| R1. Set strategic priorities (Strategic) | Convert “priorities” into an explicit institutional choice: where science diplomacy matters (themes/regions/platforms), why it matters (mission/legitimacy), and how it will be recognized internally. Position science diplomacy alongside research excellence and innovation in strategy and resource allocation so it becomes governable rather than person-dependent. | Capability Stack; Stage 1 |
| R2. Balance openness and restrictedness (Strategic) | Translate the openness–security tension into operational governance: partner due diligence, dual-use awareness, data/IP discipline, and clear escalation routes for politically sensitive cases. Stabilize decision rights and accountability to avoid oscillation between over-restriction (risk aversion) and under-protection (integrity/compliance risks), and communicate the rationale as protection of integrity, not politicization of science. | Governance blueprint; Stages 1–3 |
| R3. Tackle global challenges (Strategic) | Treat “global challenges” as a legitimacy design task: partnerships must make reciprocity auditable (who decides/benefits/whose knowledge counts), especially in North–South collaboration. Build this into partnership strategy and institutional narrative (shared responsibility rather than “exporting solutions”), because trust and reputation are implementation outcomes, not add-ons. | Capability Stack; Stages: 1–2 |
| R4. Establish structures needed for EU leadership (Operational) | Interpret “EU leadership” at RO level as interoperability: map relevant EU/national/diplomatic actors and build stable interfaces instead of relying on personal networks. Implement role clarity (who convenes, represents, translates science for policy) and internal coordination across international office, policy advice, legal/ethics, and communications. | Capability Stack; Stage 2 |
| R5. Foster science-for-policy and foresight ecosystems (Operational) | Make “science for policy” and “foresight” concrete by specifying interfaces and competencies for synthesis, co-creation and stakeholder negotiation, not only disciplinary expertise. Build routines for rapid evidence translation, scanning/monitoring and participation in advisory ecosystems as cross-boundary work that can be repeated and improved. | MEL; Stages 2–3 |
| R6. Strengthen science & technology in diplomatic representations (Operational) | Treat embassies/delegations as an interface design problem: secondments, joint labs, visiting roles and reliable channels connecting researchers with diplomatic stakeholders. Build “translation capacity” to frame research in policy-relevant ways without distorting integrity, with clear support routines and expectations. | Capability Stack; Stages 2–4 |
| R7. Create and connect communities (Enabling) | Build communities as institutional infrastructure for coordination and trust, not informal add-ons. Create internal champion networks across units/faculties and connect them to external peer-learning platforms/alliances, with cadence and ownership so the network survives turnover. | Capability Stack; Stages 2–4 |
| R8. Train and empower professionals (Enabling) | Professionalize science diplomacy through recognized roles and structured upskilling (stakeholder engagement, political sensitivity, intercultural competence, science–policy translation). Replace ad hoc, extracurricular learning with an interdisciplinary curriculum integrated into institutional strategy and incentives. | Capability Stack; Stages 2–4 |
| R9. Advance the frontiers through research & innovative approaches (Enabling) | Treat roadmaps as iterative and evidence-informed rather than static checklists. Build a learning logic that supports comparability, data-driven and network-aware approaches (“science diplomacy 2.0”), and cumulative improvement across cycles of projects and attention. | MEL; Stages 3–4 |
