more multifaceted than it has been implied so far. The authors are introducing here a framework of 5 'touchpoints' to capture and analyse instrumentalism in cultural diplomacy. Funding, agenda setting, evaluation, hierarchy and appointment power constitute the typical system of interactions between the Cultural Institutes and their reporting authorities.

Moving to a new phase in public diplomacy research

“…They found that the development paths of both institutions were closely related to the development and transformation of Sino-US political relations. Comparative analysis appeared also in specific areas of PD such as cultural diplomacy (Kizlari & Fouseki, 2018), digital diplomacy (Bjola & Jiang, 2015), international exchanges (Mawer, 2017;Ayhan & Snow, 2021), sports diplomacy (Kobierecki, 2020), and diaspora diplomacy (Gilboa, 2022).…”

The Rise of Rhizomatic Cultural Policies

“…The instrumentalisation of its work has caused a legitimacy crisis within the organisation as it has repeatedly tried to reaffirm its independence by emphasising the non-diplomatic nature of its activities (Pamment, 2012). The case of the British Council demonstrates that organisations with a cultural/educational remit pay particular attention to their public image and any links to institutions driven by instrumental concerns are strongly resisted (Kizlari & Fouseki, 2018).…”

The Role of British Council in UK Culture Diplomacy

“…18), with diplomats engaged in public diplomacy always considering their own national interests and foreign policy goals, the British Council envisions its work as cultural relations, emphasizing the use of culture to develop multi-layered networks of relationships. Funding, agenda setting, evaluation, hierarchy, and appointment authority constitute the typical system of interaction between cultural institutions and their reporting bodies (Kizlari & Fouseki, 2017).…”