Cyber diplomacy as networked securitisation: an empirically grounded framework

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop an empirically grounded framework of cyber diplomacy. In the modern era, conflicts have moved online, challenging the suitability of traditional diplomatic frameworks for this new context. While the dimensions and practices of traditional diplomacy are well-established, a clear need for the discipline of cyber diplomacy to be developed so that it can play a role in de-escalating conflicts caused by cyber aggressions with distinctive features, such as speed, anonymity and attribution challenges. Design/methodology/approach The authors interviewed 42 experts across multiple countries and qualitatively analysed their responses to identify the key components that underpin a conceptual model of cyber diplomacy. Findings This study’s analysis suggested that cyber diplomacy requires adaptation of existing frameworks and incorporation of novel elements to address the unique dynamics of cyber conflict. This study concludes with a reflection on how the model could move the field towards maturity and help cyber diplomacy to fulfil its key role in de-escalating global cyber conflicts. Research limitations/implications The derived conceptual framework is exploratory, and the authors are aware it may not fully capture the complexity or diversity of cyber diplomatic practices. Interviews provide rich, qualitative insights. However, they also convey the perceptions of respondents, in this case experts in cyber diplomacy. Therefore, interview data is subjective and shaped by the experiences and also by potential biases of the participants. Probably a much wider use of natural documents would be relevant to future research, as it was done with the collection of 53 secondary documents for additional insights. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study provides one of the first empirically grounded conceptual models of cyber diplomacy based on cross-national expert insights. By systematically distinguishing cyber diplomacy from traditional diplomacy while integrating relevant diplomatic theory, it contributes a theoretical foundation for an emerging field. The model advances scholarly understanding and offers practical guidance for policymakers and practitioners seeking to institutionalise cyber diplomacy. In doing so, it supports the maturation of the field and enhances the capacity of cyber diplomats to manage and de-escalate interstate cyber tensions more effectively.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Information and Computer Security
Published
2026-09-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/ics-03-2026-0107
Primary Topic
Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Cyber diplomacy as networked securitisation: an empirically grounded framework

Amel Attatfa, Jacques Ophoff, Stefano De Paoli, Karen Renaud
Information and Computer Security
Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
article

Cyber diplomacy as networked securitisation: an empirically grounded framework

Amel Attatfa, Jacques Ophoff, Stefano De Paoli, Karen Renaud
article en

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop an empirically grounded framework of cyber diplomacy. In the modern era, conflicts have moved online, challenging the suitability of traditional diplomatic frameworks for this new context. While the dimensions and practices of traditional diplomacy are well-established, a clear need for the discipline of cyber diplomacy to be developed so that it can play a role in de-escalating conflicts caused by cyber aggressions with distinctive features, such as speed, anonymity and attribution challenges. Design/methodology/approach The authors interviewed 42 experts across multiple countries and qualitatively analysed their responses to identify the key components that underpin a conceptual model of cyber diplomacy. Findings This study’s analysis suggested that cyber diplomacy requires adaptation of existing frameworks and incorporation of novel elements to address the unique dynamics of cyber conflict. This study concludes with a reflection on how the model could move the field towards maturity and help cyber diplomacy to fulfil its key role in de-escalating global cyber conflicts. Research limitations/implications The derived conceptual framework is exploratory, and the authors are aware it may not fully capture the complexity or diversity of cyber diplomatic practices. Interviews provide rich, qualitative insights. However, they also convey the perceptions of respondents, in this case experts in cyber diplomacy. Therefore, interview data is subjective and shaped by the experiences and also by potential biases of the participants. Probably a much wider use of natural documents would be relevant to future research, as it was done with the collection of 53 secondary documents for additional insights. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study provides one of the first empirically grounded conceptual models of cyber diplomacy based on cross-national expert insights. By systematically distinguishing cyber diplomacy from traditional diplomacy while integrating relevant diplomatic theory, it contributes a theoretical foundation for an emerging field. The model advances scholarly understanding and offers practical guidance for policymakers and practitioners seeking to institutionalise cyber diplomacy. In doing so, it supports the maturation of the field and enhances the capacity of cyber diplomats to manage and de-escalate interstate cyber tensions more effectively.

Information and Computer Security
University of Cape Town (ZA), Rhodes University (ZA), Abertay University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.