Small States in a New Era of Public Diplomacy: New Zealand and Digital Diplomacy

  • Natalia Chaban
  • Serena KellyEmail author
  • Anne-Marie Brady
Part of the The World of Small States book series (WSS, volume 6)


The power of digital technology to shape the world in the twenty-first century is undeniable. States and non-state actors use digital tools in order to compete for international attention, attract partners, gain legitimacy and secure influence. In the quest to project an image of an attractive, credible and capable actor on the global stage, diplomats are increasingly utilising digital diplomacy. Digital diplomacy has a potential to reach sizeable audiences in a rapid and cost-effective manner, making it very attractive for small states with limited resources to project their voice and influence internationally. The growth of digital diplomacy is intertwined with globalization, technological and informational change. This chapter explores New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s (MFAT) approach to digital diplomacy through the use of social media. We define digital diplomacy as a form of public diplomacy that involves the use of digital technologies and social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and Wechat by states to enter into communication with foreign publics in a low cost manner. Digital diplomacy covers with a wide range of issues including foreign affairs, consular matters, security, trade and tourism.


  1. Adesina O (2017) Foreign policy in an Era of digital diplomacy. Cogent Soc Sci 3(1):10Google Scholar
  2. Chaban N, Miskimmon A, O’Loughlin B (2017) The EU’s peace and security narrative: views from EU strategic partners in Asia. J Common Mark Stud 55(6):1273–1289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cowan G, Arsenault A (2008) Moving from monologue to dialogue to collaboration: the three layers of public diplomacy. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 616(1)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Goetschel L (ed) (1998) Small states inside and outside the European Union. Kluwer Academic, London, p 15Google Scholar
  5. Grant R (2004) The democratisation of diplomacy: negotiating with the internet (research report no. 5). Oxford Internet Institute, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Hallahan K, Holtzhausen D, van Ruler B, Verčič D, Sriramesh K (2007) Defining strategic communication. Int J Strateg Commun 1(1):3–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ivor Roberts S (2017) Satow’s diplomatic practice, 7th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 556Google Scholar
  8. McDowell M (2008) Public diplomacy at the crossroads: definitions and challenges in an ‘Open Source’ era. Fletcher Forum World Aff 32(3):7–8Google Scholar
  9. Miskimmon A, O’Loughlin B, Roselle L (2013) Strategic narratives: communication power and the new world order. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Missiroli A (2007) Introduction: a tale of two pillars – and an arch. In: Avery G (ed) The EU foreign service: how to build a more effective common policy (EPC working paper no. 28). European Policy Centre, Brussels, p 20Google Scholar
  11. Permyakova L (2012) Digital diplomacy: areas of work, risks and tools. Russian International Affairs Council.
  12. Sillanpää A (2015) Strategic communications and need for societal narratives. NATO Stratcom Centre of Excellence. Accessed 8 Nov 2018
  13. Westcott N (2008) Digital diplomacy: the impact of the internet on international relations (research report 16). Oxford Internet Institute, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Yakovenko A (2012) Russian digital diplomacy: clicking through. Russia Beyond.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Natalia Chaban
    • 1
  • Serena Kelly
    • 2
    Email author
  • Anne-Marie Brady
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand
  2. 2.University of Canterbury, National Centre for Research on EuropeChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations