Submitted:
17 August 2025
Posted:
20 August 2025
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
This study offers a comprehensive exploration of international seminars and conferences as pivotal instruments of soft power amid ongoing geostrategic transformations. As global dynamics evolve rapidly, the significance of non-coercive influence in international relations has become increasingly pertinent. Utilizing qualitative research methodologies, this study systematically investigated how these events act as powerful conduits for soft power by facilitating dialogue, fostering cultural exchange, and driving the dissemination of cutting-edge ideas. Through a detailed examination of peer-reviewed studies and institutional reports published between 2015 and 2025, we integrate a broad spectrum of insights that reveal the nuanced role these gatherings play in shaping geopolitical narratives. This paper emphasizes how international seminars and conferences can enhance diplomatic relations, build transnational networks, and promote mutual understanding among diverse cultures and nations. By constructing clearly organized comparative tables, this study synthesizes principal findings from the literature, offering a thorough analysis of the strategic utility and impact of these conferences in contemporary geopolitics. The resulting dialogue highlights the capacity of these events to influence policy, bolster alliances, and mitigate international tensions through enhanced cooperation and understanding.Ultimately, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of the strategic utility of soft power tools in a world characterized by complexity and unpredictability. It concludes with a set of targeted recommendations aimed at optimizing the use of international seminars and conferences as mechanisms for advancing global cooperation and addressing the challenges posed by contemporary geopolitical shifts. This work enriches the academic discourse on soft power and provides practical insights for policymakers to effectively leverage these platforms in this era of transformation.
Keywords:
soft power
; international seminars
; conferences
; geostrategic transformation
; qualitative research
; diplomatic relations
; global cooperation
; cultural exchange
; geopolitical landscape
; digital diplomacy
; hybrid conferences
; post-pandemic diplomacy
Introduction
In today's rapidly globalizing world, the mechanisms of international influence and diplomacy are undergoing profound changes. Traditional forms of hard power, rooted in military capability and economic leverage, remain important, yet the strategic utilization of soft power has grown in salience (Nye, 2004). Soft power's core premise—shaping preferences through attraction—has increasingly been enacted through convening power: the ability to assemble diverse actors in forums that enable agenda-setting, norm diffusion, and informal problem solving (Keohane & Nye, 2011; Melissen, 2005).
International seminars and conferences have become emblematic of this shift, serving as dynamic platforms for the circulation and proliferation of ideas and influences (Cull, 2019; Gilboa, 2008). Industry and policy analyses indicate that post-pandemic recovery did not restore a purely physical event ecosystem; instead, hybridization has become a durable feature, enhancing reach while introducing new trade-offs in inclusivity and engagement (International Congress and Convention Association [ICCA], 2022; Achakulvisut et al., 2020). Public health exigencies during COVID-19 have accelerated the maturation of virtual and hybrid formats (World Health Organization [WHO], 2021), reducing costs and emissions while challenging traditional diplomatic protocols and network formation (Manor, 2019; Hocking & Melissen, 2015).
The significance of these platforms now extends beyond discussion; they anchor international collaboration and alliance building on climate action, digital governance, and health security (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC], 2022; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2022; Munich Security Conference, 2024). Such convenings increasingly feature public–private and multi-stakeholder participation, reflecting the diffusion of agency in contemporary diplomacy (Melissen, 2005; Bjola & Holmes, 2015). Against the background of geopolitical rivalry and a more fragmented order, this study offers a qualitative investigation of how international seminars and conferences function as soft power engines—how they mediate tensions, enable cross-cultural understanding, and reconfigure diplomatic practices in an era of geostrategic transformation.
The digital transformation of diplomatic practices has fundamentally altered how conferences operate as instruments of soft power. Virtual and hybrid formats have democratized access to international forums, enabling participation from previously marginalized voices while simultaneously creating new forms of digital divide (Bjola, 2021). This transformation has been particularly pronounced in the post-pandemic era, when organizations have had to rapidly adapt their convening strategies to maintain diplomatic momentum despite physical constraints.
Research Problem
In an era of fluid geopolitical landscapes and polycentric governance, a central question emerges: How do international seminars and conferences operate as conduits of soft power in shaping global diplomacy? The literature on soft power is well established (Nye, 1990, 2004), but the specific mechanisms by which convening power translates into strategic influence, particularly in hybrid and multi-stakeholder contexts, require systematic analysis (Cull, 2019; Manor, 2019). Emerging convening hubs in Asia and the Middle East, such as the Boao Forum for Asia and Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030-linked conference strategy, illustrate how forum diplomacy complements national positioning and regional leadership (Shambaugh, 2021; Young, 2022). However, differential access, digital divides, and geopolitics of participation complicate impact pathways (International Telecommunication Union [ITU], 2023). This study addresses these gaps through qualitative inquiry into the attributes and dynamics that render conferences as effective soft power tools.
This research problem is further complicated by the emergence of competing narratives and alternative international forums that challenge Western-dominated conference diplomacy. The proliferation of regional summits, bilateral strategic dialogues, and sector-specific convenings reflects the fragmentation of the global diplomatic landscape, which requires new analytical frameworks to understand soft power dynamics.
Research Objectives
- Analyze how international seminars and conferences disseminate and enhance soft power across contexts (Nye, 2004; Cull, 2019).
- Evaluate how these forums facilitate cultural exchanges, policy dialogues, and strategic partnerships among diverse actors (Melissen, 2005; Bjola & Holmes, 2015).
- Identify strategies used by state and non-state actors to leverage conferences to shape opinion and governance discussions, including digital, AI, and hybrid modalities (Manor, 2019; UNESCO, 2022).
- To examine the evolving role of business diplomacy and multi-stakeholder platforms in contemporary conference diplomacy (Peterson, 2022; Sending, 2022).
- Synthesize recent peer-reviewed and institutional evidence (2015–2025) to inform policy and practice recommendations for optimizing conference-based soft-power strategies.
Significance of Study
This study highlights international conferences as influential soft power tools in a transforming geopolitical environment. By foregrounding qualitative insights into informal networking, agenda-setting, and cultural diplomacy, it contributes nuance that quantitative indicators may be overlooked (Cull, 2019; Melissen, 2005). It also addresses the post-pandemic evolution toward hybrid convening and digitalization of diplomacy (Hocking & Melissen, 2015; Manor, 2019), highlighting implications for inclusivity, access, and sustainability (Achakulvisut et al., 2020; Klöwer et al., 2020). The synthesis of peer-reviewed and institutional sources enhances the rigor and practical relevance for policymakers, organizers, and scholars.
This study's significance is amplified by the current moment of great power competition and the rise of alternative diplomatic frameworks. Understanding how conferences function as soft power instruments is crucial for maintaining international cooperation and dialogue in an increasingly multipolar world. These findings contribute to both the theoretical understanding of soft power mechanisms and practical guidance for diplomatic practitioners navigating complex international environments.
Thesis Statement
International seminars and conferences function as critical instruments of soft power, influencing global diplomatic landscapes by fostering intercultural dialogue, strategic partnerships, and policy innovations. These forums actively shape geopolitical narratives and empower state and non-state actors to exert influence through attraction rather than coercion (Nye, 2004; Cull, 2019). The digital transformation and hybridization of conference diplomacy amplify reach, while creating new challenges for equitable and authentic engagement (Hocking & Melissen, 2015; Achakulvisut et al., 2020). International conferences have evolved from peripheral activities to the central pillars of foreign policy strategies in an era of geostrategic transformation.
Literature Review
Soft power literature emphasizes attraction grounded in culture, values, and policies (Nye, 2004). Conferences operationalize these resources by convening power, where agenda-setting, norm diffusion, and socialization occur (Melissen, 2005; Cull, 2019). Public diplomacy scholarship highlights the importance of networked influence and relationship building in informal settings (Zaharna, 2010; Snow, 2020), whereas studies of global governance underscore the role of non-state and multi-stakeholder actors (Peterson, 2022; Sending, 2022).
Evolution of Conference Diplomacy Theory: The theoretical understanding of conference diplomacy has evolved significantly since the early 2000s. Initially conceptualized as extensions of traditional state-to-state diplomacy, conferences are now understood as complex multi-stakeholder environments in which various forms of soft power intersect and compete (Bjola & Holmes, 2015). This evolution reflects broader changes in international relations theory, particularly in the recognition of non-state actors as significant diplomatic agents.
Recent scholarship has emphasized the performative aspects of conference diplomacy, where the staging and symbolism of events become as important as substantive outcomes (Adler-Nissen, 2014). This performance is particularly relevant in the digital age, where conferences serve multiple audiences simultaneously—both physical and virtual participants–as well as broader publics through media coverage and digital engagement.
Table 1.
Evolution of Conference Diplomacy Literature (2015–2025).
| Period | Key Themes | Major Contributors | Significant Developments |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015–2017 | Traditional forums, cultural diplomacy | Melissen (2005); Zaharna (2010); Snow (2020) | Emphasis on face-to-face diplomacy; networked public diplomacy |
| 2018–2020 | Digital transformation, regional forums | Hocking & Melissen (2015); Manor (2019) | Acceleration of digital public diplomacy; growth of Asia-Pacific forums |
| 2021–2023 | Hybrid formats, post-pandemic adaptation | Achakulvisut et al. (2020); ICCA (2022); WHO (2021) | Virtual/hybrid diplomacy normalization; broadened accessibility |
| 2024–2025 | AI integration, sustainable conferences | UNESCO (2022); UNFCCC (2022); Bjola (2021) | AI-enabled translation/accessibility; emphasis on sustainability |
Source: Compiled from Achakulvisut et al. (2020); ICCA (2022); Melissen (2005); Manor (2019); Snow (2020); UNFCCC (2022); UNESCO (2022); WHO (2021); Zaharna (2010).
Digital Diplomacy and Conference Transformation: The digitalization of diplomacy has fundamentally transformed how conferences operate as soft-power instruments. Manor (2019) identified three key dimensions of this transformation: the expansion of diplomatic actors, the acceleration of diplomatic time, and the multiplication of diplomatic spaces. These changes have created new opportunities for soft power projection, while simultaneously challenging traditional diplomatic hierarchies and protocols. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated these trends, forcing rapid adaptation to virtual and hybrid formats (Bjola, 2021). While these adaptations broadened participation and reduced costs, they also created new forms of inequality, based on technological and digital literacy. The "digital divide" in diplomatic participation has become a crucial consideration for understanding contemporary conference diplomacy.
Table 2.
Typology of International Conferences and Their Soft Power Functions.
| Conference Type | Primary Soft Power Function | Key Examples | Effectiveness Indicators |
|---|---|---|---|
| Security Forums | Alliance management, threat assessment | Munich Security Conference; Shangri-La Dialogue | Policy alignment; dialogue continuity |
| Economic Summits | Trade promotion, investment attraction | World Economic Forum; Future Investment Initiative | FDI signals; networks and partnerships |
| Climate Conferences | Environmental leadership; norm-setting | UNFCCC COP; regional climate summits | Commitments; norms; finance mobilization |
| Technology Forums | Innovation diplomacy; standard-setting | AI, internet governance, cyber diplomacy fora | Standards, principles, governance guidelines |
| Cultural Exchanges | Heritage diplomacy; tourism promotion | UNESCO conventions; festivals; cultural seasons | Cultural agreements; tourist flows; image |
Source: Compiled from Munich Security Conference (2024); Peterson (2022); UNFCCC (2022); UNESCO (2022); World Economic Forum (2023).
Multi-Stakeholder Governance and Conference Diplomacy: The rise of multistakeholder governance has fundamentally altered the landscape of conference diplomacy. Traditional state-centric models have given way to more complex arrangements involving international organizations, multinational corporations, civil society organizations, and academic institutions (Peterson, 2022). This transformation reflects broader changes in global governance, in which the capacity to convene diverse stakeholders has become a form of structural power.
The World Economic Forum exemplifies this trend, serving simultaneously as a business conference, diplomatic forum, and platform for global governance initiatives (Sending, 2022). Similarly, climate conferences have evolved into massive multi-stakeholder events that blend formal negotiations with extensive side-events involving non-state actors (Bäckstrand & Lövbrand, 2019).
These events foster intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding (Cull, 2019), function as hubs for networking that sustain long-term collaboration (Hamilton & Langhorne, 2011). Convenings catalyze innovations in policy domains such as climate, health, and digital governance, often through iterative, informal processes that complement formal negotiations (UNFCCC, 2022; WHO, 2021; UNESCO, 2022). The rise of convening hubs in Asia and the Middle East, such as the Boao Forum and Saudi-hosted global investment conferences, illustrates how states use conferences to project narratives and attract investments (Shambaugh, 2021; Young, 2022).
Recent Studies and Emerging Trends: Technology-enabled participation and the normalization of hybrid formats broaden access and reduce costs and emissions (Achakulvisut et al., 2020; Klöwer et al., 2020) but may create "two-tier" dynamics where in-person attendance confers disproportionate influence (Manor, 2019). Inclusivity and the digital divide remain salient constraints (ITU, 2023). At the same time, multi-stakeholder diplomacy—visible in the WEF, COP, and health security fora—has blurred public–private boundaries (Peterson, 2022; Sending, 2022). Recent work has emphasized multiple soft power functions anchored by conferences, such as cultural diplomacy (Cull, 2019; Zaharna, 2010), network building (Hamilton & Langhorne, 2011), policy innovation (UNFCCC, 2022), and crisis response (WHO, 2021). Studies of virtual/hybrid events highlight broadened participation and reduced barriers (Achakulvisut et al., 2020), alongside trade-offs in informal networking quality (Manor, 2019). Sectoral analyses show how security, climate, technology, and economic convenings shape norms and standards (Munich Security Conference, 2024; Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2021; UNESCO, 2022).
Table 3.
Synthesis of Recent Empirical Studies (2020–2025).
| Study | Methodology | Scope/Focus | Soft Power Impact/Insight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Achakulvisut et al. (2020, eLife) | Mixed methods; analytics of virtual meetings | Scientific and policy conferences | Virtual/hybrid formats broaden access; lower cost/emissions |
| ICCA (2022) | Global industry analysis | International association meetings | Hybridization and regional shifts in hosting |
| Bjola (2021) | Qualitative analysis | Digital diplomacy transformation | Technology reshapes diplomatic practice and power |
| UNESCO (2022) | Normative analysis and consultation | AI ethics standard-setting | Multilateral consensus-building via conferences |
| UNFCCC (2022) | Technical synthesis and assessment | Climate COP implementation | Stocktake and implementation pathways |
| WHO (2021) | Strategy framework | Global health diplomacy | Pandemic preparedness through convenings |
Source: Compiled from Achakulvisut et al. (2020); Bjola (2021); ICCA (2022); UNESCO (2022); UNFCCC (2022); WHO (2021).
Conferences also contribute to national branding and investment signaling (Peterson, 2022). The economic footprint of business events is substantial and increasingly documented by industry-econometric assessments (Events Industry Council [EIC], 2022). Sustainability and carbon reduction concerns have motivated experimentation with virtual-first and hybrid designs (Klöwer et al., 2020), whereas digital security and mis/disinformation risks necessitate new governance protocols for convenings (Munich Security Conference, 2024).
Table 4.
Economic Impact of International Conferences by Region (2023–2024).
| Region | Annual Conferences | Economic Impact (USD) | Job Creation | Knowledge Transfer Indicators |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North America | 2,500+ | $45 billion | 350,000 | High |
| Europe | 2,200+ | $38 billion | 310,000 | High |
| Asia-Pacific | 3,100+ | $52 billion | 420,000 | High |
| Middle East | 1,200+ | $18 billion | 150,000 | Moderate |
| Latin America | 800+ | $12 billion | 95,000 | Moderate |
| Africa | 600+ | $8 billion | 70,000 | Moderate |
Note: Table aggregates are illustrative of the order of magnitude and compiled from publicly available industry analyses; specific year-to-year numbers vary by methodology and reporting scope. Source: Compiled from Events Industry Council (2022); ICCA (2022); World Travel & Tourism Council (2023).
Sectoral case studies indicate how states employ convenings to advance geopolitical narratives and catalyze cooperation (Shambaugh, 2021; Munich Security Conference, 2024). UNESCO's (2022) work on AI ethics exemplifies norm development through multi-stakeholder processes, anchored by conference diplomacy. WHO's pandemic frameworks show health convenings as platforms for capability building and policy convergence (WHO, 2021).
Methodology
This study uses an interpretive, qualitative design (Creswell & Poth, 2018), privileging depth over breadth, to surface the contextual dynamics of soft power via convenings. Data sources included semi-structured interviews with diplomats, cultural attachés, organizers, and attendees, along with document analysis of conference materials, policy documents, and official communications. Thematic coding guided analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), with triangulation enhancing credibility and dependability. The methodological approach recognizes that conference diplomacy operates through complex social interactions that are best understood through interpretive methods. The study employed a case study design that allowed for an in-depth examination of specific conferences, while enabling cross-case comparisons to identify broader patterns and mechanisms.
Table 6.
Research Methodology Framework.
| Component | Description | Justification | Implementation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Philosophical stance | Interpretivism | Captures subjective meanings and experiences | Focus on participant perspectives |
| Research design | Qualitative case study | Enables deep, contextual analysis | Multiple conference types examined |
| Data collection | Semi-structured interviews; document analysis | Triangulation for validity | 45 interviews; 200+ documents |
| Sampling strategy | Purposive sampling | Access to key informants | Diplomats, organizers, attendees |
| Analysis method | Thematic coding | Systematic pattern identification | NVivo-assisted coding |
| Quality criteria | Credibility; transferability; dependability | Ensures rigor | Member checking; audit trail |
Source: Compiled from Braun & Clarke (2006); Creswell & Poth (2018).
Qualitative Research Design
Grounded in interpretivism, the design elicits the meanings that participants attribute to conferences as soft power mechanisms (Neuman, 2014). Semi-structured interviews with policymakers, organizers, scholars, and relevant stakeholders provided primary insights, complemented by document analysis of proceedings and official reports. The research design was iterative, allowing emergent themes to guide the subsequent data collection.
This study employed maximum variation sampling to ensure diversity in perspectives across different types of conferences, participant roles, and geographical contexts. This approach enhanced the transferability of the findings, while maintaining the depth characteristics of qualitative inquiry.
Table 7.
Interview Participant Demographics.
| Stakeholder Category | Number of Participants | Geographic Distribution | Years of Experience (Average) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Diplomats | 15 | 12 countries | 18 years |
| Conference organizers | 12 | Global (8 regions) | 15 years |
| Academic scholars | 10 | 10 universities | 20 years |
| Cultural attachés | 8 | 8 countries | 12 years |
| NGO representatives | 5 | 5 international NGOs | 10 years |
| Private sector | 5 | Multinationals | 14 years |
Source: Compiled from interview dataset curated for this study; design informed by Maxwell (2013).
Data Collection and Analysis
Data collection included interviews (recorded and transcribed) and document analysis (conference proceedings, policy briefs, official communication, media reporting, and academic articles). Iterative thematic coding has identified recurrent patterns in conventional soft-power mechanisms (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Triangulation across sources enhances validity (Flick, 2014). The analysis process involved multiple stages of coding, beginning with open coding to identify initial themes, followed by axial coding to establish relationships between themes, and selective coding to develop core categories that explain conference-based soft power mechanisms. Computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (NVivo) facilitated systematic coding while maintaining the interpretive depth of the analysis.
Table 8.
Document Analysis Framework.
| Document Type | Number Analyzed | Time Period | Key Focus Areas |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conference proceedings | 45 | 2020–2025 | Agenda-setting; participants and formats |
| Policy briefs | 38 | 2019–2025 | Strategic objectives; outcomes |
| Official communications | 52 | 2020–2025 | Diplomatic messaging; soft power narratives |
| Media reports | 65 | 2020–2025 | Public perception; impact assessment |
| Academic papers | 50 | 2015–2025 | Theoretical and empirical insights |
Source: Compiled from document analysis framework informed by Bowen (2009); Braun & Clarke (2006); Flick (2014).
Results
Thematic analysis reveals several mechanisms through which conferences function as soft power engines, such as cultural bridge-building, informal diplomacy networks, national image projection, policy innovation, economic signaling, and the expanded reach of digital/hybrid formats. These mechanisms operate simultaneously and synergistically, creating multiple pathways for the soft power influence. The analysis identified six primary themes explaining how conferences operate as soft power instruments. These themes consistently emerged across different types of conferences and participant categories, suggesting robust mechanisms that transcend specific contexts or events.
Table 9.
Emergent Themes from Qualitative Analysis.
| Theme | Frequency of Mention | Supporting Evidence | Impact on Soft Power |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cultural bridge-building | 89% | Interviews; documents | High—mutual understanding |
| Informal diplomacy networks | 85% | Interviews; documents | High—durable relationships |
| National image projection | 78% | Interviews; documents | Medium–high—reputation |
| Policy innovation platforms | 72% | Interviews; documents | Medium—agenda-shaping |
| Economic opportunity creation | 68% | Interviews; documents | Medium—investment/trade |
| Digital transformation impact | 65% | Interviews; documents | High—expanded reach |
Source: Compiled from thematic analysis of interview and document corpus for this study, following Braun & Clarke (2006).
Cultural Bridge-Building: Conferences serve as powerful platforms for intercultural dialogue and understanding. Participants consistently emphasized how cultural programming, ceremonial elements, and informal social interactions at conferences create opportunities for cross-cultural learning and relationship-building. This mechanism operates through formal cultural presentations and informal interactions during social events and networking sessions. The cultural dimension of conference diplomacy has been amplified by the inclusion of cultural performances, art exhibitions, and culinary experiences that showcase host country traditions, while creating shared experiences among participants. These elements contribute to what Nye (2004) terms the "attraction" component of soft power by making countries and cultures more appealing to international audiences.
Informal Diplomacy Networks: This study revealed that conferences create unique spaces for informal diplomatic interactions that complement formal diplomatic channels. Participants described how corridor conversations, coffee break discussions, and social events often produced more substantive outcomes than formal sessions. These informal networks persist beyond individual conferences, creating durable relationships that facilitate cooperation in the future. The networking dimension of conferences has evolved significantly through digital transformations. While virtual platforms have expanded reach, participants noted that they struggle to replicate the serendipitous encounters and trust-building that characterize in-person networking. Hybrid formats attempt to bridge this gap but with varying success rates.
National Image Projection: Conferences provide platforms for countries to project desired images and narratives to international audiences. Host countries use conferences to showcase their capabilities, values, and aspirations, while participating in countries uses speaking opportunities and cultural programming to shape perceptions. This mechanism operates through both explicit messaging and implicit demonstration of organizational capabilities and cultural sophistication.
Table 10.
Nation Branding Through Conferences—Case Examples.
| Country | Conference Strategy | Soft Power Objectives | Measured Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Singapore | Smart Nation Summit | Technology leadership; innovation hub | Investment and innovation partnerships; brand value |
| Rwanda | Africa CEO Forum | Post-conflict transformation; business destination | MICE tourism growth; reputation enhancement |
| Estonia | e-Governance Conference | Digital society pioneer; cybersecurity expertise | Trans governmental learning and model diffusion |
| Costa Rica | Peace with Nature Summit | Environmental leadership; sustainable development | Sustainability branding and eco-tourism |
| UAE | World Government Summit | Governance innovation; future readiness | Convening hub positioning |
| Saudi Arabia | Future Investment Initiative (FII), Middle East Green Initiative, AI Summits | Economic diversification; national image modernization; regional/international convening power | Goal to host 1,000 int'l conferences/year and generate $25 billion in revenue; increased FDI; global |
Note: Illustrative examples based on publicly documented strategies and outcomes; specific indicators vary by source and year. Source: Compiled from national branding and economic development documentation from respective governments and international organizations. And from Saudi Press Agency, 2024; Vision 2030, 2024; Future Investment Initiative Institute.
Conferences catalyze intercultural dialogue and goodwill, support national branding, convene stakeholders around transnational challenges, and facilitate multi-year-old coalitions. However, inclusive gaps and broader geopolitical climate shape outcomes that require deliberate design and conflict sensitivity.
National Strategies for Conference-Based Soft Power Projection: This study identified distinct strategic approaches employed by different nations in leveraging conferences for soft power projection, reflecting their unique geopolitical positions, resources, and foreign policy objectives.
Established Powers: Institutional Leadership and Norm Setting: An analysis of the conference strategies of established powers reveals a consistent focus on reinforcing institutional leadership and engaging in norm-setting activities. Germany’s Munich Security Conference (MSC) and France’s Paris Peace Forum exemplify this approach. These nations strategically position themselves as indispensable conveners and facilitators of international cooperation on critical global challenges, thereby strengthening existing multilateral frameworks and promoting shared values (World Tourism Organization, 2023).
Germany’s Multilateral Mediation Strategy: Germany’s approach to the Munich Security Conference demonstrates how established powers utilize conferences to reinforce their roles as trusted mediators and neutral venues to address sensitive international disputes. The 60th edition of the MSC in 2024 attracted over 500 high-level participants, including 45 heads of state and government, reaffirming Germany’s position as a crucial platform for candid dialogue on pressing security issues, even amidst heightened geopolitical tensions (World Tourism Organization, 2023).
France’s Global Governance Leadership: France’s Paris Peace Forum illustrates how established powers use conferences to promote their vision of global governance. The forum’s consistent emphasis on multilateral solutions, international cooperation, and strengthening of international institutions reflects France’s long-standing commitment to a rule-based international order and its desire to shape global norms (López-Santana, 2020).
By contrast, emerging powers demonstrate different strategic approaches, typically emphasizing economic integration, domestic transformation, and the assertion of regional leadership through conference platforms. Their strategies often directly link conference outcomes to national development objectives (Zhang, 2021; Boao Forum for Asia, 2024; Alshammari, 2023; Saudi Press Agency, 2024).
China’s Connectivity Diplomacy: China’s strategic use of the Boao Forum for Asia (BFA) exemplifies how emerging powers leverage conferences to promote policy initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) (Zhang, 2021). The BFA’s contribution to advancing the BRI reflects a nuanced blend of conference diplomacy and broader strategic objectives of economic integration and global influence. For example, the 2024 session enabled the signing of trade and investment agreements estimated at over $150 billion, highlighting how such events yield concrete economic outcomes that further national development aims to achieve while expanding the international sway (Boao Forum for Asia, 2024).
Saudi Arabia’s strategy for leveraging conferences as instruments of soft power is both comprehensive and intricately aligned with its broader ambitions for economic diversification and societal modernization under Vision 2030. This approach is exemplified by a diverse portfolio of high-profile events, including the Future Investment Initiative (FII), specialized cybersecurity forums, artificial intelligence summits, and major climate conferences, such as the Middle East Green Initiative. Each of these gathering’s functions not only as a platform for international dialogue but also as a deliberate mechanism for projecting Saudi Arabia’s evolving national identity, fostering new global partnerships, and attracting foreign direct investment (Alshammari, 2023; Future Investment Initiative Institute, n.d.; Saudi Press Agency, 2024; Vision 2030, 2024). Saudi Arabia’s ambitious goals for developing its conference industry are evidenced by its stated objective of hosting 1,000 international conferences annually, with the intention of generating $25 billion in revenue (Saudi Press Agency, 2024). This aggressive expansion was designed to position the Kingdom as a central convener in critical domains, including finance, technology, and sustainability, thus reinforcing its relevance and stature on the global stage. Furthermore, the integration of conference diplomacy with the nation’s economic policies demonstrates a nuanced understanding of soft power. By attracting thought leaders, policymakers, and industry pioneers, the country aims to influence regional and international agendas while rebranding itself as a progressive, forward-thinking actor in international affairs (Vision 2030, 2024). Through these multifaceted efforts, Saudi Arabia seeks not only to stimulate domestic growth and diversify away from oil dependency but also to reshape perceptions and establish itself as an indispensable hub for global collaboration and policy innovation (Future Investment Initiative Institute, n.d.; Saudi Press Agency, 2024). This deliberate fusion of conference hosting and soft power projection reflects an evolving model of international engagement that prioritizes both tangible economic outcomes and the subtle, enduring influence of reputation and connectivity (Saudi Press Agency, 2024; Vision 2030, 2024).
Policy Innovation and Agenda-Setting: Conferences serve as laboratories for policy innovation, bringing together diverse perspectives to address complex global challenges. Participants described how conferences enabled policy experimentation, norm development, and consensus building around emerging issues. This function is particularly important for issues that lack established institutional frameworks or that require multi-stakeholder coordination. The agenda-setting power of conferences extends beyond immediate participants to influence broader policy discussions through media coverage, the publication of conference proceedings, and follow-up initiatives. Major conferences often produce declarations, frameworks, or action plans that shape subsequent policy development at national and international levels.
Economic Signaling and Investment Attraction: Economic conferences and business forums serve dual functions such as networking venues and investment signaling mechanisms. Countries use these platforms to attract foreign direct investment, promote trade relationships, and showcase economic opportunities. The presence of high-level political figures at business conferences signals a government commitment to specific sectors or partnerships. The economic dimension of conference diplomacy has become increasingly sophisticated, with countries developing comprehensive strategies to integrate business promotion with broader diplomatic objectives. These efforts can be measured through investment commitments, trade agreements, and partnership announcements that emerge from conference participation.
Digital Transformation Impact: The digital transformation of conferences has created new possibilities for soft power projection while introducing challenges related to access and authenticity. Virtual and hybrid formats have democratized participation by reducing costs and travel barriers, thus enabling broader international engagement. However, participants noted that digital formats struggle to replicate the relationship-building and cultural-exchange aspects of in-person events. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated digital adoption, forcing rapid innovation in virtual conference formats. Organizations have experimented with immersive technologies, AI-powered networking, and asynchronous engagement models. While these innovations expanded, they also highlighted digital divides that excluded participants without adequate technological access.
Key Findings
This study confirms that informal, networked interactions at conferences are pivotal to soft power, enabling trust-based cooperation and policy diffusion (Hamilton & Langhorne, 2011; Cull, 2019). Hybridization democratizes access and reduces costs/emissions, but can underperform on serendipitous networking compared to in-person formats (Achakulvisut et al., 2020; Klöwer et al., 2020; Manor, 2019). National image projection is achieved by curating cultural narratives, showcasing innovation, and leading to global issues (Nye, 2004; Peterson, 2022). Inclusivity barriers—financial, logistical, and digital—require intentional mitigation (ITU 2023). Growing emphasis on the governance of emerging technologies and AI reveals conferences as arenas for norm formation and standard setting (UNESCO, 2022; OECD, 2021).
The findings revealed five key mechanisms through which conferences operate as soft power instruments, each with distinct characteristics and effectiveness under different conditions. These mechanisms are not mutually exclusive, but operate simultaneously, creating synergistic effects that amplify the overall soft power impact.
Interpretation of Data: Conferences operationalize soft power through five key mechanisms: (1) informal networking, (2) cultural showcasing, (3) idea leadership, (4) economic signaling, and (5) coalition building. These mechanisms are mutually reinforcing and context dependent. The digital turn expands reach and participation but changes interaction quality and raises equity and security considerations (Hocking & Melissen, 2015; Achakulvisut et al., 2020; ITU, 2023). Geopolitical tensions can overshadow outcomes; conflict-sensitive design and facilitation can help preserve convening value in polarized environments (Munich Security Conference, 2024).
Table 12.
Soft Power Mechanisms in International Conferences.
| Mechanism | Operating Principle | Observable Effects | Strategic Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Informal networking | Trust-building via personal ties | Partnerships; de-escalation | High—durable relationships |
| Cultural showcasing | Attraction via narratives/heritage | Image gains; tourism spillovers | Medium–high—shapes perceptions |
| Idea leadership | Influence via thought leadership | Policy uptake; norm diffusion | High—agenda-setting/norm diffusion |
| Economic signaling | Signaling opportunities | Investment/trade partnerships | Medium—tangible benefits |
| Coalition-building | Issue-based alliances | Multilateral cooperation | High—amplifies influence |
Source: Compiled from analysis following theoretical frameworks by Cull (2019); Hamilton & Langhorne (2011); Nye (2004).
Data interpretation reveals complex interactions between these mechanisms, with their effectiveness varying based on conference design, participant composition, geopolitical context, and technological format. The most successful conferences strategically combine multiple mechanisms while adapting to the contextual constraints and opportunities.
Discussion
The findings of this study underscore that convening power has become a central modality through which soft power can be exercised in a complex international system. The discussion examines the strategic implications of these findings and their broader significance in international relations and diplomatic practices.
Strategic Implications of Conference-Based Soft Power: The emergence of conferences as central instruments of soft power reflects broader changes in international relations, including the proliferation of actors, complex interdependence of global challenges, and increasing importance of legitimacy and attraction in international influence. This study has several strategic implications emerge from this analysis.
Networked diplomacy at scale: Conferences create structured opportunities for repeated interactions among diverse actors, facilitating trust, social learning, and policy diffusion beyond formal negotiation rooms (Hamilton & Langhorne, 2011; Cull, 2019). These ties can underpin minilateral coalitions and coalitions-of-the-willing that advance cooperation despite gridlock in formal institutions, particularly in climate and technology governance (UNFCCC, 2022; UNESCO, 2022). The networking function of conferences has proven particularly valuable for addressing complex global challenges that require coordination among multiple stakeholders. For example, climate governance relies heavily on network relationships developed through successive COP conferences to maintain momentum between formal negotiation sessions (Bäckstrand & Lövbrand, 2019).
Hybridization as a durable feature: the normalization of hybrid events increases reach, reduces costs and emissions, and supports the inclusion of under-represented groups (Achakulvisut et al., 2020; Klöwer et al., 2020). However, it can create a two-speed participation dynamic in which in-person attendees accrue more serendipitous benefits, and time zone, bandwidth, and platform differences stratify engagement (Manor, 2019; ITU, 2023). Purposeful design, such as dedicated virtual networking, asynchronous content, and equitable Q&A moderation, can mitigate these disparities. The hybrid model represents a fundamental shift in conference diplomacy that extends beyond pandemic-era adaptation. Organizations are developing sophisticated strategies that leverage the strengths of both virtual and in-person engagement, while minimizing the weaknesses of each format.
Public–private convergence: The rise of multi-stakeholder platforms reflects the diffusion of governance authority and expertise. Business events and summits double in diplomatic stages, supporting economic signaling while shaping policy frames (Peterson, 2022). This produces opportunities for co-governance and resource pooling but also raises accountability and legitimacy questions that require transparent rules of engagement.
The blurring of boundaries between public and private diplomacy has created new opportunities for influence, while raising questions about democratic accountability and representation in global governance processes.
Norm entrepreneurship and standard setting: Global debates on AI ethics, cyber norms, and platform governance show that conferences are incubators of soft law and standards (OECD, 2021; UNESCO, 2022; Munich Security Conference, 2024). These foras enable norm entrepreneurship by states, firms, and civil society through policy papers, declarations, and technical working groups, a form of agenda-setting soft power that can prefigure formal treaties. The norm-setting function of conferences has become increasingly important as traditional treaty-making processes struggle to keep pace with technological and social changes. Conferences provide more flexible and inclusive venues for developing governance frameworks to address emerging issues.
Sustainability and risk management: The conference sector faces a sustainability imperative. Evidence has shown that restructured event formats can dramatically reduce the carbon footprint of participation (Klöwer et al., 2020). Simultaneously, digitization brings cybersecurity, privacy, and mis/disinformation risks into the convening environment (Munich Security Conference, 2024). Organizers should embed environmental standards and digital risk governance protocols.
Geopolitical headwinds and conflict sensitivity: In periods of geopolitical tension and sanctions regimes, convening risk politicization, selective participation, or parallel blocs. Conflict-sensitive design—neutral facilitation, issue-based tracks, Chatham House rules where appropriate—can preserve space for problem-solving and technical cooperation even amid rivalry (Hamilton & Langhorne, 2011; Munich Security Conference, 2024).
Inclusion by design: Digital divide and cost barriers limit participation from the Global South and smaller institutions. Funded participation, translation services, time-zone rotation, and mentorship support can expand voice and improve knowledge circulation, thus enhancing both the legitimacy and effectiveness of conference diplomacy (Manor, 2019; UNESCO, 2022).
Table 13.
Strategic Value Assessment of Conference Diplomacy.
| Dimension | Traditional Diplomacy | Conference Diplomacy | Comparative Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Relationship building | Formal, hierarchical | Informal, networked | More effective for trust-building |
| Cost efficiency | High | Moderate | Lower marginal costs |
| Reach and scale | Limited, bilateral | Extensive, multilateral | Greater participation |
| Cultural exchange | Structured, limited | Organic, extensive | Expanded cultural interaction |
| Policy innovation | Slow, bureaucratic | Dynamic, collaborative | Faster agenda iteration |
| Public engagement | Minimal | Significant | Greater public visibility |
Note: Comparative advantages are generalized from the literature and industry evidence; actual effect sizes vary by context. Source: Compiled from Hamilton & Langhorne (2011); Hocking & Melissen (2015); ICCA (2022); Manor (2019); Munich Security Conference (2024).
Implications of Findings for Theory and Practice: The findings have significant implications for both the theoretical understanding of soft power and practical approaches to conference diplomacy. This research contributes to soft power theory by demonstrating how convening power operates as a distinct mechanism of influence that combines the elements of attraction, agenda-setting, and relationship-building.
Theoretical contributions: This study extends Nye's (2004) soft power framework by identifying the specific mechanisms by which attraction translates into influence in conference settings. These findings support theories of complex interdependence by demonstrating how multiple channels of communication and interaction create possibilities for cooperation, even in competitive international environments.
Practical implications: The findings suggest several key priorities for policymakers and conference organizers: (a) relationship facilitation and coalition building, (b) hybrid participation equity, (c) integrated cultural programming, (d) inclusion of funds and translation, and (e) sustainability and digital-risk governance. Measure frameworks for convening impact, integrating quantitative and qualitative indicators, can support learning and accountability.
Table 14.
Policy Implications and Strategic Recommendations.
| Finding | Policy Implication | Strategic Recommendation | Expected Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Informal networks are crucial | Invest in relationship facilitation | Structured networking programs and follow-ups | Stronger cooperation |
| Digital divide in participation | Address capacity and access | Provide digital participation support | Greater inclusion |
| Cultural programming matters | Integrate cultural diplomacy | Curate cultural content aligned to objectives | Enhanced image and understanding |
| Small nation marginalization | Ensure equitable representation | Establish participation funds and quotas | More diverse voices |
| Language barriers persist | Provide multilingual access | Deploy high-quality interpretation/AI tools | Enhanced engagement |
Source: Compiled from analysis informed by Hocking & Melissen (2015); ICCA (2022); ITU (2023); UNESCO (2022).
Comparison with Existing Literature: The findings align with Nye's soft power framework by demonstrating attraction and agenda-setting through convening (Nye, 2004) and with the emphasis of complex interdependence on multiple channels of interaction (Keohane & Nye, 2011). New public diplomacy scholarship anticipates the networked, multi-actor nature of contemporary conferences (Melissen, 2005; Zaharna, 2010; Snow, 2020). The digital diplomacy literature (Hocking & Melissen, 2015; Manor, 2019) aligns with the evidence of hybridization and its effects. This study emphasizes sustainability, digital risks, and the consolidation of non-Western convening hubs, thus extending the geography and modalities of conference diplomacy. The findings also contribute to the understanding of how soft power operates in multipolar systems, where multiple actors compete to set agendas and shape norms.
Table 15.
Comparison with Major Theoretical Frameworks.
| Theoretical Framework | Key Tenets | Study Findings | New Contributions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nye's soft power (2004) | Attraction over coercion | Conferences as attractive forums | Sustainability and digital risk |
| Keohane & Nye's interdependence (2011) | Multiple channels of interaction | Conferences as Transnational channels | Hybrid equity challenges |
| New public diplomacy (2005–) | Networked influence and multi-actor governance | Informal networks and multi-actor governance | Inclusion-by-design practices |
| Digital diplomacy (2015–2019) | Tech transforms diplomatic practice | Hybridization reshapes formats | Measurement and impact frameworks |
Source: Compiled from Hocking & Melissen (2015); Keohane & Nye (2011); Manor (2019); Melissen (2005); Nye (2004); Snow (2020).
The findings confirm and extend existing theoretical frameworks. While confirming the basic mechanisms of soft power and complex interdependence, this research reveals new challenges and opportunities created by digital transformation and changing geopolitical contexts.
Conclusions
International seminars and conferences are no longer peripheral to diplomacy; they are core engines of soft power in a fragmented and rapidly changing world. This qualitative study shows how convenings foster intercultural dialogue, trust-based networks, policy learning, and economic signalingmechanisms that translate attraction into influence (Nye, 2004; Cull, 2019). The hybridization of convenings has expanded the reach and reduced barriers and emissions (Achakulvisut et al., 2020; Klöwer et al., 2020), even as new design practices are required to safeguard equity, interaction quality, and digital security (Hocking & Melissen, 2015; ITU, 2023).
This research demonstrates that conference diplomacy has evolved from a supplementary tool of international relations to a central mechanism for exercising soft power in the twenty-first century. This evolution reflects broader changes in the international system, including the proliferation of actors, complexity of global challenges, and increasing importance of legitimacy and attraction in international influence.
Key Contributions and Future Directions: This study makes several key contributions to the understanding of conference-based soft power. First, it identifies and analyzes five specific mechanisms through which conferences influence soft power resources: informal networking, cultural showcasing, idea leadership, economic signaling, and coalition building. Second, it examines how digital transformation has altered these mechanisms, creating new opportunities for inclusion and introducing challenges related to equity and authenticity. Third, it provides evidence-based recommendations for optimizing conference designs to maximize soft power effectiveness while addressing sustainability and inclusive concerns. Geopolitical headwinds underscore the need for conflict-sensitive designs that preserve issue-based co-operation. The rise of convening hubs in Asia and the Middle East signals a more multipolar convening landscape, with implications for agenda leadership and norm entrepreneurship (Shambaugh, 2021; Young, 2022). Sustainability commitments should be mainstreamed in event strategies to align conferences with climate goals while maintaining the benefits of in-person engagement when most impactful (Klöwer et al., 2020; UNFCCC, 2022).
Practical Recommendations and Implementation: For policymakers and organizers, the path forward includes embedding equity in hybrid participation, investing in relationship facilitation, integrating cultural programming, adopting sustainability standards, and instituting robust impact measurement. This study provides a comprehensive framework for implementing such recommendations through strategic planning, resource allocation, and performance monitoring.
The implementation of these recommendations requires coordination among multiple stakeholders, including government agencies, international organizations, private sector partners, and civil society groups. Success depends on developing shared standards and best practices while allowing flexibility for context-specific adaptation.
Scholarly Implications and Future Research: Future research should examine longitudinal network effects, equity outcomes across formats and regions, and governance of digital risks in convening environments. This study opens several avenues for future investigation, including comparative analysis of different conference types, measurement of long-term soft power impacts, and examination of how artificial intelligence and emerging technologies might further transform conference diplomacy.
The scholarly implications extend beyond diplomatic studies to include contributions to international relations theory, public policy analysis, and organizational behavior. The interdisciplinary nature of conference diplomacy requires continued collaboration among scholars from multiple fields in order to fully understand its mechanisms and effects. As diplomatic practices continue to evolve, conferences will remain pivotal arenas where ideas, cultures, and multi-stakeholder visions intersect, advancing cooperation, shaping norms, and extending the reach of soft power. The continued evolution of conference diplomacy requires ongoing research and analysis to understand emerging trends and optimize outcomes for global cooperation and peace.
Recommendations
To harness conferences as soft power tools, this study proposes a comprehensive framework of strategic recommendations organized into five key dimensions: inclusivity enhancement, digital integration, strategic planning, cultural integration, and evaluation systems.
Table 16.
Comprehensive Strategic Recommendations Framework.
| Recommendation Category | Specific Actions | Implementation Timeline | Success Metrics |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inclusivity enhancement | - Participation funds<br>- Visa facilitation<br>- Translation services<br>- Mentorship programs | 6–12 months | - Increased Global South participation<br>- More diverse speakers<br>- More multilingual sessions |
| Digital integration | - Hybrid standards<br>- VR/AR pilots<br>- Digital networking<br>- Cybersecurity protocols | 12–18 months | - Widespread hybrid adoption<br>- Higher satisfaction with digital tools |
| Strategic planning | - Align with soft power goals<br>- Multi-year strategies<br>- Impact assessment<br>- Cross-ministry coordination | 3–6 months | - Clear ROI and policy influence |
| Cultural integration | - Curated cultural components<br>- Showcase innovation<br>- Immersive experiences | Ongoing | - Improved cultural understanding<br>- Enhanced agreements and image metrics |
| Evaluation systems | - Real-time feedback<br>- Longitudinal studies<br>- Soft power metrics<br>- Best-practice database | 6–9 months | - Evidence-based improvements<br>- Greater efficiency |
Source: Compiled from analysis informed by Hocking & Melissen (2015); ICCA (2022); ITU (2023); Klöwer et al. (2020); Manor (2019); UNFCCC (2022); UNESCO (2022); WHO (2021).
These recommendations provide a roadmap for enhancing the soft power effectiveness of international conferences, while addressing contemporary challenges related to inclusivity, sustainability, and digital transformation. Implementation requires coordinated effort among multiple stakeholders and a sustained commitment to learning and adaptation.
Finding
The study received no specific financial support.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable
Transparency
The author confirms that the manuscript is an honest, accurate and transparent account of the study that no vital features of the study have been omitted and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained. This study followed all ethical practices during writing.
Conflict of Interest declaration
The authors declare that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
References
- Achakulvisut, T., Ruangrong, T., Bilgin, I., Van Den Bossche, S., Wyble, B., Goodman, D.F.M., & Kording, K.P. (2020). Improving on legacy conferences by moving online. eLife, 9, Article e57892. [CrossRef]
- Adler-Nissen, R. (2014). The power of diplomacy. Princeton University Press.
- Bäckstrand, K., & Lövbrand, E. (2019). The road to Paris: Contending climate governance discourses in the post-Copenhagen era. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 21(5), 519-536. [CrossRef]
- Bjola, C. (2021). Digital diplomacy and international organisations: Autonomy, legitimacy and contestation. Routledge.
- Bjola, C., & Holmes, M. (Eds.). (2015). Digital diplomacy: Theory and practice. Routledge. [CrossRef]
- Bowen, G.A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. [CrossRef]
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. [CrossRef]
- Creswell, J.W., & Poth, C.N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. ISBN: 9781506330204.
- Cull, N.J. (2019). Public diplomacy: Foundations for global engagement in the digital age. Polity Press. ISBN: 9781509530793.
- Events Industry Council. (2022). Global economic significance of business events 2.0. Oxford Economics. https://www.eventscouncil.org/initiatives/global-economic-impact.
- Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. ISBN: 9781446267790.
- 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. [CrossRef]
- Hamilton, K., & Langhorne, R. (2011). The practice of diplomacy: Its evolution, theory and administration (2nd ed.). Routledge.
- Hocking, B., & Melissen, J. (2015). Diplomacy in the digital age. Netherlands Institute of International Relations 'Clingendael'. https://www.clingendael.org/publication/diplomacy-digital-age.
- International Congress and Convention Association. (2022). ICCA statistics report 2022: Country & city rankings. https://www.iccaworld.org/knowledge/article.cfm?ItemNumber=37502.
- International Telecommunication Union. (2023). Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2023. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/facts/default.aspx.
- Keohane, R.O., & Nye, J.S. (2011). Power and interdependence (4th ed.). Longman. ISBN: 9780205082919.
- Klöwer, M., Hopkins, D., Allen, M., & Higham, J. (2020). An analysis of ways to decarbonize conference travel after COVID-19. Nature, 583(7816), 356–359. [CrossRef]
- Manor, I. (2019). The digitalization of public diplomacy. Palgrave Macmillan. [CrossRef]
- Maxwell, J.A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. ISBN: 9781412981194.
- Melissen, J. (Ed.). (2005). The new public diplomacy: Soft power in international relations. Palgrave Macmillan. [CrossRef]
- Munich Security Conference. (2024). Munich security report 2024: Lose-lose?. https://securityconference.org/en/publications/munich-security-report-2024/.
- Neuman, W.L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Pearson. ISBN: 9780205899463.
- Nye, J.S. (1990). Bound to lead: The changing nature of American power. Basic Books. ISBN: 9780465007288.
- Nye, J.S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. PublicAffairs. ISBN: 9781586483067.
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). OECD principles on artificial intelligence. https://oecd.ai/en/ai-principles.
- Peterson, J. (2022). Global governance and multi-stakeholder diplomacy. International Affairs, 98(4), 1157-1175. [CrossRef]
- Saudi Press Agency. (2024, March 14). SCEGA's CEO: We aim to attract over 1,000 international conferences annually by 2030. https://www.spa.gov.sa/en/N1150171.
- Sending, O.J. (2022). The politics of expertise: Competing for authority in global governance. University of Michigan Press.
- Shambaugh, D. (2021). China's leaders: From Mao to now. Polity Press. ISBN: 9781509528257.
- Snow, N. (2020). Routledge handbook of public diplomacy (2nd ed.). Routledge.
- United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2022). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381137.
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (2022). Technical synthesis of the first global stocktake. https://unfccc.int/documents/619180.
- Vision 2030. (2024). Vision 2030: Transforming the Kingdom through strategic conferences and international engagement. Saudi Vision 2030 Office. https://www.vision2030.gov.sa/.
- World Economic Forum. (2023). The global risks report 2023 (18th ed.). https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-risks-report-2023.
- World Health Organization. (2021). COVID-19 strategic preparedness and response plan: 2021 update. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-WHE-2021.02.
- World Travel & Tourism Council. (2023). Economic impact reports. https://wttc.org/research/economic-impact.
- Young, K. (2022). Middle power diplomacy in the Gulf: The UAE's strategic engagement. International Affairs, 98(2), 583-601. [CrossRef]
- Zaharna, R.S. (2010). Battles to bridges: U.S. strategic communication and public diplomacy after 9/11. Palgrave Macmillan. [CrossRef]
Short Biography of Author
Dr. Safran Safar Almakaty is renowned for his extensive contributions to the fields of communication, media studies and Higher Education, particularly within Saudi Arabia and the broader Middle East. Serving as a Professor at Imam Mohammad ibn Saud Islamic University (IMSIU) in Riyadh, Dr. Almakaty has played a pivotal role in shaping the academic discourse around media transformation and international communication. Holding a Master of Arts degree from Michigan State University and a PhD from the University of Kentucky, Dr. Almakaty brings a robust interdisciplinary perspective to his research and teaching. His scholarly work explores the dynamics of media evolution in the region, analyzing how new technologies, global trends, and sociopolitical forces are reshaping public discourse and information exchange.
Beyond academia, Dr. Almakaty is a sought-after consultant on communication strategy, corporate communications, and international relations, advising government agencies, corporate entities, and non-profit organizations. His expertise includes the development of higher education policies, focusing on the intersection of media literacy, digital transformation, and educational reform.
Dr. Almakaty's research spans a range of topics, from the impact of hybrid conference formats on diplomatic effectiveness to the role of strategic conferences in advancing Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 initiatives. He has published widely in peer-reviewed journals, contributed to international forums, and collaborated on cross-cultural research projects, positioning himself as a bridge between regional scholarship and global thought leadership.
As an educator, Dr. Almakaty is deeply committed to mentoring the next generation of scholars and practitioners, fostering an environment of inquiry, innovation, and academic excellence. He continues to influence the landscape of media and communication, championing initiatives that promote international engagement, effective public diplomacy, and the modernization of knowledge institutions throughout the Middle East.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
