Epistemic Justice and Knowledge Diplomacy: Reimagining U.S. Contributions to Global Knowledge

• In Event: Roundtable Session 10
  In Refereed Roundtable Session: Education, Democracy, and Epistemic Justice in a Changing Global Order

Proposal

Objective
This research critically examines the role of U.S. higher education institutions (HEIs) in global knowledge production and the implications of their contributions for epistemic justice and knowledge diplomacy. The main objective of this study is to investigate how U.S. HEIs shape global academic norms, influence epistemic hierarchies, and contribute to internationalization practices, which often reflect asymmetrical power relations. This study also pursues to reimagine internationalization as a space for ethical collaboration, plural knowledge systems, and human flourishing, but not as a vehicle for prestige or strategic influence.

Significance
This study contributes to the field of international higher education by challenging dominant narratives that frame internationalization as a neutral or benevolent process. The study highlights how global academic engagement is structured by market logic, Western epistemological dominance, and strategic national interests. By offering a justice-oriented alternative through a Post-Critical lens, this research re-examines international higher education. It contributes to the broader discourse on peacebuilding through education.

Theoretical Framework
This study uses the Post-Critical Perspective (PCP) that moves beyond critique to embrace complexity, reflexivity, and relationality in educational analysis (Hodgson et al., 2020b; Stein & McCartney, 2021). PCP examine the complicity of institutions in reproducing global hierarchies while also reclaiming the educational mission of internationalization (Stein & McCartney, 2021). It emphasizes epistemic justice, as defined by Fricker (2007) and expanded by Dotson (2011), which involves recognizing and validating diverse knowledge systems and dismantling testimonial and hermeneutical injustice. PCP also focus on plural knowledge systems, as advocated by Andreotti (2014) and Hodgson et al. (2020), call for the inclusion of Indigenous, local, and experiential epistemologies in global academic discourse. According to Vlieghe (2020), another aspect of PCP is humanizing education, which prioritizes human flourishing, shared inquiry, and ethical engagement over competition and control. This framework allows for a nuanced analysis of how knowledge diplomacy can serve as a counterbalance to soft power strategies and academic imperialism, offering a pathway toward peace and equity in global education.

Literature Review
The global influence of U.S. higher education institutions (HEIs) has been critically examined through the lenses of soft power, knowledge diplomacy, and epistemic justice. Nye (1990, 2005) introduced soft power as the ability to shape preferences through attraction rather than coercion. Altbach and Peterson (2008) argued that U.S. HEIs project soft power by exporting academic models and values, often under the guise of collaboration. Stein (2021a) expanded this critique, noting that internationalization frequently serves national interests and reinforces global hierarchies.
In contrast, knowledge diplomacy offers a more ethical framework for global engagement. Knight (2018, 2022, 2023) conceptualized it as a reciprocal, co-creative process that addresses global challenges through academic collaboration. However, Chaban (2024) and Hernandez (2021) caution that without reflexivity and structural reform, knowledge diplomacy risks reproducing the same asymmetries it aims to dismantle.
The concept of epistemic justice is central to this critique. Fricker (2007) and Dotson (2011) highlight how dominant systems marginalize non-Western knowers and knowledge. Andreotti (2014) and Stein and McCartney (2021) advocate for critical global citizenship and ethical engagement, challenging Western dominance in international education.
Finally, scholars such as Cantwell and Grimm (2018), Witt (2022), and Amelina (2022) examine how global academic systems privilege Western institutions and languages, marginalizing scholars from the Global South. These dynamics reinforce epistemic hierarchies and limit the potential for truly reciprocal knowledge exchange. Together, these works underscore the need to reimagine internationalization as a space for pluralism, equity, and ethical collaboration.

Method
This study employs a critical literature-based analysis. Rather than collecting new empirical data, it synthesizes and interrogates existing scholarship and institutional documentation to uncover patterns of epistemic dominance and possibilities for ethical engagement. Drawing on peer-reviewed literature and institutional reports, the analysis synthesizes theoretical insights from international education, critical theory, and global engagement. The method includes comparative analysis of conceptual frameworks and documented practices in U.S. HEIs, focusing on patterns of epistemic dominance and exclusion. Reflexivity is central to the approach, informed by the researcher’s positionality as a scholar from the Global South. This method aligns with the Post-Critical Perspective (PCP), emphasizing complexity, relationality, and ethical engagement over empirical generalization or positivist inquiry.

Findings
The analysis of existing literature and conceptual frameworks reveals several key findings about the role of U.S. higher education institutions (HEIs) in global knowledge production and their implications for epistemic justice and knowledge diplomacy. First, U.S. HEIs maintain a dominant position in global academic hierarchies through research output, citation impact, and institutional prestige (Lee, 2021; Hazelkorn, 2021). This dominance is reinforced by English-language publishing platforms and Western accreditation standards, which marginalize non-Western epistemologies and scholars from the Global South (Boussebaa & Tienari, 2021; Yao, 2021).
Second, internationalization practices often reflect strategic national interests, commodifying student mobility and transnational partnerships for revenue and influence rather than mutual learning (Cantwell, 2021; Bound et al., 2021). While knowledge diplomacy offers a promising framework for ethical collaboration, its implementation is frequently undermined by market-driven logics and prestige metrics (Knight, 2023; Chaban, 2024).
Third, the concept of epistemic justice highlights the structural exclusion of diverse knowledge systems and the need to challenge testimonial and hermeneutical injustice (Fricker, 2007; Dotson, 2011). Scholars advocate for a shift toward pluralism, reciprocity, and ethical engagement in global academic exchanges (Andreotti, 2014; Stein & McCartney, 2021).
Overall, the findings suggest that U.S. HEIs play a dual role by advancing soft power while also shaping global norms of knowledge legitimacy. To foster peace and equity, internationalization must be reimagined as a space for co-creation, relationality, and epistemic justice.

Conclusion:
This study highlights the urgent need to reimagine U.S. higher education’s role in global knowledge production through the lens of epistemic justice and knowledge diplomacy. By challenging epistemic hierarchies and advocating for plural, reciprocal engagement, it offers a transformative vision of internationalization as a peacebuilding practice. Grounded in post-critical theory, the research calls for ethical collaboration that centers human dignity, shared responsibility, and inclusive knowledge systems in shaping a more just global academic landscape.

Authors

• Sabrina Ahmed, The University of Iowa

• Fahmida Mazid, University of Saskatchewan