Knowledge Diplomacy in the Asia‐Pacific: Three Evaluative Criteria

ABSTRACT Jane Knight's definition of knowledge diplomacy is deliberately generic, designed to apply across diverse geopolitical contexts and sectors. Knight's framework identifies reciprocity and mutuality as core values, and her subsequent reflection highlights an important risk: ‘Social washing,’ in which partnerships adopt the language of shared commitment while falling short in practice. Building on this foundation, we propose reciprocity, mutual benefit, and relational continuity as evaluative criteria. Drawing primarily on examples from the Asia‐Pacific, we examine the institutional work required to sustain these qualities. We argue that these qualities do not arise automatically, even under favourable geopolitical conditions, and that various actors must coordinate to build and maintain knowledge diplomacy. Sustainability rests on this ongoing work, while solidarity involves sharing authority, resources, and risk. We invite scholars to use emerging technologies and new data sources to investigate whether and how international higher education, research, and innovation partnerships strengthen relations between countries.