Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article examines Slovenia’s development diplomacy as a small post-socialist donor with a specific transition trajectory. It proposes a tripartite framework of symbolic, instrumental, and strategic dimensions to analyse how development cooperation combines normative commitments, development instruments and broader foreign policy objectives. The article also introduces the concept of strategic empathy to analyse how Slovenia draws on its transition experience as diplomatic resource, particularly in the Western Balkans. Drawing on qualitative analysis of policy analysis, aid data and publicly available records of bilateral development projects, the analysis shows how Slovenia projects its identity and values through development cooperation, uses instruments such as, scholarships, technical assistance, and institutional partnerships to support diplomatic engagement, and aligns development cooperation with broader regional, political and economic interests. At the same time, institutional fragmentation, weak coordination and insufficient funding limit the diplomatic potential of these instruments. The article therefore argues that Slovenia’s case illustrates how the symbolic, instrumental and strategic dimensions of development diplomacy can interact in the foreign policy practice of a small post-socialist donor, while their integration remains uneven.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jana Arbeiter (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: