M09 | 008 STAND Business Meeting
(Friday, July 4, 9:00 AM – 10:30 AM, Archway, Theatre 3)
N07 | 008 Connections, Synergies, and Tensions in Science Diplomacy, Panel 1
(Friday, July 4, 11:00 AM – 12:30 PM, Archway, Theatre 1)
Jaehwan Hyun (Pusan National University), ‘Japanese Ornithologists in the Pacific: The Remaking of Japanese Sovereignty and Trans-Pacific Ornithology from the 1910s to the 1960s’
This paper explores the history of avifauna surveys conducted by Japanese ornithologists on islands in the Pacific Ocean from the 1910s to the 1960s. Using various sources, including scientific reports, memoirs, and biographies of Japanese ornithologists, it highlights how the naming and interpretation of the Pacific in their ornithological research shifted over time, as well as the relationship between these changes and the shifting sovereignty of the Japanese state in the region. The paper also pays attention to how these political and scientific shifts were closely linked with the reconfiguration of trans-Pacific ornithological networks amid the geopolitical change, including the end of the Pacific War (1941-1945) and the subsequent U.S. occupation of Japan. In this paper, I argue that the avifauna surveys conducted before, during and after the war were crucial to integrating Japanese ornithologists into the American-led “Pacific science” in the 1950s, in which Japanese ornithologists successfully established themselves as key participants in this new trans-Pacific ornithological network. By highlighting the importance of the Pacific in the postwar reconstruction of Japanese ornithology, this paper suggests that the Pacific focus could be a useful means to interrogate the transnational and transwar aspects of Japanese postwar science.
Felipe Vilo (University of Texas at Austin), ‘Mediated Exploration: The Transnational Transmission of the Atacama Desert 1840 – 1880’
The following work examines the diplomatic mediation activities of the Atacama Desert exploration from 1840 to 1880. During the 1840s, the Chilean government began to sponsor the Atacama exploration to survey its natural resources, arid biodiversity, and territorial boundaries. Their scientific endeavors received substantial support from the Chilean diplomatic missions in Europe. The role of its diplomats was critical for developing its publications and eventually negotiating and socializing the Atacama Desert within European political and intellectual circles. Its emergent arid ecology contributed to refabricating the global networks of scientific knowledge.
Vicente Perez Rosales (1807 – 1886) and Alberto Blest Gana (1830 – 1920) will be the leading two diplomats to focus on. Their activities assisted Ignacio Domeyko (1802 – 1889), Rudolph Philippi (1808 – 1904), and José Amado Pissis (1812 – 1889) naturalists’ requests for scientific equipment and contacts with printing houses. The travelogues and scientific periodicals articles published in English, German, and French alongside the exchange of museum objects resulted from long diplomatic efforts on European soil. Thus, embassies became hubs of knowledge transmission, mobilizing transnational channels between Europe and Chile.
Consequently, diplomatic mediation activities were critical to putting the driest desert on Earth to reach a global audience, blurring the lines of science, politics, and society during the nineteenth century.
Dr Javier Poveda-Figueroa, ‘Pedro Vicente Maldonado, the Geodesic Mission, and his role in the development of Spanish and French science during Eighteenth Century’
This paper aims to explain the role of mathematician Pedro Vicente Maldonado in the first French Geodesic Mission (1735-1744), influencing the legitimization of Newtonian science, the development of French science and Spanish scientific reform during Eighteenth Century. Two events had seminal influence in the Franco-Spanish relationships during that century: the Spanish War of Succession
(1701-1714), and the debate around the shape of the Earth.
On one hand, after the Bourbon dynasty won the succession conflict over the Habsburg Spanish faction, the French model of government was introduced in the Spanish kingdom. On the other hand, the debate over the shape of the Earth was important in the Académie des Science de Paris to improve French commerce through maritime navigation. The arrival of the Bourbon dynasty to power in the
Hispanic Monarchy was seen as an opportunity by the French to achieve both goals.
The Geodesic Mission arrived in the Spanish American territory of Real Audiencia de Quito in 1736, returning to Europe in 1743. During their stay in Quito, the members proved Newton correct, influencing the spreading of Newtonianism during Eighteenth Century. Maldonado played an important role during the expedition because he gave a map to Charles Marie De La Condamine for moving around Quito. Helping La Condamine had seminal importance in Maldonado’s life because the Académie elected Maldonado as corresponding member in 1747.
The connection between Maldonado and the Geodesic Mission is important for understanding scientific international relations during the Eighteenth Century, as this paper aims to explain.
Prof Barbara Kirsi Silva Avaria (P. Universidad Catolica De Chile), ‘Science Diplomacy in the International Geophysical Year: Global Layers and a Southern Perspective’
The International Geophysical Year (IGY) encompassed the study of eleven strategically significant scientific areas, with nearly 70 countries participating in what was celebrated as the “greatest scientific research project” of its time. The IGY remains a remarkable initiative for exploring science diplomacy in the mid-20th century. However, it is crucial to recognize that the participating countries did not—and still do not—hold equal positions in the global order. While the IGY was a global initiative, it was primarily directed by countries from the Northern Hemisphere, with institutions such as UNESCO and, more specifically, the Comité Scientifique de l’Année Géophysique Internationale (CSAGI) assuming central leadership. These organizations had a global mandate but were rooted in Northern Hemisphere contexts.
In contrast, countries in the Southern Hemisphere engaged through regional organizations and often established their own committees to manage IGY-related activities locally. For these countries, such committees were far from anecdotal; they played a pivotal role in bringing together diverse actors, setting objectives, and interpreting CSAGI’s directives. The IGY thus facilitated a multilayered, global effort in scientific research, presenting a unique opportunity to examine science diplomacy. By analyzing these layers, this study seeks to discuss whether distinct understandings of science diplomacy emerged from the Global South, understanding some of the world’s asymmetries beyond colonial and postcolonial frameworks.
O07 | 008 Connections, Synergies, and Tensions in Science Diplomacy, Panel 2
(Friday, July 4, 1:30 PM – 3:00 PM, Archway, Theatre 1)
Simone Turchetti (University of Manchester), ‘Exploring the Asymmetries of Science Diplomacy through the History of CODATA’
This talk examines the diplomacy of scientific data by focussing on the history of the Committee on Data in Science and Technology (CODATA) of the International Council of Scientific Unions. Established in 1966, CODATA has since then been the chief engine of coordination in the international provision of scientific data, also liaising with the scientific unions and other international organizations. The talk focusses especially on CODATA’s early history, drawing on the examination of its untapped collection of archival papers, and focuses for agreements on data standardization, provisions on data circulation, and initiatives to make data more available to the international scientific community.
While these initiatives were instrumental in the growth, globally, of the scientific enterprise, they also introduced some of global science’s more problematic aspects, especially with regards to asymmetrical representation and influence of national groups in the committee. CODATA was set up and developed with membership explicitly restricted to national organizations with advanced data-making capability hence limiting participation initiative to a handful of national groups from leading scientific powers. This restrictive membership provided an orientation too since CODATA prioritized data collections and practices aligned to interests and priorities of these groups while overlooking others.
The talk thus uses the CODATA example to critically appraises claims on scientific diplomacy as a wholly positive force in scientific and foreign affairs, suggesting that the past diplomatic activities connected to scientific data restricted this coordination to the few that could afford to be included in collaborative exercises while marginalizing many others.
Samuel Robinson, ‘Ocean Nexus: Science, Data, Governance, & Law’
Data is essential to ocean science. Oceanographers gather data on the marine environment using a variety of tools: satellites, remote sensors, and ship-borne instruments. For centuries knowledge of the ocean, historically captured on hydrographic charts, was a closely guarded state secret, key to geopolitical and geostrategic power at sea. Although there was limited bilateral cooperation and ocean data sharing, information access was often restricted and costly. The concept of free-at-source global ocean data sharing emerged only during the Cold War.
Following on from the International Geophysical Years “big data collecting binge” (Shapley, 1960), the United Nations created the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and the International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange in 1961. Intended to create only oceanography guidelines, the IODE struggled to enforce the free flow of data into the World Oceanographic Data Centres.
Global South nations were also sceptical about the true equity of an ocean governance regime created whilst they were not yet independent, and at the UN Conferences on the Law of the Sea (1973-82) ocean science itself came under scrutiny. The heart of these debates around the “freedom” of marine science was the equity and justice that did or did not exist in the ocean data-sharing regime. When the new Law of the Sea opened for signature in 1984, the ocean data regime had evolved from one of moral imperative to share and collaborate, through a system of intergovernmental governance, and finally entered a politico-legal regime of mandated ocean data sharing.
Matthew Adamson (McDaniel College), ‘INIS and Cold War Technopolitics: Challenging Cold War Hegemons, Reorienting Tensions’
The paper examines the origins and first years of operation of the nuclear literature indexing database, the International Nuclear Information System (INIS), based on IAEA sources. It shows that diplomatic as well as scientific and technological factors catered for creating the database in the IAEA at the end of the 1960s and for countries to elect to join it. INIS became one of the first global infrastructures for the exchange of information and data on a general level, becoming for example the primary inspiration for the FAO’s AGRIS information database in spite of the asymmetry of inputs and outputs between member states INIS entailed. We argue that by challenging the USSR’s technological dominance, INIS functioned as a tool for hidden integration between the Western and Eastern blocs during the Cold War, but, that said, INIS did not serve as effectively to integrate newly independent countries into its network, suggesting how the fault line for technopolitical tension had shifted from an East-West to a North-South orientation by the early 1970s.
P07 | 008 Connections, Synergies, and Tensions in Science Diplomacy, Panel 3
(Friday, July 4, 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM, Archway, Theatre 1)
Roberto Lalli (Politecnico Di Torino), ‘Uncovering the Impact of Research Database Infrastructural Networks on Co-Authorship Patterns in Scientific Publications’
The role of research data in science diplomacy has grown increasingly significant in recent years. However, little research has been conducted on the diplomatic negotiations behind the establishment of global infrastructures for scientific data sharing and circulation. This study combines quantitative methods from social network analysis and text analysis to examine the evolution of institutional relationships between scientific databases over the past decades and their potential influence on co-authorship networks in scientific publications.
We show that the database network, created by using the Registry of Research Repositories (RE3) can be used to identify infrastructural maintenance networks showing clusters of more central nations and geopolitical imbalances. Starting from this analysis, one of us (CK) jointly investigated the interrelations between the database network and the co-authorship network in two broad research domains (High-Energy Physics and Astronomy and Astrophysics) applying Correlation tests and Markov Chain analyses. This analysis reveals significant interconnections between the database network and co-authorship patterns, suggesting that database infrastructures influence collaborative dynamics in scientific research. Furthermore, employing Large Language Models (LLMs) to extract metadata on databases and institutions from publications, enabled a replication of the tests with additional data layers. We argue that the involvement of government entities in establishing database infrastructures creates latent state-driven dynamics that shape the organization of scientific research and its co-authorship structures. This research highlights how infrastructural networks for data sharing contribute to emergent concentration gradients, ultimately influencing the scientific process.
Doubravka Olsakova (Charles University), ‘From IGY to INIS: Transforming Research Data Exchange in Cold War Eastern Europe’
For the Soviet bloc, the 1955 Geneva Summit marked a pivotal moment in opening East-West collaboration. Following years of intentional isolation, formal cooperation emerged across the Iron Curtain, launching major international scientific programs that emphasized global research and data sharing, such as International Geophysical Year, International Biological Programme and International Hydrological Decade. Shaped by shifting political and ideological imperatives in the Soviet policy, the structure of these systems and databases evolved in the Soviet bloc: from tightly controlled data sharing in the late 1950s, to drawing on models for COMECON integration and unified policies in the 1960s and 1970s, and finally to embracing global cooperation principles under perestroika. This panel will examine three examples of data exchange structures—the IGY, IBP, and INIS systems—also focusing on the technologies and tangible aspects of information sharing.
Aya Homei (University of Manchester), ‘Inter-Imperial Politics for a Global Health Data Exchange: From the Case of the League of Nations Health Organisation Eastern Bureau’
In 1958, the World Health Organization (WHO) published an official history book reflecting on its first ten years. The book included a global map showing how epidemiological data were circulated worldwide through four service stations in Geneva, Washington D.C., Alexandria, and Singapore. As expected in a publication of this kind, the map presented a narrative of global epidemiological data exchange as an apolitical international endeavour driven by a collective duty to combat epidemics. However, this effort was far from apolitical, and neither were the institutions created for this purpose, despite their portrayal as natural components of global surveillance.
This presentation explores the political dynamics shaping the institution of global epidemiological data exchange, focusing on the League of Nations Health Organisation’s Eastern Bureau, established in 1925, which later became the Singapore service station under the WHO. It examines the inter-imperial politics in the region designated as the ‘Far East’ highlighting the complexities introduced by Japan—the only non-white empire—and China, which was internationally seen as a reservoir of epidemics but domestically sought international status through modern public health initiatives.
By foregrounding the role of Japan and China, this presentation draws attention to the complex layers of regional dynamics that shaped an ostensibly neutral international public health infrastructure and shows how locally situated negotiations and regional politics informed the development of institutions within the global health data exchange system.
Q07 | 008 Connections, Synergies, and Tensions in Science Diplomacy, Panel 4
(Saturday, July 5, 9:00 AM – 10:30 AM, Archway, Theatre 1)
Andrew Goss (Augusta University), ‘The Cold War Origins of Pacific Conservation: Raymond Fosberg’s Network of Pacific Atoll Science’
After World War II, the US Navy and Army dominated the Pacific Ocean, envisioning it as an “American Lake,” so that it could never again be a pathway for attack from East Asia. As part of this strategic vision, the US military sought to understand and preserve Pacific Island habitats and human communities. This overlapped with the interests of scientists wishing to protect natural habitats, keeping them pristine and accessible for scientific research. This paper illuminates the close and causal connection between the US military and a new network of American, Asian, and European scientists, who reframed scientific knowledge of the Pacific’s web of nature. At the center of this network was the Pacific Science Board (PSB), funded largely—and quietly—through US Cold War military allocations. Under the PSB’s chief executive and diplomat, Harold J. Coolidge, Pacific Science was transformed from a problem-solving cadre of imperial scientists, as had been the case before 1941, into a global conservation movement. My research especially examines US scientist Raymond Fosberg, who leveraged the PSB, as well as the Pacific Science Congresses, to create an international network of naturalists, and went on to oversee conservation of island habitats under US power.
Hohee Cho (University of Oxford), ‘Coconut Connections: A Global History of the Lever’s Pacific Plantations’
This paper aims to understand global connections in the Indo-Pacific world using the coconut plantations of Lever’s Pacific Plantations Limited (LPPL) as a case study. The LPPL was a subsidiary of Lever Brothers, a Britain-based soap giant that later became Unilever. The company owned 62 properties just in the Solomon Islands, most of which were run as coconut plantations. LPPL further owned about fifteen estates across the Gilbert and Ellice Islands Colony (today’s Kiribati and Tuvalu), the Cook Islands, Fiji, and New Guinea, all part of the British Empire during the 19–20th centuries. Altogether, the land once held by LPPL comprises 370,000 acres scattered across more than 6000 kilometres in the Pacific Ocean, including those that became strategically important during the Second World War. Coconut palms were grown from seed nuts imported from across the Indo-Pacific, including the Solomon Islands, Samoa, Ceylon, Federated Malay States, and the Straits Settlements. LPPL authorities made numerous attempts to bring in labourers from India, China, or New Guinea. And in the estates, plants, insects, and animals were introduced from Australia, Java, New Guinea, Fiji, Europe, and the US to assist plantation labour and control pests. Utilising the collections at Unilever’s Archives and Records Management, this paper will present a global history of coconut plantations in the Pacific. By doing so, this paper aims to frame plantations as sites of global and imperial connections.
Gordon Barrett (University of Manchester), ‘Circulation, Exclusion, and Asymmetries in International Data-Sharing: East Asia in the International Geophysical Year and the Development of the World Data Centers System, 1957-1988’
This paper considers the geopolitics of international data sharing in the Cold War, examining through the case of the 1957-58 International Geophysical Year (IGY) and the network of World Data Centers (WDC) that were established as part of the IGY, and which continued to operate, evolve, and expand in subsequent decades. For all that the IGY was conceived and discussed in terms of a non-political and truly global exercise in international scientific cooperation, the IGY and the WDC system were nevertheless both shaped and in turn also helped to shape, political currents that ran through international scientific exchange, cooperation, and competition more widely during that period. Nowhere in the IGY or WDCs were these dynamics more overtly evident than in East Asia, which featured extreme examples of the asymmetries inherent these exercises in geoscientific data collection and exchange, particularly in relation to the nature of knowledge circulation and exclusion alike. While the IGY shaped and further embedded several key dynamics in these areas, crucially, in the case of East Asia these were not static over time and, as the paper demonstrates, were primarily rooted in the Cold War’s dramatic shifting geopolitical currents.
DHST Commission on Science, Technology and Diplomacy 
Leave a comment