Cover des Buchs: Exploring the Institutionalisation of Science Diplomacy
Monographie Open Access Vollzugriff

Exploring the Institutionalisation of Science Diplomacy

A Comparison of German and Swiss Science and Innovation Centres
Autor:innen:
Verlag:
 2023

Zusammenfassung

Diese Arbeit analysiert das mehrdimensionale Konzept Science Diplomacy. Insbesondere die Entwicklung, Einrichtung und Funktionsweise von Science and Innovation Centres (SICs) wird untersucht. In einer originellen vergleichenden Längsschnittstudie wird die Institutionalisierung von zwei SICs, den Deutschen Wissenschafts- und Innovationshäusern (DWIH) und dem Schweizer Swissnex, eingehend analysiert. Die Studie geht der Frage nach, warum sich Akteure an SICs beteiligen, indem sie ihre unterschiedlichen Beweggründe entschlüsselt und so eine eindeutig akteurszentrierte Perspektive auf Science Diplomacy entwickelt. Die Ergebnisse bekräftigen, dass Science Diplomacy eindeutig von nationalen Interessen angetrieben wird, während gleichzeitig hervorgehoben wird, dass Science Diplomacy und ihre Governance nur durch eine Analyse des nationalen Kontexts vollständig verstanden werden können.

Schlagworte

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr
2023
ISBN-Print
978-3-7560-0436-2
ISBN-Online
978-3-7489-3798-2
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe
Kultur und Außenpolitik
Band
2
Sprache
Englisch
Seiten
360
Produkttyp
Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 - 24 Download Kapitel (PDF)
  2. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. 1.1. Research Focus
    2. 1.2. Research Design
    3. 1.3. Research Structure
  3. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. 2.1. Science Diplomacy and the Obama Administration
      1. 2.2.1. Conceptualisation by the Royal Society and AAAS
      2. 2.2.2. Contemporary Understanding of Science Diplomacy
      3. 2.2.3. The Long History of Science Diplomacy
    3. 2.3. Science Diplomacy Actors
    4. 2.4. Rationales for Countries to Engage in Science Diplomacy
    5. 2.5. The Science Diplomacy Toolbox
    6. 2.6. Challenges to Science Diplomacy Research
    7. 2.7. Conclusion
  4. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. 3.1. A New Instrument—Challenges in Researching SICs
    2. 3.2. Defining SICs
      1. 3.3.1. Operating Countries (Sending Countries)
      2. 3.3.2. Target Countries (Receiving Countries)
      3. 3.3.3. Links to Diplomacy
      4. 3.3.4. Core Activities and Key Stakeholders
        1. 3.3.5.1. Organisational Set-Up
        2. 3.3.5.2. Funding
      6. 3.3.6. Demarcations to Similar Institutions
      1. 3.4.1. Service-Oriented SICs
      2. 3.4.2. Representational SICs
      3. 3.4.3. Policy-Led SICs
      4. 3.4.4. Synthesis of the Typology
    5. 3.5. Conclusion
  5. Download Kapitel (PDF)
      1. 4.1.1. Definition
      2. 4.1.2. Taxonomies
      3. 4.1.3. Instruments and Policy Design
      1. 4.2.1. Instruments as Institutions
      2. 4.2.2. Instrumentation and Institutionalisation
        1. 4.2.3.1. Step 1: Analysing the Careers of SICs
        2. 4.2.3.2. Step 2: Use of SICs by Actors
      1. 4.3.1. Creating and Sustaining SICs
      2. 4.3.2. Rationales for Joining SICs
    4. 4.4. Conclusion and Discussion
  6. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. 5.1. Research Questions
      1. 5.2.1. Typology Building
      2. 5.2.2. Comparative Research
      3. 5.2.3. Case Study Research
        1. 5.2.4.1. Similarities Between Germany and Switzerland
        2. 5.2.4.2. Differences Between Germany and Switzerland
      1. 5.3.1. Interviews and Personal Communications
        1. 5.3.2.1. Exploratory Phase (Phase I)
        2. 5.3.2.2. Consolidation Phase (Phase II)
      3. 5.3.3. Interview Processing
      4. 5.3.4. Documents
      1. 5.4.1. Content Analysis
      2. 5.4.2. Open Coding: Gioia Methodology
    5. 5.5. Conclusion and Reflection
  7. Case Study (I): Representational Model—The DWIH, Germany 129 - 130 Download Kapitel (PDF)
  8. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. 6.1. Principal Actors
      1. 6.2.1. Central Governance
      2. 6.2.2. On-Site Governance
    3. 6.3. Funding
    4. 6.4. Political Embeddedness
  9. Download Kapitel (PDF)
      1. 7.1.1. Launch of the Initiative Außenwissenschaftspolitik
      2. 7.1.2. Policy Entrepreneurs
      3. 7.1.3. Early Deliberations
      1. 7.2.1. Ministerial Struggles Over Competence and Design
      2. 7.2.2. Agreeing on a Model (Format, Themes and Goals)
      3. 7.2.3. The Network
      4. 7.2.4. Debates on the Governance Structure
      1. 7.3.1. Closing the Cairo Office
      2. 7.3.2. The DWIH Revisited: Reorganisation in Response to an Audit
      3. 7.3.3. Expanding the Network
    4. 7.4. Findings and Discussion
  10. Download Kapitel (PDF)
      1. 8.1.1. Branding and Visibility
      2. 8.1.2. Cooperation and Competition: Internationalisation
      3. 8.1.3. Economic Considerations and Innovation
      4. 8.1.4. Consolidating Science Diplomacy
      5. 8.1.5. Discussion
    2. 8.2. Key Stakeholder Rationales
      1. 8.3.1. Increasing International Visibility
      2. 8.3.2. Access to Resources
      3. 8.3.3. Opportunities for Strategic (Re-)Positioning
      4. 8.3.4. Thematic Fit and Synergies
      5. 8.3.5. Precautionary Reasons
      1. 8.4.1. Support for the General Idea
      2. 8.4.2. Maximising the Impact of the Wider (Science) Landscape
      3. 8.4.3. Responsibility
    5. 8.5. Systemic Aspects
      1. 8.6.1. Concerns about Visibility
      2. 8.6.2. Cost-Benefit Considerations
      3. 8.6.3. Different Priorities
        1. 8.7.1.1. Aggregation Effects
        2. 8.7.1.2. Representation Effects
        3. 8.7.1.3. Appropriation Effects
  11. Case Study (II): Service-Oriented Model—Swissnex, Switzerland 207 - 208 Download Kapitel (PDF)
  12. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. 9.1. Principal Actors
    2. 9.2. Governance Architecture
    3. 9.3. Funding
      1. 9.4.1. Bottom-Up Principle for Policy-making
      2. 9.4.2. Demarcations to Similar Institutions
  13. Download Kapitel (PDF)
        1. 10.1.1.1. Globalisation and Internationalisation
        2. 10.1.1.2. Brain Drain
      2. 10.1.2. Political Momentum
        1. 10.1.3.1. Boston
        2. 10.1.3.2. San Francisco
      4. 10.1.4. Private Funding
        1. 10.1.5.1. Struggles With the FDFA
        2. 10.1.5.2. Reception Among Other Actors
      1. 10.2.1. Launch Phase (2000–2005): The Policy Entrepreneurs Era
        1. 10.2.2.1. The Swissnex Committee
        1. 10.2.3.1. Closing the Singapore Location
        2. 10.2.3.2. Evaluation
        3. 10.2.3.3. Outlook and New Formats
      4. 10.2.4. Expansion and Reinvention
    3. 10.3. Findings and Discussion
  14. Download Kapitel (PDF)
      1. 11.1.1. International Branding and Positioning
      2. 11.1.2. Knowledge Transfer and Innovation
      3. 11.1.3. Internationalisation Efforts
      4. 11.1.4. Foreign Policy Goals
      5. 11.1.5. Conclusions
    2. 11.2. Key Stakeholder Rationales
      1. 11.3.1. Access to Resources
      2. 11.3.2. Thematic Fit and Synergies
      3. 11.3.3. Precautionary Reasons
    4. 11.4. Sense of Collectivity
    5. 11.5. Systemic Aspects to Participation
      1. 11.6.1. Strategic Considerations
      2. 11.6.2. Cost-Benefit Considerations
      3. 11.6.3. Different Priorities
      1. 11.7.1. Interim Analysis of Case Study (II): Instrumentation Effects
  15. Download Kapitel (PDF)
        1. 12.1.1.1. Temporality and Different (Initial) Objectives
        2. 12.1.1.2. Timing: (Delayed) Policy Transfer
        3. 12.1.1.3. Design Processes: Bottom-Up vs. Top-Down Logic
        4. 12.1.1.4. Institutional Environment (Domestic and International)
        5. 12.1.1.5. Ministerial Struggles
        6. 12.1.1.6. Incremental vs. Simultaneous Opening of SICs
        7. 12.1.1.7. Sub-Conclusion
        1. 12.1.2.1. Increased Political Steering
        2. 12.1.2.2. Audit Exercises
        3. 12.1.2.3. Renewed Political Focus
        4. 12.1.2.4. Stakeholder Support
        5. 12.1.2.5. Sub-Conclusion: Comparing the Institutionalisation
      1. 12.2.1. Patterns of Difference: Actor Structures and Involvement
      2. 12.2.2. Political Rationales
      3. 12.2.3. Patterns of Sense-Making: Rationales for Participation
      4. 12.2.4. Strategic Considerations
      5. 12.2.5. Sense of Collectivity
      6. 12.2.6. Systemic Aspects of Participation
      7. 12.2.7. Limits to Participation
      8. 12.2.8. Sub-Conclusion: Comparing Rationales for Participation
    3. 12.3. Conclusion
  16. Download Kapitel (PDF)
      1. 13.1.1. Characterisation of SICs (Sub-Question 1)
      2. 13.1.2. Longitudinal Analysis of Two SICs (Sub- Question 2)
      3. 13.1.3. Actor-Centred Perspective: Stakeholder Rationales (Sub-Question 3)
    2. 13.2. Contributions to Scholarship
      1. 13.3.1. A New Focus on Science Diplomacy Instruments
      2. 13.3.2. Science Diplomacy is National
      3. 13.3.3. Science Diplomacy Actors
      4. 13.3.4. Science Diplomacy Is Used by (Key) Stakeholders as a Platform to Convey Their Goals
      5. 13.3.5. Science Diplomacy Creates a Sense of Collectivity (in Research Ecosystems)
    4. 13.4. Reflections and Limitations
    5. 13.5. Avenues for Further Research
    6. 13.6. Conclusion
  17. Download Kapitel (PDF)
      1. 1.1. Overview: Interviews and Personal Communication
      2. 1.2. Overview: Documents (used in Section 8.1)
      1. 2.1. Overview: Interviews and Personal Communication
      2. 2.2. Overview: Documents (used in Section 11.1)
  18. References 331 - 360 Download Kapitel (PDF)

Literaturverzeichnis (450)

  1. AAAS Center for Science Diplomacy (2009). Science and Diplomacy: A Conceptual Framework. Google Scholar öffnen
  2. Adamson, M., & Lalli, R. (2021). Global perspectives on science diplomacy: Exploring the diplomacy‐knowledge nexus in contemporary histories of science. Centaurus, 63(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/1600-0498.12369 Google Scholar öffnen
  3. Adler-Nissen, R. (2014). Symbolic power in European diplomacy: The struggle between national foreign services and the EU's External Action Service. Review of International Studies, 40(4), 657–681. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210513000326 Google Scholar öffnen
  4. AG Science Diplomacy (2019). Science Diplomacy 2020 – Eckpunkte einer neuen Strategie: AKBP-Strategieprozess. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  5. Ahrne, G., & Brunsson, N. (2005). Organizations and meta-organizations. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 21(4), 429–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2005.09.005 Google Scholar öffnen
  6. Ahrne, G., & Brunsson, N. (2008). Meta-organizations. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Google Scholar öffnen
  7. Ahrne, G., Brunsson, N., & Seidl, D. (2016). Resurrecting organization by going beyond organizations. European Management Journal, 34(2), 93–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2016.02.003 Google Scholar öffnen
  8. Alberts, B. (2010). Policy-Making Needs Science. Science, 330(6009), 1287. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1200613 Google Scholar öffnen
  9. Allison, G. T. (1968). Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis: Rational Policy, Organization Process, and Bureaucratic Politics (P-3919). California. Google Scholar öffnen
  10. Almeida Domingues, A., & Ribeiro Neto, P. H. (2017). Science Diplomacy as a tool of international politics: the power of "soft power". Brazilian Journal of International Relations, 6(3), 607–629. Google Scholar öffnen
  11. Altbach, P. G. (2001). Academic freedom: International realities and challenges. Higher Education, 41, 205–219. Google Scholar öffnen
  12. Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2009). Trends in Global Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution: A Report Prepared for the UNESCO 2009 World Conference on Higher Education. Paris. Google Scholar öffnen
  13. Ammon, P. (2009, January 20). Rede von Staatssekretär Peter Ammon zur Auftaktkonferenz der Initiative Außenwissenschaft 2009 [Press release]. Berlin. Retrieved from http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/DE/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2009/090120-StSAmmon-AWP.html Google Scholar öffnen
  14. Anheier, H. K. (2017). Die Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik Deutschlands im internationalen Vergleich: Zwischenbericht. Berlin: Hertie School of Governance. Google Scholar öffnen
  15. Aukes, E., Ordonez-Matamoros, G., & Kuhlmann, S. (2019). Meta-Governance for Science Diplomacy – towards a European framework (STePS Working Paper Series No. 2019/01). Enschede. Google Scholar öffnen
  16. Auswärtiges Amt (Ed.) (2009a). Wissenswelten verbinden. Deutsche Außenpolitik für mehr Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung: Konferenzdokumentation. Edition Diplomatie. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  17. Auswärtiges Amt (2009b, January 14). Wissenswelten verbinden. - Auftaktkonferenz zur Initiative Außenwissenschaftspolitik [Press release]. Berlin. Retrieved from https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/de/newsroom/090114-awp/212790 Google Scholar öffnen
  18. Auswärtiges Amt (2011). Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik in Zeiten der Globalisierung: Partner gewinnen, Werte vermitteln, Interessen vertreten. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  19. Auswärtiges Amt (2012, October 26). Außenstaatssekretärin Haber eröffnet Deutsches Wissenschafts- und Innovationshaus in Neu Delhi [Press release]. Retrieved from http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/DE/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2012/121026-StSH_DWIH.html Google Scholar öffnen
  20. Auswärtiges Amt (2013). 16. Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik 2011/2012. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  21. Auswärtiges Amt (2014, February 14). 17. Bericht der Bundesregierung Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik. Berlin. Retrieved from Auswärtiges Amt website: https://www.bundesrat.de/bv.html?id=0059-14 Google Scholar öffnen
  22. Auswärtiges Amt (2015). 18. Bericht der Bundesregierung Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik 2013 / 2014: Grenzen überbrücken – Werte teilen – Wissen schaffen – die Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik in globaler Verantwortung. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  23. Auswärtiges Amt (2016). 19. Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik: Kultur, Bildung, Wissenschaft und Kommunikation in globaler Verantwortung. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  24. Auswärtiges Amt (2017). 20. Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik 2016: Menschen bewegen: Dialogräume schaffen Brücken bauen Perspektiven entwickeln. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  25. Auswärtiges Amt (2019a). 21. Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik für das Jahr 2017: Zugang zu Kultur und Bildung: Kulturelle Freiräume schaffen und gestalten. Berlin. Retrieved from Auswärtiges Amt website: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/blueprint/servlet/blob/2177718/893ae0d7033056d7f6ce7e51a61d42e0/akbp-bericht-2017-data.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  26. Auswärtiges Amt (2019b). 22. Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik für das Jahr 2018: Europa stärken. Freiräume schützen. Innovationen fördern. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  27. Auswärtiges Amt (2019c). Grundprinzipien deutscher Außenpolitik. Retrieved from https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/de/aussenpolitik/themen/grundprinzipien/216474#content_5 Google Scholar öffnen
  28. Auswärtiges Amt (2020a). Wissenschaftsdiplomatie. Retrieved from https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/de/aussenpolitik/themen/kulturdialog/-/212804 Google Scholar öffnen
  29. Auswärtiges Amt (2020b, October 9). 23. Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik für das Jahr 2019. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  30. Auswärtiges Amt (December 2020c). Science Diplomacy. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  31. Auswärtiges Amt (2021). 24. Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik für das Jahr 2020. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  32. Axworthy, L. (2013). The Political Actors: President, Prime Minister, and Minister of Foreign Affairs. In A. F. Cooper, J. Heine, & R. Thakur (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy (pp. 92–105). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  33. Ayebare Nyakato, R., & Kyora, S. (2015). A roadmap for the swissnex network. Retrieved from https://www.startupticker.ch/en/news/december-2015/a-roadmap-for-the-swissnex-network Google Scholar öffnen
  34. Babbie, E. (2004). The Practice of Social Research (10th edn.). Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth. Google Scholar öffnen
  35. Bach, T., & Jann, W. (2010). Animals in the Administrative Zoo: Organizational Change and Agency autonomy in Germany. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 76(3), 443–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852310372448 Google Scholar öffnen
  36. Bache, I. (2010). Partnership as an EU Policy Instrument: A Political History. West European Politics, 33(1), 58–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380903354080 Google Scholar öffnen
  37. Badout, P.‑Y. (2011). Uncertain Instruments: The Computerization of Public Administration and Changes in Public Policy (1966–1975). Revue Française De Science Politique (English Edition), 61(1), 69–93. Google Scholar öffnen
  38. Bali, A. S., Capano, G., & Ramesh, M. (2019). Anticipating and designing for policy effectiveness. Policy and Society, 38(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2019.1579502 Google Scholar öffnen
  39. Ball, P. (2021). Science Is Political, and We Must Deal with It. The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters, 12(27), 6336–6340. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpclett.1c02017 Google Scholar öffnen
  40. Balzacq, T., Charillon, F., & Ramel, F. (eds.) (2019). The Sciences Po series in international relations and political economy. Global diplomacy: An introduction to Theory and Practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  41. Bemelmans-Videc, M. L. (1998). Introduction. Policy Instrument Choice and Evaluation. In M. L. Bemelmans-Videc, R. C. Rist, & E. Vedung (eds.), Comparative policy analysis series. Carrots, Sticks & Sermons: Policy Instruments and their Evaluation (pp. 1–18). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen
  42. Bemelmans-Videc, M. L., Rist, R. C., & Vedung, E. (eds.) (1998). Comparative policy analysis series. Carrots, Sticks & Sermons: Policy Instruments and their Evaluation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen
  43. Bendor, J., & Hammond, T. H. (1992). Rethinking Allison's Models. The American Political Science Review, 86(2), 301–322. https://doi.org/10.2307/1964222 Google Scholar öffnen
  44. Berg, L.‑P. (2010). Science Diplomacy Networks. In FDFA (ed.), Swiss Science Diplomacy (Politorbis – Zeitschrift zur Aussenpolitik No. 49, pp. 69–74). Bern: FDFA. Google Scholar öffnen
  45. Berkman, P. A., Lang, Michael, A., Walton, D. W., & Young, Oran, R. (eds.) (2011). Science Diplomacy: Antarctica, and the governance of international spaces. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  46. Bertelsen, R. G. (2018). The Arctic as a Laboratory of Global Governance: The Case of Knowledge-Based Cooperation and Science Diplomacy. In M. Finger & L. Heininen (eds.), The Globalarctic Handbook (1st edn., pp. 251–267). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91995-9_15 Google Scholar öffnen
  47. Bevir, M. (2006). How Narratives Explain. In D. Yanow & P. Schwartz-Shea (eds.), Interpretation and method: Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn (pp. 163–168). Armonk, NY u. a.: M. E. Sharpe. Google Scholar öffnen
  48. BMBF (2008). Deutschlands Rolle in der globalen Wissensgesellschaft stärken: Strategie der Bundesregierung zur Internationalisierung von Wissenschaft und Forschung. Bonn. Google Scholar öffnen
  49. BMBF (2014). Internationale Kooperation: Aktionsplan des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung. Berlin. Retrieved from BMBF website: https://www.bmbf.de/pub/Aktionsplan_Internationale_Kooperation.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  50. BMBF (2017a). Internationalisierung von Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung: Strategie der Bundesregierung. Bonn. Google Scholar öffnen
  51. BMBF (Juni 2017b). Bericht der Bundesregierung zur internationalen Kooperation in Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung 2014–2016. Bonn. Google Scholar öffnen
  52. BMBF (2018). Bundesbericht Forschung und Innovation 2018: Forschungs- und innovationspolitische Ziele und Maßnahmen. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  53. BMBF (2019). Bericht der Bundesregierung zur internationalen Kooperation in Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung 2017–2018. Bonn. Google Scholar öffnen
  54. BMBF (2020a). BMBF-Preis für Bildungs- und Wissenschaftsdiplomatie für laufende und abgeschlossene wissenschaftliche Projekte. Retrieved from https://www.nks-lebenswissenschaften.de/de/3188.php Google Scholar öffnen
  55. BMBF (2020b). Bundesbericht Forschung und Innovation 2020: Forschungs- und innovationspolitische Ziele und Maßnahmen. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  56. BMBF (2021). Bericht der Bundesregierung zur internationalen Kooperation in Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung 2019–2020: Politische Kurzfassung. Bonn. Google Scholar öffnen
  57. Bogner, A., & Menz, W. (2001). „Deutungswissen“ und Interaktion: Zu Methodologie und Methodik des theoriegenerierenden Experteninterviews. Soziale Welt, 52, 477–500. Google Scholar öffnen
  58. Boon, W., & Edler, J. (2018). Demand, challenges, and innovation. Making sense of new trends in innovation policy. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 435–447. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy014 Google Scholar öffnen
  59. Borchardt, A., & Göthlich, S. E. (2009). Erkenntnisgewinnung durch Fallstudien. In S. Albers, D. Klapper, U. Konradt, A. Walter, & J. Wolf (eds.), Methodik der empirischen Forschung (3rd edn., 33-48). Wiesbaden: Gabler. Google Scholar öffnen
  60. Borgwardt, A. (ed.) (2009). Wissenschaftsaußenpolitik: Deutschland als Knotenpunkt im weltweiten Wissensnetzwerk; Konferenzbericht der Veranstaltung vom 13. November 2008 Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (1. Aufl.). Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Google Scholar öffnen
  61. Borrás, S., & Edquist, C. (2013). The Choice of Innovation Policy Instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1513–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.002 Google Scholar öffnen
  62. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027 Google Scholar öffnen
  63. Brand Finance (2020). Global Soft Power Index 2020: The world's most comprehensive research study on perceptions of soft power. Google Scholar öffnen
  64. Braun, D. (1993). Politische Steuerungsfähigkeit in intermediären Systemen am Beispiel der Forschungsförderung. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 34(2), 249–271. Google Scholar öffnen
  65. Braun, D., & Capano, G. (2010). Introductory Paper: The missing link – Policy Ideas and Policy Instruments (European Consortium for Political Research Workshop). Münster. Google Scholar öffnen
  66. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Google Scholar öffnen
  67. Bressers, H. T. A., & O'Toole, L. J. (1998). The Selection of Policy Instruments: a Network-based Perspective. Journal of Public Policy, 18(3), 213–239. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X98000117 Google Scholar öffnen
  68. Brunsson, N., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000). Constructing Organizations: The Example of Public Sector Reform. Organization Studies, 21(4), 721–746. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840600214003 Google Scholar öffnen
  69. Bundesministerium der Finanzen (2020). Finanzbericht 2021: Stand und voraussichtliche Entwicklung der Finanzwirtschaft im gesamtwirtschaftlichen Zusammenhang. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  70. Der Bundesrat (2015, September 30). swissnex Singapore schliesst die Türen, Bildungs- und Wissenschaftsbüro an Botschaft neu eröffnet [Press release]. Bern. Retrieved from https://www.admin.ch/gov/de/start/dokumentation/medienmitteilungen.msg-id-58932.html Google Scholar öffnen
  71. Bundesrechnungshof (2013). Auswärtiges Amt: Wissenschafts- und Innovationshäuser des Auswärtigen Amtes tragen sich weiterhin nicht selbst. In Bundesrechnungshof (ed.), Bemerkungen 2013 zur Haushalts- und Wirtschaftsführung des Bundes. Bonn, Google Scholar öffnen
  72. Burkhalter, D. (2010, October 28). Celebration of the 10-year anniversary of swissnex Boston – «Toward to the next decade of connecting the dots»: Cambridge (USA), 28.10.2010 – Allocution du Conseiller fédéral Didier Burkhalter – Seule la version orale fait foi. [Press release]. Bern. Retrieved from https://www.admin.ch/gov/fr/accueil/documentation/communiques.msg-id-36122.html Google Scholar öffnen
  73. Capano, G. (2018). Policy design spaces in reforming governance in higher education: the dynamics in Italy and the Netherlands. Higher Education, 75(4), 675–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0158-5 Google Scholar öffnen
  74. Capano, G. (2019). Reconceptualizing layering – From mode of institutional change to mode of institutional design: Types and outputs. Public Administration, 13, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12583 Google Scholar öffnen
  75. Capano, G., & Howlett, M. (2020). The Knowns and Unknowns of Policy Instrument Analysis: Policy Tools and the Current Research Agenda on Policy Mixes. SAGE Open, 10(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019900568 Google Scholar öffnen
  76. Capano, G., & Lippi, A. (2017). How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices. Policy Sciences, 50(2), 269–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-016-9267-8 Google Scholar öffnen
  77. Capano, G., Pritoni, A., & Vicentini, G. (2019). Do policy instruments matter? Governments’ choice of policy mix and higher education performance in Western Europe. Journal of Public Policy, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X19000047 Google Scholar öffnen
  78. Capoccia, G., & Keleman, D. R. (2007). The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative, and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism. World Politics, 59(3), 341–369. Google Scholar öffnen
  79. Caporaso, J. A. (2007). The promises and pitfalls of an endogenous theory of institutional change: A comment. West European Politics, 30(2), 392–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380701239921 Google Scholar öffnen
  80. Carlsson, B. (2006). Internationalization of innovation systems: A survey of the literature. Research Policy, 35(1), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.003 Google Scholar öffnen
  81. Carosso, G. A., Ferreira, L. M. R., & Mostajo-Radji, M. A. (2019). Scientists as non-state actors of public diplomacy. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(11), 1129–1130. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0716-1 Google Scholar öffnen
  82. Cassis, I. (2019, March 19). "The corals of Aqaba and the Red Sea, where science and diplomacy come together". Rede von Bundesrat Ignazio Cassis anlässlich der internationalen Konferenz zum Thema „Dialog zwischen Wissenschaft und Diplomatie“ [Press release]. Bern. Retrieved from https://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/de/home/suche/suchresultat.html/content/eda/de/meta/speeches/2019/3/19/74380.html Google Scholar öffnen
  83. Chong, A. (2007). The Foreign Policy Potential of "Small State Soft Power" Information Strategies. Singapore: National University of Singapore. Google Scholar öffnen
  84. Chou, M.‑H., & Ulnicane, I. (2015). Introduction: New Horizons in the Europe of Knowledge. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 11(1), 4–15. Google Scholar öffnen
  85. Coleman, J. S. (2010). Grundlagen der Sozialtheorie: Band 1: Handlungen und Handlungssysteme (3rd edn.). Scientia Nova. München: Oldenbourg. Google Scholar öffnen
  86. Comtesse, X. (2000, January 26). Opinions. Un grand marché mondial de l'éducation se met en place. Le Temps. Retrieved from https://www.letemps.ch/opinions/opinions-un-grand-marche-mondial-leducation-se-met-place Google Scholar öffnen
  87. Comtesse, X. (2021). “swissnex was a breakthrough idea”. In Revealing the Dots: Eleven interviews with some of the most influential figures in swissnex’s 20-year history (pp. 6–9). Boston: Swissnex Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  88. Constantinou, C. M., Kerr, P., & Sharp, P. (eds.) (2016). The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  89. Constantinou, C. M., & Sharp, P. (2016). Theoretical Perspectives in Diplomacy. In C. M. Constantinou, P. Kerr, & P. Sharp (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy (pp. 13–27). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  90. Cooper, A. F. (2013). The Changing Nature of Diplomacy. In A. F. Cooper, J. Heine, & R. Thakur (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy (pp. 35–53). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  91. Cooper, A. F., Heine, J., & Thakur, R. (2013). Introduction: The Challenges of 21st-Century Diplomacy. In A. F. Cooper, J. Heine, & R. Thakur (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy (pp. 1–31). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  92. Copeland, D. (2011). Science Diplomacy: What's It All About? (Policy Brief No. 13). Ottawa. Google Scholar öffnen
  93. Copeland, D. (2015). Science and diplomacy after Canada’s lost decade: Counting the costs, looking beyond. Google Scholar öffnen
  94. Cramer, K. C., & Hallonsten, O. (2020). Big science and research infrastructures in Europe. Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Google Scholar öffnen
  95. Crawford, E., Shinn, T., & Sörlin, S. (1993). The Nationalization and Denationalization of the Sciences: An Introductory Essay. In E. Crawford, T. Shinn, & S. Sörlin (eds.), Sociology of the Sciences A Yearbook: Vol. 16. Denationalizing Science (Vol. 16, pp. 1–42). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1221-7_1 Google Scholar öffnen
  96. Cremonini, L., Horlings, E., & Hessels, L. K. (2018). Different recipes for the same dish: Comparing policies for scientific excellence across different countries. Science and Public Policy, 45(2), 232–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scx062 Google Scholar öffnen
  97. DAAD (2017, September 4). Gemeinsam und vernetzt international agieren [Press release]. Bonn. Retrieved from http://www.juraforum.de/wissenschaft/gemeinsam-und-vernetzt-international-agieren-602753 Google Scholar öffnen
  98. DAAD (Juli 2018). Deutsche Wissenschafts- und Innovationshäuser: Jahresbericht 2017. Bonn. Retrieved from DAAD website: https://www.dwih-netzwerk.de/files/2018/08/DWIH-Jahresbericht-2017_D-E_komprimiert.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  99. DAAD (2020, September 18). Neues Deutsches Wissenschafts- und Innovationshaus in San Francisco [Press release]. Bonn. Retrieved from https://www.daad.de/de/der-daad/kommunikation-publikationen/presse/pressemitteilungen/dwih-netzwerkerweiterung/ Google Scholar öffnen
  100. DAAD (2022). Wissenschaft, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: Hand in Hand für mehr Innovation (DUZ Magazin für Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft). Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  101. Darby, S. (2015). The Emperor's New Clothes — A Failure of Diplomacy in the Oil and Mining Sectors. In L. S. Davis & R. G. Patman (eds.), Science Diplomacy: New Day Or False Dawn?. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  102. Davis, L. S., & Patman, R. G. (eds.) (2015). Science Diplomacy: New Day Or False Dawn? Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  103. De Wit, H., & Altbach, P. G. (2021). Internationalization in higher education: global trends and recommendations for its future. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 5(1), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2020.1820898 Google Scholar öffnen
  104. De Wit, H., Hunter, F., Howard, L., & Egron-Polak, E. (2015). Internationalisation of Higher Education: Study. Brussels. Google Scholar öffnen
  105. Deutscher Bundestag (2010, March 4). Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kulturpolitik 2008/2009 (No. 17/970). Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  106. Deutscher Bundestag (2011, January 13). Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik 2009/2010 (No. 17/4413). Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  107. Deutscher Bundestag (2012, January 11). Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung: Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik 2010/2011. Retrieved from Bundesanzeiger Verlagsgesellschaft mbH website: http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/083/1708326.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  108. Deutscher Bundestag (2013, June 25). Antrag: Deutschland in der globalen Wissensgesellschaft klar positionieren – Internationalisierung von Wissenschaft und Forschung weiter vorantreiben (No. Drucksache 17/14111). Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  109. Deutscher Bundestag (2017, March 16). 20. Bericht der Bundesregierung Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik: Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung (Drucksache 18/11550). Google Scholar öffnen
  110. Deutscher Kulturrat e.V. (2018). Die dritte Säule: Beiträge zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik (Politik & Kultur No. 16). Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  111. Deutsches Wissenschafts- und Innovationshaus Moskau (2013). Deutsches Wissenschafts-und Innovationshaus (DWIH) Moskau 2010–2012. Moskau. Google Scholar öffnen
  112. Directorate-General of Global Affairs, Development and Partnerships (2013). Science Diplomacy for France: Report 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  113. Dohjoka, N., Campbell, C. A., & Hill, B. (2017, March 17). Science Diplomacy in Arab Countries: The Need for a Paradigm Shift (Science & Diplomacy). Google Scholar öffnen
  114. Dolowitz, D. P., & Marsh, D. (2000). Learning from Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Policy-Making. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13(1), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/0952-1895.00121 Google Scholar öffnen
  115. Dresing, T., & Pehl, T. (eds.) (2017). Praxisbuch Interview, Transkription & Analyse: Anleitungen und Regelsysteme für qualitativ Forschende (7th edn.). Marburg: Eigenverlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  116. Drori, G. S., Meyer, J. W., Ramirez, F. O., & Schofer, E. (2002). Science in the Modern World Polity: Institutionalization and globalization. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  117. Dufour, N. (2000a, April 14). La Suisse expérimente une nouvelle politique face à ses cerveaux expatriés. Le Temps. Retrieved from https://www.letemps.ch/suisse/suisse-experimente-une-nouvelle-politique-face-cerveaux-expatries Google Scholar öffnen
  118. Dufour, N. (2000b, October 12). A Nouvelle Economie, nouvelle diplomatie? Esquisse de réponse avec la Swiss House de Boston. Le Temps. Retrieved from https://www.letemps.ch/suisse/nouvelle-economie-nouvelle-diplomatie-esquisse-reponse-swiss-house-boston Google Scholar öffnen
  119. Dufour, N. (2000c, October 14). Quand une banque privée soutient la diplomatie suisse. Le Temps. Retrieved from https://www.letemps.ch/suisse/une-banque-privee-soutient-diplomatie-suisse Google Scholar öffnen
  120. Dusdal, J., & Powell, J. J. W. (2021). Benefits, Motivations, and Challenges of International Collaborative Research: A Sociology of Science Case Study. Science and Public Policy, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scab010 Google Scholar öffnen
  121. Dusdal, J., Zapp, M., Marques, M., & Powell, J. J. (2021). Higher Education Organizations as Strategic Actors in Networks: Institutional and Relational Perspectives Meet Social Network Analysis. In J. Huisman & M. Tight (eds.), Theory and Method in Higher Education Research (7th edn., pp. 55–73). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2056-375220210000007004 Google Scholar öffnen
  122. DWIH-Netzwerk (2019). Objectives. Retrieved from https://www.dwih-netzwerk.de/en/who-we-are/objectives/ Google Scholar öffnen
  123. DWIH-Netzwerk (2021). Organisation. Retrieved from https://www.dwih-netzwerk.de/de/ueber-uns/organisation/ Google Scholar öffnen
  124. Edler, J., & Fagerberg, J. (2017). Innovation policy: what, why, and how. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 2–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx001 Google Scholar öffnen
  125. Edler, J., Kuhlmann, S., & Stegmaier, P. (2010). Fragmentierung und Koordination – Governance der Wissenschafts- und Innovationspolitik in Deutschland. In M. Seckelmann, S. Lange, & T. Horstmann (eds.), Die Gemeinschaftsaufgaben von Bund und Ländern in der Wissenschafts- und Bildungspolitik: Analysen und Erfahrungen (pp. 169–194). Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  126. Eggenberger, C. (1986). Die Stiftung " Pro Helvetia" als Vermittlerin schweizerischer Kunst im Ausland. Zeitschrift Für Schweizerische Archäologie Und Kunstgeschichte, 43(4), 417–428. Google Scholar öffnen
  127. Egger, P. (2013). Vorwort. In Wissenschaftsdiplomatie: Die Schweiz vernetzt sich neu (Dossier: «Wissenschaftsdiplomatie» Ausgabe 1003, p. 54). Google Scholar öffnen
  128. Elken, M. (2015). Developing policy instruments for education in the EU: the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 34(6), 710–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2015.1103795 Google Scholar öffnen
  129. Embassy of Finland, Washington D.C. (2016, July 14). Nordic Cooperation in Silicon Valley [Press release]. Retrieved from https://finlandabroad.fi/web/usa/current-affairs/-/asset_publisher/h5w4iTUJhNne/content/nordic-cooperation-in-silicon-valley/384951 Google Scholar öffnen
  130. Epping, E. (2018). Science and Innovation Centers – bringing a new dimension to the internationalization of higher education, research and innovation (CHEPS Blog). Enschede. Google Scholar öffnen
  131. Epping, E. (2020). Lifting the smokescreen of science diplomacy: comparing the political instrumentation of science and innovation centres. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00599-4 Google Scholar öffnen
  132. Erler, G. (2008, November 13). Rede Staatsminister Gernot Erler bei der Konferenz der FES „Wissenschaftsaußenpolitik – Deutschland als Knotenpunkt im weltweiten Wissenschaftsnetz“ [Press release]. Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  133. European Commission (2004). Die Schweiz richtet Wissenschaftsaußenposten in den USA und in Asien ein. Retrieved from https://cordis.europa.eu/news/rcn/22940/de Google Scholar öffnen
  134. Fähnrich, B. (2013). Science Diplomacy: Strategische Kommunikation in der Auswärtigen Wissenschaftspolitik. Organisationskommunikation. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  135. Fähnrich, B. (2015). Science diplomacy: Investigating the perspective of scholars on politics-science collaboration in international affairs. Public Understanding of Science, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515616552 Google Scholar öffnen
  136. Fathi, D. (2012, June 5). Eine Roadmap zur Verdoppelung des Netzwerkes Swissnex: 12.3431 Postulat. Curia Vista – Die Geschäftsdatenbank. Google Scholar öffnen
  137. FDFA (2019). Die Schweiz in der Welt 2028: Bericht der Arbeitsgruppe «Aussenpolitische Vision Schweiz 2028». Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  138. FDFA (2021). Bundesrat ernennt Sonderbeauftragten für Science Diplomacy. Retrieved from https://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/de/home/das-eda/aktuell/newsuebersicht/2021/02/science-diplomacy.html Google Scholar öffnen
  139. Fedoroff, N. V. (2009). Science Diplomacy in the 21st century. Cell, 136(1), 9–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.12.030 Google Scholar öffnen
  140. Ferreira, G. G. C., & Oliveira, A. J. N. S. de (2020). From Science Diplomacy to Education Diplomacy: The Brazilian Case. Conjuntura Austral, 11(54), 90–104. https://doi.org/10.22456/2178-8839.100750 Google Scholar öffnen
  141. Fetscherin, M., & Marmier, P. (2010). Switzerland’s nation branding initiative to foster science and technology, higher education and innovation: A case study. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 6(1), 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1057/pb.2010.6 Google Scholar öffnen
  142. Fischer, T., & Möckli, D. (2016). The Limits of Compensation: Swiss Neutrality Policy in the Cold War. Journal of Cold War Studies, 18(4), 12–35. https://doi.org/10.1162/JCWS_a_00678 Google Scholar öffnen
  143. Fleury, A., & Zala, S. (eds.) (2012). Wissenschaft und Aussenpolitik: Beiträge zur Tagung anlässlich des 50. Jubiläums der Schaffung des ersten Postens eines schweizerischen Wissenschaftsattachés. Quaderni di Dodis: Vol. 1. Bern: Diplomatische Dokumente der Schweiz: Diplomatische Dokumente der Schweiz. Retrieved from http://www.alexandria.admin.ch/bv001490427.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  144. Flick, U. (2011). Triangulation: Eine Einführung (3rd edn.). Qualitative Sozialforschung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften; Springer Fachmedien. Google Scholar öffnen
  145. Flick, U. (2018a). Doing Qualitative Data Collection – Charting the Routes. In U. Flick (ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection (34–50). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  146. Flick, U. (Ed.) (2018b). The SAGE handbook of qualitative data collection. Los Angeles: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  147. Flink, T. (2009). Aussenwissenschaftspolitik – ein neues Handlungsfeld? Forschung, Politik - Strategie - Management, 3+4, 69–78. Google Scholar öffnen
  148. Flink, T. (2020a). The Sensationalist Discourse of Science Diplomacy: A Critical Reflection. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 15(3), 359–370. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-BJA10032 Google Scholar öffnen
  149. Flink, T. (2020b). Wissenschaftsdiplomatie in der Europäischen Union: Praktiken und Perspektiven. Forschung, Politik - Strategie - Management, 1+2(2019), 5–11. Google Scholar öffnen
  150. Flink, T., & Rüffin, N. V. (2019). The current state of the art of science diplomacy. In W. Cranzler, S. Kuhlmann, & D. Simon (eds.), Handbook on Science and Public Policy (pp. 104–121). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Google Scholar öffnen
  151. Flink, T., & Schreiterer, U. (2010). Science diplomacy at the intersection of S&T policies and foreign affairs: toward a typology of national approaches. Science and Public Policy, 37(9), 665–677. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234210X12778118264530; Google Scholar öffnen
  152. Forbes, W. H. (1957). The Role of Science Attachés. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 13(8), 274–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.1957.11457578 Google Scholar öffnen
  153. Fromm, N., & Raev, A. (2018). Contesting Contextual Forces of National Politics—Explaining German Transnational Education from a Policy Design Perspective. European Policy Analysis, 4(2), 275–293. https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1042 Google Scholar öffnen
  154. Fumasoli, T., Barbato, G., & Turri, M. (2020). The determinants of university strategic positioning: a reappraisal of the organisation. Higher Education, 80(2), 305–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00481-6 Google Scholar öffnen
  155. Fumasoli, T., & Lepori, B. (2011). Patterns of strategies in Swiss higher education institutions. Higher Education, 61(2), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9330-x Google Scholar öffnen
  156. Gabriel, J. (2003). The Price of Political Uniqueness: Swiss Foreign Policy in a Changing World Pages. In J. Gabriel & T. Fischer (eds.), Swiss Foreign Policy 1945–2002 (pp. 1–22). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  157. Gauweiler, P. (2018). Auswärtige Kulturpolitik. Die dritte Säule der Außenpolitik. In O. Zimmermann & T. Geißler (eds.), Die dritte Säule: Beiträge zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik (Politik & Kultur No. 16, pp. 101–103). Berlin, Google Scholar öffnen
  158. Gerring, J. (2004). What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for? The American Political Science Review, 98(2), 341–354. Google Scholar öffnen
  159. Gilboa, E. (2008). Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 55–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207312142 Google Scholar öffnen
  160. Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151 Google Scholar öffnen
  161. Gläser, J., & Laudel, G. (2013). Life With and Without Coding: Two Methods for Early-Stage Data Analysis in Qualitative Research Aiming at Causal Explanations. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/FQS-14.2.1886 Google Scholar öffnen
  162. Gläser, J., & Velarde, K. S. (2018). Changing Funding Arrangements and the Production of Scientific Knowledge: Introduction to the Special Issue. Minerva, 56(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-018-9344-6 Google Scholar öffnen
  163. Gluckmann, P. D., Turekian, V. C., Grimes, R. W., & Kishi, T. (2017). Science Diplomacy: A Pragmatic Perspective from the Inside (Science & Diplomacy No. 6 (4)). Google Scholar öffnen
  164. Goetschel, L., Bernath, M., & Schwarz, D. (2005). Swiss Foreign Policy: Foundations and Possibilities. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  165. Goodman, L. A. (2011). Comment: On Respondent-Driven Sampling and Snowball Sampling in Hard-to-Reach Populations and Snowball Sampling Not in Hard-to-Reach Populations. Sociological Methodology, 41(1), 347–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9531.2011.01242.x Google Scholar öffnen
  166. Goodsite, M. E., Bertelsen, R. G., Pertoldi-Bianchi, S. C., Ren, J., van der Watt, L.‑M., & Johannsson, H. (2016). The role of science diplomacy: a historical development and international legal framework of arctic research stations under conditions of climate change, post-cold war geopolitics and globalization/power transition. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 6(4), 645–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0329-6 Google Scholar öffnen
  167. Gottlieb, T. (2019a). Innovation Centre Denmark – São Paulo: Research, Funding and Collaboration Opportunities – with Denmark. Google Scholar öffnen
  168. Gottlieb, T. (April 2019b). Innovation Centre Denmark. Retrieved from https://www.faubai.org.br/conf/presentation2019/Centres%20for%20research%20and%20innovation%20as%20platforms%20for%20sustainable%20cooperation%20between%20Europe%20and%20Brazil.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  169. Götz, T. (2009). Vorwort: Wissenswelten verbinden. Deutsche Außenpolitik für mehr Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung. In Auswärtiges Amt (Chair), Wissenswelten verbinden. Auftaktkonferenz zur Initiative Außenwissenschaftspolitik, Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  170. Government of Spain (2016). Report on Science, Technology And Innovation Diplomacy. Google Scholar öffnen
  171. Graf, L. (2013). The Hybridization of Vocational Training and Higher Education in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland. Opladen [u.a.]: Budrich UniPress Ltd. https://doi.org/10.3224/86388043 Google Scholar öffnen
  172. Gregory, B. (2008). Public Diplomacy: Sunrise of an Academic Field. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 274–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207311723 Google Scholar öffnen
  173. Griessen, T., & Braun, D. (2008). The political coordination of knowledge and innovation policies in Switzerland. Science and Public Policy, 35(4), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234208X310338; Google Scholar öffnen
  174. Gunn, A. (2017). Policy entrepreneurs and policy formulation. In M. Howlett & I. Mukherjee (eds.), Handbooks of research on public policy. Handbook of Policy Formulation (pp. 265–282). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Google Scholar öffnen
  175. Gupta, K. (2012). Comparative Public Policy: Using the Comparative Method to Advance Our Understanding of the Policy Process. The Policy Studies Journal, 40(S1), 11–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2012.00443.x Google Scholar öffnen
  176. Haber, E. (2012, October 27). Staatssekretärin Haber zur Eröffnung des Deutschen Wissenschafts- und Innovations-hauses in New Delhi. DWIH, Neu Delhi. Retrieved from http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/DE/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2012/121028-Haber-DWIH-Delhi.html Google Scholar öffnen
  177. Habicht, M. (1953). The Special Position of Switzerland in International Affairs. International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944–), 29(4), 457–463. https://doi.org/10.2307/2606004 Google Scholar öffnen
  178. Haelg, L., Sewerin, S., & Schmidt, T. S. (2020). The role of actors in the policy design process: introducing design coalitions to explain policy output. Policy Sciences, 53(2), 309–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-019-09365-z Google Scholar öffnen
  179. Hajjar, D. P. (2016, June 27). Want to ease tensions in the Middle East? Science diplomacy can help. Brookings. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/markaz/2016/06/27/want-to-ease-tensions-in-the-middle-east-science-diplomacy-can-help/ Google Scholar öffnen
  180. Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. (1996). Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms (MPIFG Discussion Paper No. 6). Cologne. Google Scholar öffnen
  181. Halpern, C. (2008). EU-policy Instruments: To What Extent are they EU-specific? Comparison and transfer of European environmental policy instruments. In Efficient and Democratic Governance in the European Union (Connex Report Series, pp. 109–118). Mannheim, Google Scholar öffnen
  182. Halpern, C. (2010). Governing Despite its Instruments? Instrumentation in EU Environmental Policy. West European Politics, 33(1), 39–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380903354064 Google Scholar öffnen
  183. Halpern, C., Jacquot, S., & Le Galès, P. (2008). A Mainstreaming: Analysis of a Policy Instrument (New Gov Policy Brief). Google Scholar öffnen
  184. Harmsen, R., & Powell, J. J. W. (2019). Higher Education Systems and Institutions, Luxembourg. In J. C. Shin & P. Teixera (eds.), Encyclopedia of International Higher Education Systems and Institutions (pp. 1–5). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; Imprint: Springer. Google Scholar öffnen
  185. Harmsen, R., & Tupper, A. (2017). The Governance of Post‐Secondary Education Systems in British Columbia and Ontario: Path dependence and Provincial Policy. Canadian Public Administration, 60(3). Google Scholar öffnen
  186. Harnisch, S. (2013). German Foreign Policy: Gulliver's Travails in the 21st Century. In R. K. Beasley, J. Kaarbo, J. S. Lantis, & Snarr, Michel, T. (eds.), Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective: Domestic and International Influences on State Behavior (pp. 71–93). Sage Publications. Google Scholar öffnen
  187. Harnischfeger, H. (2007). Auswärtige Kulturpolitik. In S. Schmidt, G. Hellmann, & R. Wolf (eds.), Handbuch zur deutschen Aussenpolitik (1st edn., pp. 713–723). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90250-0_56 Google Scholar öffnen
  188. Hassan, M., ter Meulen, V., McGrath, P. F., & Fears, R. (2015). Academies of Science as Key Instruments of Science Diplomacy. Science & Diplomacy. (4. No. 1 (March)). Google Scholar öffnen
  189. Hassel, A. (2015). Public Policy. In J. Wright (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 569–575). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.75029-X Google Scholar öffnen
  190. Heidenheimer, A. J. (1997). Disparate ladders: Why school and university policies differ in Germany, Japan and Switzerland. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  191. Heidenheimer, A. J., Heclo, H., & Teich Adams, C. (2005). The politics of social choice. In H. J. Wiarda (ed.), Critical concepts in political science. Comparative politics: Volume VI Comparative Public Policy (Vol. 6, 13–36). London: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  192. Helfferich, C. (2011). Die Qualität qualitativer Daten: Manual für die Durchführung qualitativer Interviews (4th edn.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften / Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92076-4 Google Scholar öffnen
  193. Hellström, T., & Jacob, M. (2017). Policy instrument affordances: a framework for analysis. Policy Studies, 38(6), 604–621. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2017.1386442 Google Scholar öffnen
  194. Héritier, A. (2012). Policy Effectiveness and Transparency in European Policy-Making. In E. Jones, A. Menon, & Weatherill (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the European Union (pp. 676–689). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199546282.013.0047 Google Scholar öffnen
  195. Hertig, H.‑P. (2015). UNESCO science report: towards 2030. Google Scholar öffnen
  196. Hesse, J. J. (2010). Die Internationalisierung der Wissenschaftspolitik: Nationale Wissenschaftssysteme im Vergleich. Journal for Comparative Government and European Policy, 8(1), 89–128. Google Scholar öffnen
  197. Hofmänner, A. (2018). New International Science and Technology Policies: Key Issues and Questions in Switzerland: An exploratory study conducted on ­behalf of the Swiss Science Council SSC (No. ISBN 978-3-906113-54-8). Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  198. Hood, C. (1983). The Tools of Government.: Public Policy and Politics (1st edn.). London: Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  199. Hood, C. (2007). Intellectual Obsolescence and Intellectual Makeovers: Reflections on the Tools of Government after Two Decades. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 20(1), 127–144. Google Scholar öffnen
  200. Hood, C., & Margetts, H. (2007). The Tools of Government in the Digital Age. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  201. Hoornbeek, J. A., & Peters, B. G. (2017). Understanding policy problems: a refinement of past work. Policy and Society, 36(3), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1361631 Google Scholar öffnen
  202. Hornbostel, S. (2001). Third party funding of German universities. An indicator of research activity? Scientometrics, 50(3), 523–537. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010566916697 Google Scholar öffnen
  203. Hotz-Hart, B. (2012). Innovation Switzerland: A Particular Kind of Excellence. In J. Bauer, A. Lang, & V. Schneider (eds.), Innovation Policy and Governance in High-Tech Industries: The Complexity of Coordination (1st edn., pp. 127–154). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.5167/UZH-50783 Google Scholar öffnen
  204. House of Switzerland (2016). Swiss Pavilion EXPO 2017: call for projects. Retrieved from https://houseofswitzerland.org/de/headlines/swiss-pavilion-expo-2017-call-projects Google Scholar öffnen
  205. Howlett, M. (1991). Policy Instruments, Policy Styles, and Policy Implementation: National Approaches to Theories of Instrument Choice. Policy Studies Journal, 19(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1991.tb01878.x Google Scholar öffnen
  206. Howlett, M. (2000). Managing the "hollow state": procedural policy instruments and modern governance. Canadian Public Administration/Administration Publique Du Canada, 43(4), 412–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-7121.2000.tb01152.x Google Scholar öffnen
  207. Howlett, M. (2004). Beyond Good and Evil in Policy Implementation: Instrument Mixes, Implementation Styles, and Second Generation Theories of Policy Instrument Choice. Policy and Society, 23(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1449-4035(04)70030-2 Google Scholar öffnen
  208. Howlett, M. (2005). What is a policy instrument? Tools, mixes, and implementation styles. In F. P. Eliadis, M. M. Hill, & M. Howlett (eds.), Designing Government: From Instruments to Governance (1st edn., 31–50). Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  209. Howlett, M. (2009). Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design. Policy Sciences, 42(1), 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-009-9079-1 Google Scholar öffnen
  210. Howlett, M. (2014a). From the ‘old’ to the ‘new’ policy design: design thinking beyond markets and collaborative governance. Policy Sciences, 47(3), 187–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-014-9199-0 Google Scholar öffnen
  211. Howlett, M. (2014b). Policy Design: What, Who, How and Why? In C. Halpern, P. Lascoumes, & P. Le Galès (eds.), L'instrumentation de l'action publique: Controverses, résistances, effets (pp. 281–315). Paris: Presses de la Fondation nationale des sciences politiques. Google Scholar öffnen
  212. Howlett, M. (2018). The criteria for effective policy design: character and context in policy instrument choice. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 11(3), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2017.1412284 Google Scholar öffnen
  213. Howlett, M., & Mukherjee, I. (2014). Policy Design and Non-Design: Towards a Spectrum of Policy Formulation Types. Politics and Governance, 2(2), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v2i2.149 Google Scholar öffnen
  214. Howlett, M., & Mukherjee, I. (2017). Policy design: From tools to patches. Canadian Public Administration, 60(1), 140–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/capa.12209 Google Scholar öffnen
  215. Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., & Woo, J. J. (2015). From tools to toolkits in policy design studies: the new design orientation towards policy formulation research. Policy & Politics, 43(2), 291–311. https://doi.org/10.1332/147084414X13992869118596 Google Scholar öffnen
  216. Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (1993). Patterns of Policy Instrument Choice: Policy Styles, Policy Learning and the Privatization Experience. Review of Policy Research, 12(1–2), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1993.tb00505.x Google Scholar öffnen
  217. Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2003). Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems (2nd edn.). Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford Univ. Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  218. Huisman, J., & van der Wende, M. (eds.) (2005). ACA papers on international cooperation in education. On cooperation and Competition II: Institutional responses to Internationalisation, Europeanisation and Globalisation. Bonn: Lemmens. Google Scholar öffnen
  219. Hüther, O., & Krücken, G. (2016). Nested Organizational Fields: Isomorphism and Differentiation among European Universities. In E. Popp Berman & C. Paradeise (eds.), Research in the Sociology of Organizations: Vol. 46. The University Under Pressure (Vol. 46, pp. 53–83). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20160000046003 Google Scholar öffnen
  220. Jäger, T., Höse, A., & Oppermann, K. (eds.) (2011). Deutsche Außenpolitik: Sicherheit, Wohlfahrt, Institutionen und Normen (2nd edn.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93024-4 Google Scholar öffnen
  221. Jenson, J., & Nagels, N. (2018). Social Policy Instruments in Motion. Conditional Cash Transfers from Mexico to Peru. Social Policy & Administration, 52(1), 323–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12275 Google Scholar öffnen
  222. Jones, C. M. (2010). Bureaucratic Politics and Organizational Process Models. In Oxford Research Encyclopedias (ed.). https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.2 Google Scholar öffnen
  223. Jones, P. L. (2015). Track two diplomacy in theory and practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  224. Jost, H. U. (2012). Wissenschaft auf Aussenposten. Eine Einführung zur Geschichte der Wissenschaftsattachés. In A. Fleury & S. Zala (eds.), Quaderni di Dodis: Vol. 1, Wissenschaft und Aussenpolitik: Beiträge zur Tagung anlässlich des 50. Jubiläums der Schaffung des ersten Postens eines schweizerischen Wissenschaftsattachés (pp. 15–20). Bern: Diplomatische Dokumente der Schweiz. Google Scholar öffnen
  225. Kaltofen, C., & Acuto, M. (2018). Science Diplomacy: Introduction to a Boundary Problem. Global Policy, 9 (53), 8–13. Google Scholar öffnen
  226. Kaltofen, C., Acuto, M., & Blackstock, J. (eds.) (2018). Science Diplomacy [Special issue]. Global Policy, 9(53). Oxford: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  227. Kaplan, K. (2011). International opportunities: The science of diplomacy. Nature, 470(7334), 425–427. https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7334-425a Google Scholar öffnen
  228. Kassim, H., & Le Galès, P. (2010). Exploring Governance in a Multi-Level Polity: A Policy Instruments Approach. West European Politics, 33(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380903354031 Google Scholar öffnen
  229. Keenan, M., Cutler, P., Marks, J., Meylan, R., Smith, C., & Koivisto, E. (2012). Orienting international science cooperation to meet global 'grand challenges'. Science and Public Policy, 39(2), 166–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs019 Google Scholar öffnen
  230. Keerawella, G. (2016). Symbiosis between science and diplomacy in changing paradigm in international affairs. Retrieved from http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=154034 Google Scholar öffnen
  231. Kleiber, C. (2000). Going Global and Acting Locally. In X. L. Comtesse & C. von Arb (eds.), Swiss House for Advanced Research and Education (pp. 4–5). Boston: SHARE Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  232. Kleiber, C. (2021). “We wanted to invent a new diplomacy”: Former Swiss State Secretary Charles Kleiber reflects on 20 years of swissnex, and imagines a future Switzerland that tackles global challenges head-on. In Revealing the Dots: Eleven interviews with some of the most influential figures in swissnex’s 20-year history (4–5). Boston: Swissnex Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  233. Kluge, S. (2000). Empirisch begründete Typenbildung in der qualitativen Sozialforschung. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(1). Google Scholar öffnen
  234. Kosmützky, A. (2016). The Precision and Rigor of International Comparative Studies in Higher Education. In J. Huisman & M. Tight (eds.), Theory and Method in Higher Education Research. Theory and Method in Higher Education Research (2nd edn., Vol. 2, pp. 199–221). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2056-375220210000007004 Google Scholar öffnen
  235. Kosmützky, A. (2019). Comparative Research, Higher Education. In J. C. Shin & P. Teixera (eds.), Encyclopedia of International Higher Education Systems and Institutions (pp. 1–8). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; Imprint: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9553-1_175-1 Google Scholar öffnen
  236. Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods & techniques (2nd rev. edn.). New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd. Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen
  237. Kowner, A. (1993). Kulturförderung in der Schweiz. In R. Strachwitz & S. Toepler (eds.), Kulturförderung: Mehr als Sponsoring (pp. 111–119). Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-85836-8_11 Google Scholar öffnen
  238. Kristensen, G. K., & Ravn, M. N. (2015). The voices heard and the voices silenced: recruitment processes in qualitative interview studies. Qualitative Research, 15(6), 722–737. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794114567496 Google Scholar öffnen
  239. Krücken, G., & Meier, F. (2006). Turning the University into an Organizational Actor. In G. S. Drori, J. W. Meyer, & H. Hwang (eds.), Globalization and Organization: World Society and Organizational Change (pp. 241–257). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  240. Kuckartz, U. (2006). Zwischen Singularität und Allgemeingültigkeit: Typenbildung als qualitative Strategie der Verallgemeinerung. In K.-S. Rehberg (ed.), Soziale Ungleichheit, kulturelle Unterschiede: Verhandlungen des 32. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie in München. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  241. Kuhlmann, S. (2008). Forschungs- und Innovationssysteme im internationalen Wettbewerb. In G. Schütte (ed.), Wettlauf ums Wissen: Außenwirtschaftspolitik im Zeitalter der Wissensrevolution (1st edn., pp. 52–58). Berlin: Berlin Univ. Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  242. Kuhlmann, S., & Rip, A. (2018). Next-Generation Innovation Policy and Grand Challenges. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 448–454. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy011 Google Scholar öffnen
  243. Kwiek, M. (2021). The Globalization of Science: The Increasing Power of Individual Scientists. In P. Mattei, X. Dumay, E. Mangez, & J. Behrend (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Education and Globalization (pp. 1–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  244. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2014). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics (2nd edn.). Radical thinkers. London, New York: Verso. Google Scholar öffnen
  245. Lascoumes, P., & Le Galès, P. (2004). Gouverner par les instruments (1st edn.). Sciences Po Gouvernance. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po. Google Scholar öffnen
  246. Lascoumes, P., & Le Galès, P. (2007). Introduction: Understanding Public Policy through Its Instruments—From the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy Instrumentation. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 20(1), 1–21. Google Scholar öffnen
  247. Lascoumes, P., & Simard, L. (2011). Public Policy Seen Through the Prism of its Instruments: Introduction. Revue Française De Science Politique (English Edition), 61(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfspe.611.0001 Google Scholar öffnen
  248. Le Galès, P. (2011). Policy Instruments and Governance. In M. Bevir (ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Governance (pp. 142–159). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  249. Le Galès, P. (2016). Performance measurement as a policy instrument. Policy Studies, 37(6), 508–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2016.1213803 Google Scholar öffnen
  250. Leese, M. (2018). Between a Carrot and a Stick: Science Diplomacy and Access to EU Research Funding. Global Policy, 9(2), 48–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12546 Google Scholar öffnen
  251. Legrand, T., & Stone, D. (2018). Science diplomacy and transnational governance impact. British Politics, 13(3), 392–408. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-018-0082-z Google Scholar öffnen
  252. Leijten, J. (2017). Exploring the future of innovation diplomacy. European Journal of Futures Research, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40309-017-0122-8 Google Scholar öffnen
  253. Lepori, B. (2008). Research in non-university higher education institutions. The case of the Swiss Universities of Applied Sciences. Higher Education, 56(1), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-007-9088-y Google Scholar öffnen
  254. Lepori, B., & Fumasoli, T. (2010). Reshaping the Swiss Higher Education System: Governance Reforms and Fields Reconfigurations. Swiss Political Science Review, 16(4), 811–814. Google Scholar öffnen
  255. Lepori, B., Huisman, J., & Seeber, M. (2014). Convergence and differentiation processes in Swiss higher education: an empirical analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 197–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.647765 Google Scholar öffnen
  256. Lepori, B., Seeber, M., & Bonaccorsi, A. (2015). Competition for talent. Country and organizational-level effects in the internationalization of European higher education institutions. Research Policy, 44(3), 789–802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.11.004 Google Scholar öffnen
  257. Lequesne, C. (2020). Ministries of Foreign Affairs: A Crucial Institution Revisited. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 15(1–2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-BJA10003 Google Scholar öffnen
  258. Linder, S. H., & Peters, B. G. (1989). Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts. Journal of Public Policy, 9(1), 35–58. Google Scholar öffnen
  259. Loftness, R. L. (1955). Why Science Attaches? The Scientific Monthly, 80(2), 124–127. Google Scholar öffnen
  260. Lombard, T. (2021). "The idea was to build bridges between science and business”. In Revealing the Dots: Eleven interviews with some of the most influential figures in swissnex’s 20-year history (pp. 16–18). Boston: Swissnex Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  261. Lombard, T., & Odier, P. (2000). Building a Bridge. In X. L. Comtesse & C. von Arb (eds.), Swiss House for Advanced Research and Education (pp. 6–7). Boston: SHARE Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  262. Lombard Odier (2011). Collaboration and Partnerships: the ‘swissnex’ Case. Geneva. Google Scholar öffnen
  263. Long, T. (2017). It’s not the size, it’s the relationship: from ‘small states’ to asymmetry. International Politics, 54(2), 144–160. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0028-x Google Scholar öffnen
  264. Lord, K. M., & Turekian, V. C. (2007). Science and Society. Time for a New Era of Science Diplomacy. Science, 315(5813), 769–770. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1139880 Google Scholar öffnen
  265. Lord, K. M., & Turekian, V. C. (2009, May 5). The Science of Diplomacy. Brookings. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-science-of-diplomacy/ Google Scholar öffnen
  266. Lubell, M. (2003). Collaborative Institutions, Belief-Systems, and Perceived Policy Effectiveness. Political Research Quarterly, 56(3), 309–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591290305600306 Google Scholar öffnen
  267. Maasen, S., & Weingart, P. (eds.) (2005a). Sociology of the sciences: v. 24. Democratization of expertise? Exploring novel forms of scientific advice in political decision-making. Dordrecht, London: Springer. Retrieved from http://www.springer.com/gb/ BLDSS Google Scholar öffnen
  268. Maasen, S., & Weingart, P. (2005b). What's New in Scientific Advice to Politics? Exploring Novel Forms of Scientific Advice in Political Decision-Making. In S. Maasen & P. Weingart (eds.), Sociology of the sciences: v. 24. Democratization of expertise? Exploring novel forms of scientific advice in political decision-making (pp. 1–19). Dordrecht, London: Springer. Google Scholar öffnen
  269. Maaß, K.‑J. (2011). Aktuelle Herausforderungen der Auswärtigen Kulturpolitik. In T. Jäger, A. Höse, & K. Oppermann (eds.), Deutsche Außenpolitik: Sicherheit, Wohlfahrt, Institutionen und Normen (2nd edn., pp. 584–602). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Google Scholar öffnen
  270. Maaß, K.‑J. (2013). Werbung, Werte, Wettbewerb – wohin steuert die Auswärtige Kulturpolitik? Stuttgart. Google Scholar öffnen
  271. Maaß, K.‑J. (2015). Das deutsche Modell – Die Mittlerorganisationen. In K.-J. Maaß (ed.), Kultur und Außenpolitik: Handbuch für Wissenschaft und Praxis (3rd edn., pp. 263–277). Baden-Baden: Nomos. Google Scholar öffnen
  272. Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (eds.) (2009). Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511806414.003 Google Scholar öffnen
  273. Mai, M. (2016). Regieren in der modernen Gesellschaft: Governance aus der Sicht der Ministerialbürokratie. Opladen [u.a.]: Verlag Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.3224/84740518 Google Scholar öffnen
  274. Mansell, R. (2018). Science diplomacy and internet governance. In M. Marzouki & A. Calderaro (eds.), Global Internet Governance as a Diplomacy Issue. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham. Google Scholar öffnen
  275. Marmier, P. (2021). “We were seeding relationships that very often grew into successful partnerships”. In Revealing the Dots: Eleven interviews with some of the most influential figures in swissnex’s 20-year history (pp. 28–31). Boston: Swissnex Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  276. Marmier, P., & Fetscherin, M. (2010). Case E: A Public–Private Partnership to Foster Science, Higher Education and Innovation – The Case of Switzerland with swissnex Boston. In F. Go & R. Govers (eds.), International Place Branding Yearbook 2010: Place Branding in the New Age of Innovation (pp. 97–109). Palgrave Macmillan London. Google Scholar öffnen
  277. Marques, M. (2018). Research Governance through public funding instruments: institutional change of educational research in the European Union and England 1984–2014 (Dissertation). University of Luxembourg. Google Scholar öffnen
  278. Marsh, D., & McConnell, A. (Eds.) (2008). Towards a Framework for Examining Policy Success. Google Scholar öffnen
  279. Max Dohner (2019, April 28). Hans Peter Hertig – Er bündelt dort, wo die Wege sich gabeln. St.Galler Tagblatt AG. Retrieved from https://www.tagblatt.ch/kultur/buch-buehne-kunst/er-bundelt-dort-wo-die-wege-sich-gabeln-ld.1359501 Google Scholar öffnen
  280. Mayntz, R. (1996). Politik und Wissenschaft – ein Spannungsverhältnis. Retrieved from Spektrum der Wissenschaft Verlagsgesellschaft mbH website: https://www.spektrum.de/magazin/politik-und-wissenschaft-ein-spannungsverhaeltnis/823031 Google Scholar öffnen
  281. Mayntz, R., & Scharpf, F. W. (1995). Der Ansatz des akteurszentrierten Institutionalismus. In R. Mayntz & F. W. Scharpf (eds.), Gesellschaftliche Selbstregelung und politische Steuerung (pp. 39–72). Frankfurt/New York: Campus Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  282. Melchor, L. (2020). What Is a Science Diplomat? The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 15(3), 409–423. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-BJA10026 Google Scholar öffnen
  283. Melissen, J. (2005). The New Public Diplomacy: Between Theory and Practice. In J. Melissen (ed.), Studies in diplomacy. The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations (pp. 3–27). Houndmills Basingstoke Hampshire, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  284. Menon, A., & Sedelmeier, U. (2010). Instruments and Intentionality: Civilian Crisis Management and Enlargement Conditionality in EU Security Policy. West European Politics, 33(1), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380903354106 Google Scholar öffnen
  285. Merton, R. K. (1974). The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  286. Mey, G., & Mruck, K. (2007). Qualitative Interviews. In G. Naderer & E. Balzer (eds.), Qualitative Marktforschung in Theorie und Praxis: Grundlagen, Methoden und Anwendungen (pp. 247–278). Wiesbaden: Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Dr. Th. Gabler / GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-9262-8_13 Google Scholar öffnen
  287. Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997). World Society and the Nation‐State. American Journal of Sociology, 103(1), 144–181. https://doi.org/10.1086/231174 Google Scholar öffnen
  288. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. Google Scholar öffnen
  289. Milkoreit, M. (2015). Science and Climate Change Diplomacy: Cognitive Limits and the Need to Reinvent Science Communication. In L. S. Davis & R. G. Patman (eds.), Science Diplomacy: New Day Or False Dawn? (pp. 109–131). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  290. Ministry of Foreign Affairs Denmark (2021). Innovation Centre Denmark Tel Aviv: Advisory Board. Retrieved from https://israel.um.dk/en/innovation-centre/advisory-board-ii Google Scholar öffnen
  291. European Commission (01.06.15). The EU approach to science diplomacy [Press release]. Washington. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019/moedas/announcements/eu-approach-science-diplomacy_en Google Scholar öffnen
  292. Moedas, C. (2016). Science Diplomacy in the European Union. Science & Diplomacy. (March). Retrieved from http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/perspective/2016/science-diplomacy-in-european-union Google Scholar öffnen
  293. Morgan, L. (2010, March 3). Letter to Mrs Maria Vamvakinou MP. Letter. Canberra. Google Scholar öffnen
  294. Moro-Martín, A. (2017). How dare you call us diplomats. Nature, 543(7645), 289. https://doi.org/10.1038/543289a Google Scholar öffnen
  295. Mosch, K. (2009). Deutsche Wissenschafts- und Innovationshäuser: Was das Goethe-Institut für die Kultur ist, sollen die DWIH für die Wissenschaft werden. Wissenschaftsmanagement. Zeitschrift Für Innovation, 15(6), 4–5. Google Scholar öffnen
  296. Moses, J. W., & Knutsen, T. (2001). Inside Out: Globalization and the Reorganization of Foreign Affairs Ministries. Cooperation and Conflict, 36(4), 355–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/00108360121962506 Google Scholar öffnen
  297. Mukherjee, I., & Bali, A. S. (2019). Policy effectiveness and capacity: two sides of the design coin. Policy Design and Practice, 2(2), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2019.1632616 Google Scholar öffnen
  298. Mukherjee, J. (2022, March 5). A price to pay: What science diplomacy means in wartime. Retrieved from https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20220304085448544 Google Scholar öffnen
  299. Netzwerk Future (2019). Förderung von Bildung, Forschung und Innovation in den Jahren 2021-2024: Gemeinsames Positionspapier der Schweizer Hochschulen und der Institutionen der Forschungs- und Innovationsförderung. Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  300. Newman, P. (2009). Methods for analyzing policy tools: the case of new planning instruments in the UK. Planum — the European Journal of Planning Online, 1–7. Google Scholar öffnen
  301. Nordic Innovation House (2021, August 13). About Us. Retrieved from https://www.nordicinnovationhouse.com/#about-nih Google Scholar öffnen
  302. Nye, J. S. (1990). Soft Power. Foreign Policy, 80, 153–171. Google Scholar öffnen
  303. Nye, J. S. (2008). Public Diplomacy and Soft Power. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 94–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207311699 Google Scholar öffnen
  304. Ostrowski, D. (2010). Die Public Diplomacy der deutschen Auslandsvertretungen weltweit: Theorie und Praxis der deutschen Auslandsöffentlichkeitsarbeit (1st edn.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92263-8_3 Google Scholar öffnen
  305. Oxford Research A/S (2015). Evaluation of the Danish Innovation Centres: For the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark and the Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science. Google Scholar öffnen
  306. Oxford Research A/S (2020). Evaluation of the swissnex Network: Evaluation report by Oxford Research for the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI). Denmark. Google Scholar öffnen
  307. Özkaragöz Dogan, E. (2015). Science Diplomacy in the Global Age: Examples from Turkey and the World. Middle East Technical University, Ankara. Google Scholar öffnen
  308. Padgett, J. F., & Powell, W. W. (2012). The Problem of Emergence. In J. F. Padgett & W. W. Powell (eds.), The Emergence of Organizations and Markets (pp. 1–29). Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  309. Pasternack, P., Maue, I., Hechler, D., Kolasinski, T., & Schulze, H. (2016). Die BFI-Policy-Arena in der Schweiz: Akteurskonstellation in der Bildungs-, Forschungs- und Innovationspolitik (1st edn.). Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung Halle-Wittenberg. Berlin: BWV Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  310. Peters, B. G. (2005). The Problem of Policy Problems. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 7(4), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876980500319204 Google Scholar öffnen
  311. Peters, B. G., Capano, G., Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., Chou, M.‑H., & Ravinet, P. (2018). Designing for Policy Effectiveness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108555081 Google Scholar öffnen
  312. Peters, B. G., & van Nispen, F. K. M. (eds.) (1998). New horizons in public policy. Public Policy Instruments: Evaluating the Tools of Public Administration. Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar. Google Scholar öffnen
  313. Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. American Political Science Association, 94(2), 251–267. Google Scholar öffnen
  314. Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis. Princeton, N.J., Oxford: Princeton University Press. Retrieved from http://swb.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=768545 Google Scholar öffnen
  315. Powell, J. J. W. (2018). Higher Education and the Exponential Rise of Science: Competition and Collaboration. In R. A. Scott, M. Buchmann, & S. M. Kosslyn (eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences: An interdisciplinary, Searchable, and Linkable resource (pp. 1–17). New York: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118900772 Google Scholar öffnen
  316. Powell, J. J. W. (2020). Comparative education in an age of competition and collaboration. Comparative Education, 56(1), 57–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2019.1701248 Google Scholar öffnen
  317. Powell, J. J. W., Baker, D., & Fernandez, F. (eds.) (2017). International perspectives on education and society: Vol. 33. The Century of Science: The Global Triumph of the Research University (1st edn.). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. Google Scholar öffnen
  318. Powell, W. W. (1991). Expanding the Scope of Institutional Analysis. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 183–203). Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  319. Powell, W. W., & Soppe, B. (2015). Boundaries and New Organization Forms. In J. Wright (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 768–772). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.73050-9 Google Scholar öffnen
  320. Quevedo, F. (2013). The Importance of International Research Institutions for Science Diplomacy. Science & Diplomacy. (Vol. 2, No. 3 (September)). Google Scholar öffnen
  321. Raev, A. (2020). Transnationale Bildung im Wandel: Grenzüberschreitende Hochschulbildung ‚made in Germany‘ (1990–2016). Kultur und Außenpolitik: Vol. 1. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748920960 Google Scholar öffnen
  322. Raev, A., & Minkman, E. (2020). Emotional policies: Introducing branding as a tool for science diplomacy. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00617-5 Google Scholar öffnen
  323. Rapley, T., & Rees, G. (2018). Collecting Documents as Data. In U. Flick (ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data collection (pp. 548–565). Los Angeles: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  324. Ravinet, P. (2011). European Coordination alla bolognese.: Notes on the Instrumentation of the European Higher Education Area. Revue Française De Science Politique (English Edition), 61(1), 19–42. Google Scholar öffnen
  325. Reale, E., & Seeber, M. (2011). The transformation of steering and governance in Higher Education: funding and evaluation as policy instruments (Working Paper CNR-CERIS No. 2). Google Scholar öffnen
  326. Rist, R. C. (1998). Choosing the Right Policy Instrument at the Right Time: The Contextual Challenges of Selection and Implementation. In M. L. Bemelmans-Videc, R. C. Rist, & E. Vedung (eds.), Comparative policy analysis series. Carrots, Sticks & Sermons: Policy Instruments and their Evaluation (pp. 156–171). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen
  327. Rittmeyer, F., & Forster, N. (2013). High-Tech-Diplomat, übernehmen Sie! In Wissenschaftsdiplomatie: Die Schweiz vernetzt sich neu (Dossier: «Wissenschaftsdiplomatie» Ausgabe 1003, pp. 64–67). Google Scholar öffnen
  328. Roberts, N. C., & King, P. J. (1991). Policy Entrepreneurs: Their Activity Structure and Function in the Policy Process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 1(2), 147–175. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1181732 Google Scholar öffnen
  329. Roulston, K., & Choi, M. (2018). Qualitative Interviews. In U. Flick (ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection (pp. 349–372). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  330. The Royal Society, & AAAS (2010). New frontiers in science diplomacy: Navigating the changing balance of power. London. Google Scholar öffnen
  331. Rüffin, N. V. (2018). Case Study Science and Innovation Diplomacy Agencies at the nexus of research, economics, and politics (Working Paper No. 2018/10). Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  332. Rüffin, N. V., & Schreiterer, U. (2017a). Case Study Science and technology agreements in the toolbox of science diplomacy: Effective instruments or insignificant add-ons? (EL-CSID Working Papers No. 6). Brussels. Google Scholar öffnen
  333. Rüffin, N. V., & Schreiterer, U. (2017b). Emerging Practices of Diplomacy for Science in Europe: Tensions and Potentials? Panel T05P06 Session 2 Challenges in Global Policy Making: The ‘Practice Turn’ in the New Diplomacy. Singapore. Google Scholar öffnen
  334. Ruffini, P.‑B. (2017). Science and diplomacy: A New Dimension of International Relations. Science, Technology and Innovation Studies. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Google Scholar öffnen
  335. Ruffini, P.‑B. (2018). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Science-Diplomacy Nexus. Global Policy, 9 (53), 73–77. Google Scholar öffnen
  336. Ruffini, P.‑B. (2020a). Collaboration and Competition: The Twofold Logic of Science Diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 15(3), 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-BJA10028 Google Scholar öffnen
  337. Ruffini, P.‑B. (2020b). Conceptualizing science diplomacy in the practitioner-driven literature: a critical review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00609-5 Google Scholar öffnen
  338. Rungius, C. (2020). SESAME – a synchrotron light source in the Middle East: an international research infrastructure in the making. In M. Young, T. Flink, & E. Dall (eds.), Science Diplomacy in the Making: Case-based insights from the S4D4C project. Google Scholar öffnen
  339. Rungius, C., & Flink, T. (2020). Romancing science for global solutions: on narratives and interpretative schemas of science diplomacy. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00585-w Google Scholar öffnen
  340. Sabzalieva, E., Sá, C. M., Martinez, M., & Kachynska, N. (2021). Science Diplomacy Policy Processes in Comparative Perspective: The Use of Scientific Cooperation Agreements in Canada, India, Norway, and the UK. Minerva. (59), 149–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-020-09429-y Google Scholar öffnen
  341. Salamon, L. M. (2000). The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance and the Tools of Public Policy Action: An Introduction. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28(5). Google Scholar öffnen
  342. Sartori, G. (1960). Der Begriff der "Wertefreiheit" in der politischen Wissenschaft. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 1(1), 12–22. Google Scholar öffnen
  343. Saurugger, S. (2014). The Changing Nature of Instruments: Why and how instruments of participation change in the European Union. In C. Halpern, P. Lascoumes, & P. Le Galès (eds.), L'instrumentation de l'action publique: Controverses, résistances, effets (pp. 317–341). Paris: Presses de la Fondation nationale des sciences politiques. Google Scholar öffnen
  344. SBF (2006). Jahresbericht 2006 über die Schweizer Häuser für wissenschaftlichen und technologischen Austausch. Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  345. Schaffer, F. C. (2006). Ordinary Language Interviewing. In D. Yanow & P. Schwartz-Shea (eds.), Interpretation and method: Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn. Armonk, NY u. a.: M. E. Sharpe. Google Scholar öffnen
  346. Schaper, R. (2016, April 8). Frank-Walter Steinmeier: „Man muss das Gespräch vor Ort suchen“: Außenminister zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik. Der Tagesspiegel. Retrieved from https://www.tagesspiegel.de/kultur/aussenminister-zur-auswaertigen-kultur-und-bildungspolitik-frank-walter-steinmeier-man-muss-das-gespraech-vor-ort-suchen/13423998.html Google Scholar öffnen
  347. Schavan, A. (2010, February 19). Rede der Bundesministerin für Bildung und Forschung, Prof. Dr. Annette Schavan, MdB, anlässlich der Eröffnung des Deutschen Wissenschafts- und Innovationshauses, New York. Retrieved from http://www.annette-schavan.de/reden/mr20100219.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  348. Schlegel, F., Jacot, O., & Fetscherin, M. (2011). Science diplomacy with swissnex China: A Swiss nation brand initiative. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 7(4), 289–298. https://doi.org/10.1057/pb.2011.14 Google Scholar öffnen
  349. Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1990). Behavioral Assumptions of Policy Tools. The Journal of Politics, 52(2), 510–529. Google Scholar öffnen
  350. Schneider, G., Schiller, J., & Goethe, J. W. (2000). Goethe ist nicht überall. Eine empirische Analyse der Standortentscheidungen in der Auswärtigen Kulturpolitik. Zeitschrift Für Internationale Beziehungen, 7(1), 5–32. Google Scholar öffnen
  351. Schreier, M. (2014). Qualitative Content Analysis. In U. Flick (ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis (pp. 170–183). Los Angeles: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446282243.n12 Google Scholar öffnen
  352. Schultes, N. (2011). Deutsche Außenwirtschaftsförderung. In T. Jäger, A. Höse, & K. Oppermann (eds.), Deutsche Außenpolitik: Sicherheit, Wohlfahrt, Institutionen und Normen (2nd edn., pp. 349–369). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Google Scholar öffnen
  353. Schütte, G. (2006, April 12). Diplomatie der Forscher: Wenn Deutschland international mithalten will, braucht es eine Außenwissenschaftspolitik. Ein Plädoyer. Die Zeit. Google Scholar öffnen
  354. Schütte, G. (2007). Resümee: Außenwissenschaftspolitik – Wissenschaftsaußenpolitik: eine Querschnittsperspektive internationaler Politikgestaltung in modernen Wissensgesellschaften. In Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik & Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung (eds.), Außenwissenschaftspolitik-Wissenschaftsaußenpolitik: Arbeits- und Diskussionspapier 7/2007 (pp. 28–39). Bonn, Google Scholar öffnen
  355. Schütte, G. (ed.) (2008). Wettlauf ums Wissen: Außenwirtschaftspolitik im Zeitalter der Wissensrevolution (1. Aufl.). Berlin: Berlin Univ. Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  356. Schütte, G. (2009). Innovativ, sichtbar, glaubwürdig – Repräsentanzen der deutschen Wissenschaft im Ausland. In A. Borgwardt (ed.), Wissenschaftsaußenpolitik: Deutschland als Knotenpunkt im weltweiten Wissensnetzwerk; Konferenzbericht der Veranstaltung vom 13. November 2008 Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (1st edn., pp. 14–19). Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Google Scholar öffnen
  357. Schütte, G. (2010). Außenwissenschaftspolitik – Wissenschaft im globalen Wandel gestalten. In D. Simon, A. Knie, & S. Hornbostel (eds.), Handbuch Wissenschaftspolitik (pp. 151–161). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-91993-5_11 Google Scholar öffnen
  358. Schütte, G. (2022, March 31). Eiszeit für die Wissenschaft. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Retrieved from https://zeitung.faz.net/faz/politik/2022-03-31/e3d23c4a67bfaa46420d292ae6e188ce/?GEPC=s3 Google Scholar öffnen
  359. Schweizer Bundesrat (2002, November 29). 02.089 Botschaft über die Förderung von Bildung, Forschung und Technologie in den Jahren 2004–2007 (No. 2002–1417). Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  360. Schweizer Bundesrat (2007, January 24). 07.012 Botschaft über die Förderung von Bildung, Forschung und Innovation in den Jahren 2008–2011 (No. 2006-1630). Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  361. Schweizer Bundesrat (2010, December 3). 10.109 Botschaft über die Förderung von Bildung, Forschung und Innovation im Jahr 2012. Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  362. Schweizer Bundesrat (2012, February 22). 12.033 Botschaft über die Förderung von Bildung, Forschung und Innovation in den Jahren 2013–2016. Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  363. Schweizer Bundesrat (2016, February 24). 16.025 Botschaft zur Förderung von Bildung, Forschung und Innovation in den Jahren 2017–2020 (No. 2015-2540). Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  364. Schweizer Bundesrat (2018). Internationale Strategie der Schweiz im Bereich Bildung, Forschung und Innovation: Strategie des Bundesrates. Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  365. Schweizer Bundesrat (2020a). Botschaft zur Förderung der Kultur in den Jahren 2021–2024: (Kulturbotschaft 2021-2024). Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  366. Schweizer Bundesrat (2020b, February 26). 20.028 Botschaft Botschaft über die Förderung von Bildung, Forschung und Innovation in den Jahren 2021–2024. Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  367. Schweizer Eidgenossenschaft (2010). Internationale Strategie der Schweiz im Bereich Bildung, Forschung und Innovation. Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  368. Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and Organizations (2nd edn.). Foundations for organizational science. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications. Google Scholar öffnen
  369. Scott, W. R. (2008). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas and interests (3rd edn.). Los Angeles, Calif.: Sage Publications. Google Scholar öffnen
  370. Seawright, J., & Gerring, J. (2008). Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options. Political Research Quarterly, 61(2), 294–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912907313077 Google Scholar öffnen
  371. Seeber, M. (2014). ERAWATCH Country Reports 2013: Switzerland (EUR – Scientific and Technical Research series No. EUR 26770 EN). Luxembourg. https://doi.org/10.2791/10268 Google Scholar öffnen
  372. Sending, O. J., Pouliot, V., & Neumann, I. B. (2011). The future of diplomacy: Changing practices, evolving relationships. International Journal. (66 (3)), 527–542. Google Scholar öffnen
  373. SERI (2015a). Eine Roadmap für die Weiterentwicklung des swissnex Netzwerkes: Bilanz, Perspektiven und Leitlinien. Bern: Staatssekretariat für Bildung, Forschung und Innovation. Google Scholar öffnen
  374. SERI (2015b). Staatsrechnung – swissnex Netzwerk. Bern. Retrieved from SBFI website: http://annualreport.swissnex.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Financial-Statement_Jahresbericht_2016_D.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  375. SERI (2016). swissnex Annual Report 2015. Bern. Retrieved from SERI website: http://annualreport15.swissnex.org/ Google Scholar öffnen
  376. SERI (2017). swissnex Netzwerk: Jahresbericht 2016 – Highlights. Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  377. SERI (2020). Bildung, Forschung und Innovation in der Schweiz: Chronologie. Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  378. SHARE Boston (2000). Swiss House for Advanced Research and Education. Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  379. Simm, C. (2021). The only constant at swissnex is change. In Revealing the Dots: Eleven interviews with some of the most influential figures in swissnex’s 20-year history (pp. 35–38). Boston: Swissnex Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  380. Simon, D. [Dagmar], & Knie, A. (2010). Stabilität und Wandel des deutschen Wissenschaftssystems. In D. Simon, A. Knie, & S. Hornbostel (eds.), Handbuch Wissenschaftspolitik (pp. 26–33). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  381. SIN (2018). Science & Innovation Network (SIN). Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604011/SIN_Strategy_Mar_2017.docx Google Scholar öffnen
  382. Singer, O. (2003). Auswärtige Kulturpolitik in der Bundesrepublik: Konzeptionelle Grundlagen und institutionelle Entwicklung seit 1945 (No. WF X – 095/03). Google Scholar öffnen
  383. Skodvin, T. (1994). Structure and Agent in Leadership Diplomacy: Institutional design and leadership performance in the science-politics interface of climate change (1994:14). Google Scholar öffnen
  384. Skolnikoff, E. B. (2001). The political role of scientific cooperation. Technology in Society, 23(3), 461–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-791X(01)00026-4 Google Scholar öffnen
  385. Smelser, N. J. (2003). On Comparative Analysis, Interdisciplinarity and Internationalization in Sociology. International Sociology, 18(4), 643–657. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580903184001 Google Scholar öffnen
  386. Smith III, F. L. (2014). Advancing science diplomacy: Indonesia and the US Naval Medical Research Unit. Social Studies of Science, 44(6), 825–847. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312714535864 Google Scholar öffnen
  387. Soss, J. (2006). Talking our way to meaningful explanations. In D. Yanow & P. Schwartz-Shea (eds.), Interpretation and method: Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn. Armonk, NY u. a.: M. E. Sharpe. Google Scholar öffnen
  388. Srugies, A. (2016). Competition or Cooperation? A comparative analysis of the public diplomacy of the European Union and selected member states (Dissertation). Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau. Google Scholar öffnen
  389. Stein, J. A. (2002). Globalisation, science, technology and policy. Science and Public Policy, 29(6), 402–408. Google Scholar öffnen
  390. Steinmeier, F.‑W. (2008a). Partner gewinnen und Potenziale nutzen – Warum sich Außenpolitik für die Wissenschaft einsetzt. In G. Schütte (ed.), Wettlauf ums Wissen: Außenwirtschaftspolitik im Zeitalter der Wissensrevolution (1st edn., pp. 28–30). Berlin: Berlin Univ. Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  391. Steinmeier, F.-W. (2008b, February 13). Rede vor dem Ausschuss für Kultur und Medien des Deutschen Bundestags [Press release]. Berlin. Retrieved from http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/DE/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2008/080213-SteinmeierKulturausschuss.html Google Scholar öffnen
  392. Steinmeier, F.-W. (2009, January 19). Rede zur Eröffnung der Auftaktkonferenz zur Initiative Außenwissenschaftspolitik [Press release]. Berlin. Retrieved from http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/sid_6176B0B6F3F1114753AE1DD9BA614C37/DE/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2009/090119-BM-AWP.html Google Scholar öffnen
  393. Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, & Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung (2007). Außenwissenschaftspolitik-Wissenschaftsaußenpolitik: Arbeits- und Diskussionspapier 7/2007. Bonn. Google Scholar öffnen
  394. Stoll, M. (2018, April 15). Der Bund setzt auf Discount-Diplomaten: Wissenschaftsräte repräsentieren den Forschungsplatz Schweiz im Ausland – zu Kassierinnen-Löhnen. SonntagsZeitung, p. 10. Google Scholar öffnen
  395. Strasser, B. J. (2009). The Coproduction of Neutral Science and Neutral State in Cold War Europe: Switzerland and International Scientific Cooperation, 1951–69. Osiris, 24(1), 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1086/605974 Google Scholar öffnen
  396. Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Introduction: institutional change in advanced political economies. In W. Streeck & K. Thelen (eds.), Beyond continuity: institutional change in advanced political economies (1–39). Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  397. Stucke, A. (2010). Staatliche Akteure in der Wissenschaftspolitik. In D. Simon, A. Knie, & S. Hornbostel (eds.), Handbuch Wissenschaftspolitik (pp. 363–376). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  398. Swire, H. (2014, December 15). The UK, Brazil and Science Diplomacy [Press release]. Harwell Science Park. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-uk-brazil-and-science-diplomacy Google Scholar öffnen
  399. Swiss Federal Audit Office (2016, April 26). Wirtschaftlichkeitsprüfung des Aussennetzes für Bildung, Forschung und Innovation (Swissnex): Staatssekretariat für Bildung, Forschung und Innovation (EFK-15312). Bern. Google Scholar öffnen
  400. Swissinfo.ch (2000). Swiss House in Cambridge eingeweiht. Retrieved from https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/swiss-house-in-cambridge-eingeweiht/1699438 Google Scholar öffnen
  401. Swissinfo.ch (2001). Swiss House wins Massachusetts award. Retrieved from https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-house-wins-massachusetts-award/2318922 Google Scholar öffnen
  402. Swissinfo.ch (2015, June 26). Swissnex to close Singapore office [Press release]. swissinfo.ch. Retrieved from https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/research-promotion_swissnex-to-close-singapore-office/41515588 Google Scholar öffnen
  403. Swissnex (2016). ERI Network: Learn more about the swissnex network, its outposts, and the role of science and technology counsellors. Retrieved from https://www.swissnex.org/about/erinetwork/ Google Scholar öffnen
  404. Swissnex (2017). Brief history of the swissnex Network: Formation and development of the Swiss science attachés network. Retrieved from https://www.swissnex.org/about/history/ Google Scholar öffnen
  405. Swissnex (2019). Our Mission. Retrieved from https://www.swissnex.org/about/mission/ Google Scholar öffnen
  406. Swissnex (2021a). Annual Report: We are Swissnex. Retrieved from https://annualreport.swissnex.org/ Google Scholar öffnen
  407. Swissnex (2021b). Governance: Organization and structure. Retrieved from https://swissnex.org/about-us/governance Google Scholar öffnen
  408. Swissnex (2021c, April 13). Our mission – Swissnex. Retrieved from https://swissnex.org/about-us/mission Google Scholar öffnen
  409. Swissnex (2021d, August 2). Coming soon: Consulate of Switzerland in Osaka & 6th Swissnex location! Retrieved from https://swissnex.org/news/new-swissnex-location-japan Google Scholar öffnen
  410. Swissnex Boston and New York (2010, March 3). Ruth Dreifuss on swissnex Boston [Youtube]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4C6K0AdNFc Google Scholar öffnen
  411. Swissnex in Boston and New York (2022). Our Team – Swissnex in Boston and New York. Retrieved from https://swissnex.org/boston/about-us/our-team/ Google Scholar öffnen
  412. ThinkSwiss (2010). The Swissnex Role Model: How Philanthropists and Government Worked Together for Switzerland. Google Scholar öffnen
  413. Thorhallsson, B., & Bailes, A. J. (2016). Small State Diplomacy. In C. M. Constantinou, P. Kerr, & P. Sharp (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy (294–307). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  414. Turchetti, S. (2020). The (Science Diplomacy) Origins of the Cold War. Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, 50(4), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2020.50.4.411 Google Scholar öffnen
  415. Turekian, V. C. (2018). The Evolution of Science Diplomacy. Global Policy, 9 (53), 5–7. Google Scholar öffnen
  416. Turekian, V. C., Macindoe, S., Copeland, D., Davis, L. S., Patman, R. G., & Pozza, M. (2015). The Emergence of Science Diplomacy. In L. S. Davis & R. G. Patman (eds.), Science Diplomacy: New Day Or False Dawn? (pp. 3–24). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  417. Turekian, V. C., & Neureiter, N. (2012). Science and Diplomacy: The Past as Prologue. Science & Diplomacy, 1(1). Google Scholar öffnen
  418. Turekian, V. C., & Wang, T. C. (eds.) (2012). National Approaches to Science Diplomacy: An Education Resource [Special issue]. Science & Diplomacy. (March). Google Scholar öffnen
  419. UK Science & Innovation Network (2015). UK Science & Innovation Network Report. Google Scholar öffnen
  420. Ulnicane, I. (2021). Self-Organisation and Steering in International Research Collaborations. In K. Kastenhofer & S. Molyneux-Hodgson (eds.), Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook: volume 31. Community and identity in contemporary technosciences (Vol. 31, pp. 107–125). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61728-8_5 Google Scholar öffnen
  421. UNESCO (2021). SESAME. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/themes/science-sustainable-future/sesame#story Google Scholar öffnen
  422. Välimaa, J., & Hoffman, D. (2008). Knowledge society discourse and higher education. Higher Education, 56(3), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9123-7 Google Scholar öffnen
  423. Van den Besselaar, P., Hemlin, S., & van der Weijden, I. (2012). Collaboration and Competition in Research. Higher Education Policy, 25(3), 263–266. https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2012.16 Google Scholar öffnen
  424. Van der Wende, M. C. (2001). Internationalisation policies: About new trends and contrasting paradigms. Higher Education Policy, 14(3), 249–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0952-8733(01)00018-6 Google Scholar öffnen
  425. Van Langenhove, L. (2016). Global Science Diplomacy as a New Tool for Global Governance. Retrieved from https://media.wix.com/ugd/0bc3be_8d3a721735e84a1e8f40c6f949c7132d.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  426. Van Langenhove, L. (2017). Tools for an EU Science Diplomacy. Brussels. https://doi.org/10.2777/911223 Google Scholar öffnen
  427. Van Vught, F., & de Boer, H. (2015). Governance Models and Policy Instruments. In J. Huisman, H. de Boer, D. D. Dill, & M. Souto Otero (eds.), The Palgrave International Handbook of Higher Education Policy and Governance (pp. 38–56). Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-45617-5_3 Google Scholar öffnen
  428. Vlaamse Regering (2020). Science & Technology Offices Roadmap voorinternationale valorisatie van Vlaamse innovatie – Vlaanderen wereldwijd sterker op de kaart als innovatieve technologiegedreven regio. (No. VR 2020 1707 MED.0259/1BIS). Google Scholar öffnen
  429. Vogel, D., & Funck, B. J. (2018). Immer nur die zweitbeste Lösung? Protokolle als Dokumentationsmethode für qualitative Interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 19(1). Google Scholar öffnen
  430. Von Arb, C. (2004). SHARE – Diplomatie im Zeichen der Wissenschaft: Menschen verbinden, Innovationen fördern (BIOforum No. 7–8). Darmstadt. Google Scholar öffnen
  431. Von Arb, C. (2021). “Something new and different could emerge”. In Revealing the Dots: Eleven interviews with some of the most influential figures in swissnex’s 20-year history (pp. 25–27). Boston: Swissnex Boston. Google Scholar öffnen
  432. Wagner, C. S. (2002). Science and foreign policy: The elusive partnership: science and foreign policy. Science and Public Policy, 29(6), 409–417. Google Scholar öffnen
  433. Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network Structure, Self-organization, and the Growth of International Collaboration in Science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608–1618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.002 Google Scholar öffnen
  434. Waldvogel, M., & Huang, J. (1999). Swiss House: The physical/virtual consulate of Switzerland. Google Scholar öffnen
  435. Wanat, C. L. (2008). Getting Past the Gatekeepers: Differences Between Access and Cooperation in Public School Research. Field Methods, 20(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X07313811 Google Scholar öffnen
  436. Wang, J. (2006). Managing national reputation and international relations in the global era: Public diplomacy revisited. Public Relations Review, 32(2), 91–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2005.12.001 Google Scholar öffnen
  437. Wang, T. C. (2013, June 27). The Evolution and Future of Science Diplomacy: A US Perspective, University of Tokyo. Retrieved from http://www3.grips.ac.jp/~gist/en/events/document/gistseminar_50.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
  438. Weigel, S. (2019). Transnationale Auswärtige Kulturpolitik – Jenseits der Nationalkultur: Voraussetzungen und Perspektiven der Verschränkung von Innen und Außen (ifa-Edition Kultur und Außenpolitik). Stuttgart: Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen. Google Scholar öffnen
  439. Weingart, P. (2018). Foreword. In New International Science and Technology Policies: Key Issues and Questions in Switzerland: An exploratory study conducted on behalf of the Swiss Science Council SSC (ISBN 978-3-906113-54-8, pp. 10–13). Bern: Swiss Science Council SSC. Google Scholar öffnen
  440. Weiss, C. (2005). Science, technology and international relations. Technology in Society, 27(3), 295–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2005.04.004 Google Scholar öffnen
  441. Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies. New York: The Free Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  442. Westerwelle, G. (2012a, February 14). Eröffnung des Deutschen Wissenschafts- und Innovationshauses São Paulo. DWIH São Paulo, São Paulo. Retrieved from http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/DE/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2012/120214_BM_DWIZ.html?nn=608946 Google Scholar öffnen
  443. Westerwelle, G. (2012b, November 13). Rede zur Eröffnung des Deutschen Wissenschaftszentrums in Kairo, Cairo. Retrieved from http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/DE/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2012/121113-BM-DWZ-Kairo.html Google Scholar öffnen
  444. Whitley, R. (2008). Universities as strategic actors: limitations and variations. In L. Engwall & D. L. Weaire (eds.), Wenner-Gren international series: v. 84. The University in the Market: Proceedings from a symposium held in Stockholm, 1–3 November 2007. London: Portland Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  445. WIPO (2021). Global Innovation Index 2021: Tracking Innovation through the COVID-19 Crisis. Geneva. Google Scholar öffnen
  446. Witjes, N., & Sigl, L. (2015). Internationalization of STI. In A. Franzmann, A. Jansen, & P. Münte (eds.), Legitimizing Science: National and Global Public (1800–2010) (1st edn.). Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  447. Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge. Science (New York, N.Y.), 316(5827), 1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099 Google Scholar öffnen
  448. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (3rd edn.). Applied social research methods series: v. 5. Thousand Oaks, Calif., London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  449. Zapp, M. (2022). Revisiting the Global Knowledge Economy: The Worldwide Expansion of Research and Development Personnel, 1980–2015. Minerva, 60, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-021-09455-4 Google Scholar öffnen
  450. Zito, A. R. (2018). Instrument constituencies and epistemic community theory. Policy and Society, 37(1), 36–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1416929 Google Scholar öffnen

Ähnliche Veröffentlichungen

aus dem Schwerpunkt "Internationale Beziehungen", "Internationale Organisationen & NGOs", "Politische Kommunikation", "Europapolitik & Europäische Union", "Politik allgemein"
Cover des Buchs: Weltbilder und Weltordnung
Lehrbuch Kein Zugriff
Gert Krell, Peter Schlotter, Alexandra Homolar, Frank A. Stengel
Weltbilder und Weltordnung
Cover des Buchs: Arenen des Diskurses
Sammelband Kein Zugriff
Thomas Schölderle, Laura Martena
Arenen des Diskurses
Cover des Buchs: Europa
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Hans Jörg Schrötter
Europa
Cover des Buchs: Israel in deutschen Medien
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Jonas Hessenauer, Lukas Uwira
Israel in deutschen Medien
Cover des Buchs: Transnationale Bildung im Wandel
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Alexander Raev
Transnationale Bildung im Wandel

Hinweis

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und darf nur nach den Vorgaben der Nutzungs- und Lizenzvereinbarung genutzt werden. Jede darüber hinaus gehende Nutzung des Werkes ist ausdrücklich untersagt und wird verfolgt.

Feedback geben

Wir freuen uns über Ihr Feedback zu Inhalten und Funktionen. Ihre Nachricht hilft uns, unseren Service stetig zu verbessern.

Bewertung
Bild anhängen
oder hier ablegen
PNG oder JPG (max. 3 MB)

Anmelden

Passwort vergessen?
Login via Open Athens
Noch kein Benutzerkonto?
Jetzt registrieren

Publikation zitieren

Download: RIS BibTex