Diplomacy reloaded : exploring new frontiers for sustainable development goals through diplomacies required by United Nations (UN) Resident Coordinator Office (RCO) Heads : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Master of Arts in Psychology at Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand (via distance). EMBARGOED until 18th February 2025.
Loading...
Date
2024
DOI
Open Access Location
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Massey University
Rights
The author
Abstract
Through the advent of United Nations (UN) Human Development Goals, the 21st century has witnessed an uptick in the importance of multilateral diplomacy. However, research has not yet explored the everyday multilateral diplomacy challenges faced, and relatedly skills required, by senior UN workers at work. In theory, these could be Machiavellian (Old), Psychological (Mass Persuasion and Political skills), or New Diplomacies (from Humanitarian Work Psychology). Employing an inductive qualitative social constructionist approach, alongside Flannigan’s Critical Incident Technique (CIT), a total of nine resident Coordinator Office (RCO) Heads were interviewed about the diplomacies they needed to have in their daily high-level UN work. Qualitative analysis was carried out through MAXQDA2022 software, with built in tabulation processes, aided in reliable and valid critical incident content analysis. MAXQDA2022 allowed a systematic and structured approach for identifying and creating clearly defined code categories based on the research objectives, theoretical frameworks and emergent themes across the data. CIT facilitated through an inductive qualitative (social constructionist) descriptive phenomenological approach. The lens from the chosen approach being, ‘transcendental reflexivity,’ wherein researchers acknowledged themselves as an additional instrument within the research, in order to account for and consider how their own pre-conceived biases and ideas may influence the research. This will, in turn, allow for improved assurances of the reliability and validity of the data. As a result, four prominent critical diplomacy meta-challenges emerged (discussed, further within introduction): 1. Countermanding in-country resource constraints, 2. Maintaining RCO work-life balance, 3. Misalignment with United Nations itself: Structurally (i.e., bureaucratic), Historically (i.e., country has negative collective memory of UN intervention) or politically (i.e., country has non-democratic governance, misaligned to the UN’s democratic governance).. 4. Navigating unfamiliar environmental: adaption difficulties or hostile work dynamic difficulties in a development partners country placement. The findings revealed instances of diplomacy-solutions from all scopes investigated (separate from the amalgamation of old and psychological)and one never before considered ‘emerging diplomacy’ old and psychological. The discussion revealed in the summary of each meta-theme solutions, that depending on the specific challenges, associated with each meta-theme and resulting sub-themes, different diplomacy-solutional scopes were more or less effective than the other. The ideological mapping of interviewees diplomacy scope placements revealed that there was a link between interviewees ideological diplomacy scope placement and diplomacy scope action that they chose. As seven out of the 10 interviewees were fully within the new diplomacies scope (with three additional in-scope new diplomacies areas of conflict), in instances where solely psychological or solely old diplomacies was actioned (and not already amalgamated) they typically followed or were preceded by a new diplomacy solution, revealing a process that amalgamated the solutions. Emphasizing the pro-social impact of new diplomacies, as was the intention of the diplomat. Furthermore the only instance where a solution from a diplomatic scope’s intention wasn’t entirely for new diplomacies goals, was where “psychological” and “new” were conducted by the two interviewees within that scope, or in the case of the singular diplomat from “emerging.” 7 out of the 10 interviewees were placed fully within the new diplomacies scope. Two interviewees were within the psychological and new scope, while one was within the never before considered scope of emerging diplomacies (i.e emerging from new). As there is evidence of a link between the diplomacy ideology and diplomacy action of a diplomat, and some diplomacy-solutions are only able to be actioned by diplomats from certain ideological scope placements, there reveals a need for multiple perspectives and placements from the varying scopes with some link to new diplomacies (due to its pro social nature, to handle different difficulties). The limitations of this study consisted of the following; (a) hand-picked interviewees (b) missed opportunities (c)lost transcripts and (d)gender. Therefore improvements to minimise similar limitations in future research could be as follows: follow up interviews, practice and upskill of interviewing style prior to conducting interviews, and to face mistakes as the researcher, with accountability and reflection in line with transcendental reflexivity.
Description
EMBARGOED until 18th February 2025.