China and UNESCO: Cultural Diplomacy and the Shaping of International Status in the 21st Century (2000–2020)-(http://doi.org/10.63386/621255)

Ying Xu ^1,a , Fang Liu ^1,b Yimei Xie ^*,c Yang Wu^2,d

 ¹ School of Marxism, Guangzhou City University of Technology, 510000, Guangdong, China

¹ School of Marxism, Guangzhou College of Commerce, 510000, Guangdong, China

^*School of Marxism, Guangzhou Songtian Polytechnic College, 510000, Guangdong, China

²School of Art and Architecture, Guangzhou Songtian Polytechnic College, 510000, Guangdong, China

^aEmail: xusu752@gmail.com

^bEmail:liufang201316@163.com

^cEmail:Thgzhy2008@126.com

^dEmail:wyty201311@sohu.com

Abstract：With the enhancement of its comprehensive national strength and the deepening of its participation in global governance, China’s role in international organizations has gradually shifted from a “participant” to a “shaper”, and cultural diplomacy has become a key path for it to enhance its national soft power and international image. As one of the world’s most important multilateral governance platforms for culture, UNESCO provides China with a strategic field for institutional intervention and cultural export. The research centers on China’s participation in UNESCO from 2000 to 2020, systematically reviewing the phased evolution of its cultural diplomacy strategy. Through cases such as the joint application for World Heritage status of the Silk Road, the promotion of intangible cultural heritage, and the governance of AI ethics, it explains how China has enhanced its international discourse power and cultural influence by leveraging multilateral mechanisms. Research findings show that China’s cultural diplomacy has achieved remarkable results on the international stage, but it also faces challenges such as discourse competition, cultural misinterpretation, and communication bottlenecks. In response, this study specifically puts forward policy suggestions for enhancing cross-cultural communication capabilities and institutional cultural layout, providing a reference for China’s strategic positioning in global cultural governance in the future.

Keywords: Chinese cultural diplomacy; UNESCO; Soft Power; China’s International Image

1. Introduction

Against the backdrop of the accelerated reshaping of the global governance structure, cultural diplomacy has increasingly become a key dimension in the competition of a country’s comprehensive strength. Compared with traditional military and economic strength, the role of culture in building national identity, shaping international image and expanding international influence is becoming increasingly prominent. Since the 21st century, especially under the impetus of the “going global” strategy and the “Belt and Road Initiative”, China has continuously strengthened institutional interactions with international organizations, relying on multilateralism, and actively expanded its influence in global cultural governance. Among them, UNESCO, as the most representative cultural governance institution within the United Nations system, has become an important platform for China to implement its cultural diplomacy strategy.

Although China’s actions in UNESCO have become increasingly active, demonstrating a significant willingness and commitment to participate in areas such as cultural heritage protection, intangible cultural heritage inheritance, educational cooperation, and ethical issues, systematic analyses of this process by the academic community remain relatively scarce. Especially, how can China utilize the UNESCO platform for multilateral cultural dissemination? What specific role does this process play in the construction of China’s international image and status? There is still a lack of a clear analytical framework and path exploration. This study intends to systematically explain its functional path by integrating theories such as soft power theory and international relations theory. Meanwhile, by sorting out China’s cultural diplomacy practices in UNESCO from 2000 to 2020 and typical cases, this paper reveals its role transformation and influence mechanism in the multilateral cultural diplomacy system, providing certain countermeasures and suggestions for the optimization of China’s cultural diplomacy strategy and the layout of international systems.

2. China’s Cultural Diplomacy Trajectory within UNESCO

Cultural diplomacy is not only a crucial element of a nation’s soft power but also a vital aspect of influence and rule-setting in multilateral institutions. To clearly outline how China has transitioned from simply providing cultural resources to actively shaping multilateral cultural norms, this chapter is structured around four interconnected phases: Cultural Projection, Institutional Embedding, Agenda Leadership, and Status Construction. These stages serve to highlight the key mechanisms and characteristics of China’s cultural diplomacy within UNESCO.

2.1 Cultural Output

Cultural export is the primary link in a country’s cultural diplomacy. It is not only the material carrier of cultural soft power but also a symbolic projection of the country’s intentions. On the UNESCO platform, China has been continuously building a cultural narrative framework with Chinese characteristics by promoting the application for cultural heritage, the protection of intangible cultural heritage, and the dissemination of traditional knowledge and skills. This stage has a dual logic: on the one hand, it meets UNESCO’s institutional demand for a balance between “cultural diversity” and “non-Western knowledge systems”; On the other hand, it is also an active strategy adopted by China to internationalize its national cultural brand and make its soft power perceptible. This kind of output is no longer a single cultural display, but a structural intervention deliberately carried out in response to international cultural governance rules.

2.2 Institutional Embedding

Institutional embedding is a key node for the further deepening of cultural diplomacy. It is reflected in the fact that the state not only “is present” within the system but also attempts to “be present with influence” within it. China’s institutional role in UNESCO has become increasingly prominent, including serving as a member of the Executive Board, actively participating in cultural conventions such as the revision of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, and even becoming a proposer of several global cultural initiatives. This process has enabled China to gradually transform from an advocate of marginal issues to a “co-rule maker” of the cultural agenda. Institutional embedding has endowed China with a larger discourse basis and also means that its cultural diplomacy behavior has begun to possess stronger sustainability and normativity.

2.3 Agenda Leadership

The agenda-leading stage marks a country’s ability to achieve a discourse leap in multilateral platforms. The cultural issues on the UNESCO platform do not arise naturally but are structured products resulting from the competition among multiple forces. In recent years, China has not only promoted the international dissemination of traditional topics such as “Eastern Medicine” and “Confucian culture”, but also actively engaged in emerging global issues, such as the ethics of artificial intelligence and the protection of digital cultural heritage, which are cutting-edge topics. During this process, China has gradually enhanced its dominance in the agenda through bilateral cooperation, regional mechanisms and technical cooperation with the UN Secretariat. This not only reflects the expansion of cultural capabilities but also the institutionalized upgrading of the national knowledge system in the international discourse arena.

2.4 Status Construction

Cultural diplomacy ultimately aims at the perception of status and the construction of identity in the international community. Constructivist theory holds that national status is a kind of social identity, and its acquisition depends on the interaction between external recognition and internal performance. China’s promotion of cultural diplomacy through UNESCO is not merely aimed at the dissemination of soft power at the technical level, but rather hopes to thereby reshape its status as a “cultural power” in the international order. This status construction is reflected not only in the cultural recognition of other countries, but also in the adoption of China’s proposals by the system, the acceptance of cultural values, and the stability of institutional expression capabilities. The multilateral rule field provided by UNESCO offers China the opportunity to participate in global governance as a “cultural advocate”, thereby countering Western discourse hegemony and achieving global consultation on cultural identity.

3. The Evolution of China’s Cultural Diplomacy Strategy and Representative Cases within UNESCO

3.1 Strategic Evolution of China’s Cultural Diplomacy in UNESCO (2000–2020)

In the global multilateral cultural governance system, the cultural diplomacy strategic path carried out by China through UNESCO not only reflects the diplomatic construction process of China’s national identity, but also is the result of the gradual awakening of its global cultural power consciousness. This chapter takes time as the axis, dividing the period from 2000 to 2020 into three stages: the initial embedding period, the institutional participation period, and the agenda shaping period. It systematically analyzes the cultural diplomacy strategies, operational methods, and institutional achievements of each stage, and explores the changes in their roles in the international cultural governance system.

3.1.1 Initial Embedding Phase (2000–2008): Establishing Cultural Visibility through Heritage Nomination

Following China’s accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001 and its successful bid to host the 2008 Beijing Olympics, the early 21st century marked a significant acceleration in its external cultural strategy. Against this backdrop, China began to regard UNESCO as a primary platform for promoting cultural outreach. By adopting a strategy that combined project-based nominations with symbolic cultural representation, China actively advanced the international inscription of its cultural heritage as a means of enhancing both global cultural visibility and recognition of its national identity.

The hallmark of this stage was the use of “cultural projects” as a medium of international discourse expression. Through sustained efforts to nominate World Heritage and Intangible Cultural Heritage items—such as Kunqu Opera, Guqin (ancient zither), and the Silk Roads—China constructed a culturally rich and historically grounded national narrative. This approach served not only to export a cultural identity rooted in historical continuity but also to align with UNESCO’s institutional mandate to promote cultural diversity and amplify non-Western knowledge systems. By engaging UNESCO’s heritage mechanisms, China achieved institutional legitimacy and symbolic recognition in the global cultural system through cultural means.

Table 1: Key Initiatives and Outcomes of China’s Cultural Diplomacy during the Initial Embedding Phase

3.1.2 Institutional Participation Phase (2009–2015): From Peripheral Presence to Institutional Voice

Following its initial phase of cultural presence, China came to recognize that cultural exhibition alone was insufficient for attaining structural influence within the international system. Beginning in 2009, China’s diplomatic strategy toward UNESCO shifted from passive participation to proactive institutional embedding, with an emphasis on deeper involvement in rule-making, resource allocation, and normative construction.

This phase was marked by three notable transformations. First, in terms of institutional positioning, China assumed an increasingly prominent role by serving multiple terms on UNESCO’s Executive Board and the World Heritage Committee, thereby enhancing its presence at key decision-making levels. Second, China demonstrated greater commitment to cultural development assistance by establishing the UNESCO-China Trust Fund, which provided targeted support for heritage protection in developing countries—underscoring China’s emerging role as a cultural donor and partner in global South-South cooperation. Third, China began to contribute more actively to discursive frameworks within UNESCO by promoting narratives such as cultural diversity, dialogue among civilizations, and heritage as a shared human legacy. These discourses sought to align international cultural language with China’s philosophical traditions and strategic interests.

This form of institutional embedding not only expanded China’s influence within UNESCO but also marked a strategic transition: from a passive recipient of cultural norms to an active co-constructor of global cultural rules. By participating in the formation of standards and discourse systems, China began to shape the normative environment of international cultural governance from within.

Table 2: Strategic Features of China’s Cultural Diplomacy during the Institutional Participation Phase

3.1.3 Agenda Shaping Period (2016-2020) : The Leap from narrative intervention to global issue propositions

With the full advancement of the “Belt and Road Initiative” and the continuous enhancement of China’s comprehensive national strength, China’s cultural diplomacy strategy has further evolved from institutional participation to agenda dominance. Since 2016, China’s role in UNESCO has increasingly evolved from a provider of systems to an initiator of issues, and it has been actively shaping the future direction in global cultural governance, entering a period of agenda shaping.

At this stage, China no longer relies solely on traditional cultural heritage as the core medium for its foreign exchanges. Instead, it leverages emerging technologies and global issues to build a more forward-looking system of cultural diplomacy topics. For instance, regarding the ethical issues of artificial intelligence, China has proposed a governance value of “people-oriented”, guiding global governance discussions on the integration of science and technology with humanity. Against the backdrop of digital transformation, China calls for strengthening the institutional protection of digital cultural heritage and promoting the modernization of traditional cultural protection mechanisms. Furthermore, the concept of “global dialogue of Civilizations” advocated by China has gradually evolved from a diplomatic slogan into a practical agenda, integrating into multiple cultural cooperation platforms of UNESCO. This reflects China’s attempt to shape the global cultural cognitive structure through the soft issue of civilization governance. Through the setting of such strategic issues, China has not only gained the leading position in the cultural agenda but also enhanced its structural discourse capacity in the global discourse system.

From the perspective of national behavior, the strategic evolution of cultural diplomacy within UNESCO reflects China’s three aspirations for global cultural governance: visibility, institutionality, and leadership. From the perspective of constructing cultural identity, this process not only reshapes the cultural power of “Chinese culture” in the international community, but also creates space for China to strive for an international status in the new round of global governance reconstruction.

3.2 Typical Cases of China’s Cultural Diplomacy in UNESCO

In the process of China’s cultural diplomacy and the shaping of its international status, through the active participation of the platform of UNESCO, the country’s position in the global cultural governance system has been significantly enhanced. This section explores how China can shape its 21st-century cultural diplomacy strategy and gradually enhance its international status through the UNESCO platform by analyzing three representative cases: the application for cultural heritage status along the Silk Road, the initiative for global civilizational Dialogue, and the promotion of ethical issues related to artificial intelligence.

3.2.1 Application for “Silk Road Cultural Heritage”

Since the beginning of the 21st century, with China’s rise in the global political and economic landscape, cultural diplomacy has gradually become an important tool for enhancing the country’s soft power. Especially in the context of globalization, how to enhance China’s international status through the global sharing and recognition of cultural resources has become a key part of the national strategy. The Silk Road, as a bridge for the exchange of Eastern and Western civilizations, is an important part of Chinese culture and also a breakthrough point for China’s cultural diplomacy. By promoting the application for cultural heritage status along the Silk Road, China aims to enhance its say in global cultural governance, thereby demonstrating its global influence as a major cultural power and facilitating cultural exchanges and protection among countries along the route through multilateral cooperation.

In 2008, after China proposed the application plan for the cultural heritage of the Silk Road, the support of UNESCO became a key factor. The Silk Road is not only a cultural heritage of China, but also an important cultural bond connecting many countries and regions. During this process, China not only actively coordinated cooperation with countries such as Kazakhstan, Pakistan, India and Iran, but also integrated the concepts of “cultural sharing” and “cross-border cooperation” into the joint application. This strategy has promoted the global protection of cultural heritage and also provided an institutionalized framework for cultural cooperation between China and countries along the routes. Ultimately, in 2014, the cultural heritage of the Silk Road was successfully inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List, marking that China’s status in the global cultural heritage field has been internationally recognized. This declaration not only enhanced China’s influence in the global cultural governance system, but also strengthened cultural ties and diplomatic relations with relevant countries through cultural diplomacy.

This case reflects that through the application for cultural heritage projects, China is not only implementing the “going global” strategy of culture, but more importantly, shaping international rules and discourse systems through the global cultural governance platform. According to the theory of “cultural diplomacy”, the application for cultural heritage is not only a form of cultural display, but also promotes the recognition and influence of a country’s culture on the international stage through participation in global governance, formulation of protection standards and cooperation mechanisms. This process demonstrates how a country can transform into a participant and shaper of global cultural rules by actively engaging in multilateral cultural governance.

3.2.2 “Global Civilization Dialogue” Initiative

As China’s international status gradually rises, it has begun to realize that a single cultural export is no longer sufficient to meet the demands of its national cultural diplomacy strategy, especially in the context of globalization, where dialogue and cooperation among civilizations have become increasingly important. Therefore, in 2016, China proposed the “Global Dialogue of Civilizations” initiative, aiming to promote equal dialogue among different cultures and jointly build a community with a shared future for mankind by facilitating exchanges and understanding among global civilizations. This initiative reflects China’s advocacy for cultural diversity and mutual learning among civilizations, and through the platform of UNESCO, showcases China’s diplomatic intention to promote global cultural consensus to the world.

Since 2016, China has actively advocated the concept of “global dialogue of civilizations” on multiple international platforms, especially at the annual meetings of UNESCO and international cultural forums. By organizing cross-civilization academic discussions and cultural exchange activities, China has not only shaped an international cultural dialogue framework centered on mutual learning among civilizations, but also deepened cultural exchanges and the establishment of mutual trust with countries along the routes through the support of the Belt and Road Initiative. This process has gradually transformed China’s discourse in the global cultural governance system from cultural export to cultural leadership, and effectively enhanced China’s cultural influence in international affairs.

The proposal and promotion of this initiative are in line with the cultural leadership and global governance strategy in the theory of soft power. By advocating dialogue among civilizations on a global scale, China has not only enhanced its cultural soft power but also demonstrated its ability to shape discourse in global cultural governance by promoting dialogue among civilizations. The “Global Dialogue of Civilizations” initiative not only helps establish China’s image as a global cultural leader, but also promotes the international community’s recognition and absorption of Chinese cultural concepts through interaction with the cultures of various countries.

3.2.3 Promotion of the “Artificial Intelligence Ethics” topic

With the rapid development of technology, especially in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), China has gradually recognized the influence of technological ethics on global culture and civilization. In 2019, China promoted international discussions on the topic of “Artificial Intelligence ethics” through UNESCO, advocating “people-oriented” AI ethical standards and emphasizing that technological development should follow humanitarian principles and balance technological innovation and humanistic care. The proposal of this issue not only reflects China’s high attention to the ethics of science and technology, but also indicates that China has begun to base its global governance on the ethics of science and technology and participate in shaping the global cultural and technological order. The Chinese government actively promotes the inclusion of the “artificial intelligence ethics” topic on the UNESCO agenda and advocates for the global formulation of AI ethics standards at multiple international forums. Through cooperation with other countries and international organizations, China not only provides a Chinese solution for global AI development, but also embeds the common ethical bottom line of humanity into global science and technology governance. In 2020, UNESCO officially released the “Artificial Intelligence Ethics Guidelines”, which incorporated the “people-oriented” concept advocated by China.

This cultural practice demonstrates how China, through cultural diplomacy, integrates technology and ethics to promote the innovation and improvement of the global governance framework. By advocating ethical standards for artificial intelligence, China has not only shaped new rules for global science and technology governance, but also laid the foundation for its leading position in the global science and technology culture field. It has proved the concept of cross-disciplinary cooperation in the theory of cultural soft power. The intersection of science and technology and culture has become an important platform for China to enhance its international influence.

4. Challenges Facing China’s Cultural Diplomacy through UNESCO

Although China has continuously expanded its cultural diplomacy practices through the UNESCO platform from 2000 to 2020 and achieved a certain discourse status in global cultural governance, this process has not been smooth sailing. Cultural diplomacy, as a form of cross-cultural and cross-institutional practice, is embedded in the complex network of global power structures, value systems and discourse politics. Especially when a “rising China” attempts to reshape its international image and enhance its cultural dominance, the structural and functional challenges it faces become increasingly prominent. This chapter systematically reviews the main challenges currently faced by China from five dimensions: macro structure, institutional constraints, cultural differences, capacity mismatch, and international public opinion, and analyzes how these challenges might limit the effectiveness and sustainability of China’s international status shaping.

4.1 Path Dependency in the International Cultural Governance Structure

UNESCO, as a global cultural governance institution established in the post-World War II era, was shaped by discursive paradigms rooted in Western cultural liberalism. While it promotes ideals of cultural universality and value neutrality, the institution inherently reflects a deep structural embedding of Western-centric cultural frameworks. As a latecomer power, China’s cultural concepts, such as “civilizational mutual learning” and “pluralistic coexistence,” often lack sufficient space for institutional expression within this preexisting normative order. For instance, UNESCO’s evaluation frameworks emphasize cultural diversity and individual rights, which at times conflict with China’s emphasis on collective cultural identity. This normative incompatibility often requires China’s cultural proposals to be “translated” and adapted to the existing discourse system, resulting in the dilution or misinterpretation of China’s intended message. Moreover, UNESCO’s procedural and evaluative mechanisms are highly standardized and technically codified, creating high barriers to the integration of innovative cultural propositions and, consequently, limiting the institutional pathways for China’s agenda-setting efforts.

4.2 Ambiguous International Perceptions of China’s Role

Cultural diplomacy is both a symbolic exercise of power and a process of identity construction. The international community’s perception of China’s role within UNESCO remains ambiguous, oscillating between “resource provider” and “norm entrepreneur.” On the one hand, China’s numerous heritage nominations, financial contributions, and personnel engagement have established a strong presence; on the other hand, its identity as a rule advocate and value creator has not yet gained full international recognition. This perceptual misalignment reflects asymmetry in China’s cultural diplomacy toolkit. While significant resources have been invested in cultural promotion and heritage showcasing, the development of discursive frameworks with broad international acceptance remains insufficient. Concepts such as “a community with a shared future for mankind” and “civilizational mutual learning” have lacked clear strategic pathways and consensus-building mechanisms for integration into UNESCO’s multilateral agenda, resulting in limited communicative resonance. Additionally, coordination between domestic cultural institutions and foreign affairs agencies remains underdeveloped, leading to fragmented expression, personnel misalignment, and inconsistent project implementation—factors that constrain the coherence and effectiveness of China’s cultural diplomacy.

4.3 Limited Cross-Cultural Communication Capacity

At the core of cultural diplomacy lies the capacity for cross-cultural communication and discursive adaptation. Although China has put forward numerous value-driven cultural initiatives within UNESCO, the global impact and reception of these initiatives have often fallen short of their intended significance. One reason for this is China’s inward-oriented discursive tendency, which begins from domestic value logics without fully accommodating the cognitive structures and semantic preferences of international audiences. For example, the concept of “people-centered development,” which in the Chinese context emphasizes collective security and social harmony, is often interpreted in Western contexts as referring primarily to individual freedom and human rights, leading to semantic misalignment and even misinterpretation. Furthermore, China continues to face a shortage of high-level professionals proficient in multilingual, cross-cultural policy dialogue. Although efforts have been made to cultivate integrated talent with both language skills and cultural policy expertise, operational competence in multilateral, multi-language diplomatic settings remains limited.

4.4 Structural Bias and Ideological Competition in Global Public Opinion

Cultural diplomacy inevitably intersects with ideological competition and the contestation of public opinion. Since the mid-2010s, Western media and think tanks have frequently characterized China’s cultural diplomacy as a political tool or a state-driven propaganda project, undermining the perceived legitimacy of its initiatives within UNESCO. Chinese proposals—such as those linked to the Belt and Road Initiative—are often framed within geopolitical or influence-expansion narratives, creating a trust deficit in international cooperation. Additionally, certain cultural expressions linked to ethnicity, religion, or historical memory easily trigger political sensitivities, leading to politicized interpretations of China’s cultural initiatives. As a result, China faces dual opinion barriers: externally, the need to address skepticism regarding the legitimacy of its cultural proposals; and domestically, the need to maintain discourse security and political stability. These challenges significantly constrain China’s ability to set agendas and exert cultural leadership within global governance.

4.5 Insufficient Institutional Resilience and Cooperation Ecosystem Sustainability

While China has successfully advanced multiple cultural initiatives between 2000 and 2020 through trust funds and joint projects, the institutional resilience of its cultural diplomacy framework remains limited. Many international cultural projects lack long-term evaluation mechanisms and focus on short-term outcomes, neglecting sustained impact accumulation and feedback loops, thereby limiting the development of enduring cultural recognition. Moreover, China’s cooperation ecosystem within UNESCO remains state-centric, with insufficient participation from non-governmental organizations, transnational think tanks, and academic networks. This has hindered the organic embedding and endogenous sustainability of its cultural agenda. China’s issue promotion has primarily relied on top-down governmental advocacy rather than on building cross-national policy coalitions and issue-based communities. Such unilateral, initiative-driven diplomacy lacks strong multilateral support mechanisms, thereby constraining the breadth and durability of its cultural governance influence.

5. Policy Recommendations

5.1 Enhance cross-cultural discourse capabilities and optimize global expression logic

Whether China’s cultural diplomacy can exert greater influence within UNESCO depends crucially on the improvement of its cross-cultural discourse capabilities. At present, in China’s cultural dissemination to the outside world, there still exists the inertia of “translating from the internal language to the external language”. When cultural propositions enter the international agenda, they are often misinterpreted or even excluded due to deviations in expression methods and semantic structures from the mainstream Western cultural cognition. Therefore, it is necessary to enhance research on the language system of UNESCO’s cultural policies, proactively align with the value framework and cognitive habits of the target audience, and achieve precise translation and logical reconstruction of discourse content. In addition, efforts should be made to actively build a compound talent system covering language, policy, culture, communication and other dimensions, enhance the discourse generation capacity and international agenda alignment ability of cultural diplomacy personnel, and thereby promote the effective embedding of Chinese cultural concepts on multilateral stages.

5.2 Improve the institutional design mechanism to enhance the strategic resilience of cultural diplomacy

The operation of China’s cultural diplomacy in UNESCO still faces problems such as fragmented policies and isolated projects, which restrict the stability and communication effectiveness of strategic planning. To achieve the long-term strategic goals of cultural diplomacy, it is urgently necessary to establish a more resilient institutional design mechanism. First of all, efforts should be made to establish a cultural diplomacy coordination system that involves the central government, local authorities and overseas institutions, to avoid problems such as multiple decision-making and repetitive resource allocation. Secondly, a “Special Fund for Cultural Diplomacy” should be established to support long-term and institutionalized cooperation projects, and to conduct systematic resource integration and issue assessment on topics such as World Heritage application, intangible cultural heritage, and dialogue among civilizations. Secondly, cultural think tanks and academic support institutions should be integrated into diplomatic affairs to form a cultural policy consultation mechanism supported by knowledge production, thereby enhancing the professional level of diplomatic decision-making. Through institutional innovation, China can transform from a project-led model to a rule-participatory one and play a more stable structural role in global cultural governance.

5.3 Build a multi-level cooperation network to activate the momentum of social and cultural diplomacy

To promote the sustainable development of cultural diplomacy, it is not only necessary to carry out strategic promotion at the national level, but also to build a multi-level cooperation network of “state – society – international organizations” to achieve the spillover of cultural momentum and the synergy of multiple subjects. At present, most of China’s cultural projects in UNESCO are led by the authorities, while the participation of non-governmental cultural organizations, academic institutions and youth groups is relatively limited, resulting in cultural issues often lacking a social foundation and international resonance. Therefore, efforts should be accelerated to cultivate non-governmental cultural organizations oriented towards the international community, and universities, think tanks and non-profit institutions should be encouraged to participate in United Nations cultural affairs. At the same time, support young scholars and cultural workers to participate in internships, research and short-term tasks at UNESCO, and build a reserve force for cultural diplomacy oriented towards the future. In addition, efforts should be made to promote the building of a multilateral community on cultural issues. By sharing mechanisms for issue setting, joint discourse expression and cooperative practice, the inclusiveness and external recognition of China’s cultural issues can be enhanced, and the path dependence of unilateral output in communication can be broken.

5.4 Strengthen the ability to guide global public opinion and break through external cognitive barriers

The ultimate effectiveness of cultural diplomacy not only depends on the setting of issues and the participation of institutions, but also relies on the cognitive acceptance and symbolic reconstruction in the global public opinion field. In recent years, the “political instrumentalization” interpretation of China’s cultural diplomacy in Western public opinion has become increasingly frequent, affecting the dissemination power and legitimacy of China’s discourse propositions within UNESCO. In this regard, China should strengthen its global public opinion monitoring mechanism, establish a “topic – media – feedback” three-in-one public opinion response strategy, and enhance its rapid response and risk prevention and control capabilities to negative perceptions. At the same time, we should increase investment in international communication resources, build a multilingual cultural communication matrix, and shape a warm and logical image of Chinese culture through channels such as documentaries, interviews, and international social media. In addition, it is necessary to strengthen cooperation with international mainstream think tanks, cultural leaders and opinion networks, and enhance the objectivity and persuasiveness of cultural discourse from a third-party perspective, so as to build a stable, credible and sustainable narrative framework of Chinese culture in the global public opinion field.

6. Conclusion

In an era of globalization, China’s cultural diplomacy via UNESCO has laid a solid foundation for shaping its international image, enhancing soft power, and participating in global cultural governance. However, the sustainable development of this diplomacy faces numerous challenges. To overcome these obstacles, China must continually innovate and adjust its strategic approaches, enhance cross-cultural adaptation capacity, strengthen institutional resilience, and improve global public opinion engagement. Only by addressing these challenges can China ensure the long-term sustainability and effectiveness of its cultural diplomacy and maintain its growing influence in the evolving landscape of global cultural governance.

Reference

[1] Schnell, J. (2011). The cross-cultural rhetoric of diplomacy in the case of the U.S. surveillance plane landing on Hainan Island, China in April, 2001. China Media Research.

[2] González Fernández, S. M. (2021). The role of the cultural and creative industries in cultural diplomacy and soft power between China and the European Union. Janus.net, 1.

[3] Eric, Y. J. L., & Ramachanderan, R. (2023). Is a threat to destroy cultural heritage a violation of international law? Tweet diplomacy and gaps in cultural property protection. Journal of East Asia & International Law, 16(1).

[4] Information, V. F. A., Li, X., Information, V. F. A., et al. (2023). Transformational governance framework for institutions of cultural diplomacy: the case of the Chinese Confucius Institute. International Journal of Cultural Policy.