Evaluating Diplomacy: A Mission Impossible?

Abstract

This article presents a model to evaluate national diplomatic interventions in multilateral decision-making arenas. The performance-driven evaluation model that is commonly used in new public management settings does not do justice to the trade of diplomacy as a distinctive profession. This article argues that when evaluating diplomatic interventions in multilateral settings the process-driven nature of decision-making must be taken into account. This is undertaken, first, by using the barrier model as a heuristic tool to reconstruct diplomatic interventions in an international decision-making process. Second, a set of evaluation criteria is developed which both meets the evaluation standards of new public management and which does justice to the complex environment in which diplomats operate. The article ends with an illustration of how the model has been applied in the specific case of Dutch diplomatic interventions regarding the negotiations on explosive remnants of war in the Convention for Certain Conventional Weapons.

Towards the European Union's Foreign Policy 2025 – Taking Stock of the Dahrendorf Foresight Project

“…The Strategic Planning Division within the EEAS, the inter-institutional European Strategy and Policy Analysis System, the European Political Strategy Centre within the European Commission, the Long Term Trends Team at the Cabinet of the Secretary General of the European Parliament and various actors dealing with foresight studies from member states the should combine resources in order to tackle the future challenges. At the same time, strategic planning of the EU's external actions should involve regular evaluation of the Union's performance in various dimensions of its international involvement (Kleistra and van Willigen, 2010).…”

Transprofessional Diplomacy

“…Reduced to the grammars of policy evaluation and auditing, their traditional skills and methods are now considered old-fashioned, unable to deliver tangible results, whilst the validity of such methods for improving their performance remains unclear (cfr. Kleistra and Willigen 2010;Kuus 2016).…”

Standing back and looking forward: Editors’ reflections on the 20th Anniversary of Evaluation

“…At a macro level we have also published a great deal about policy, policy making and governance. Articles about evaluating 'nudge theory' (Kosters and Heijden, 2015), legislation (Fitzpatrick, 2012), diplomacy (Kleistra and Willigen, 2010), network governance (Hertting and Vedung, 2012), federalism (Stame, 2008), accountability (Zapico-Goñi, 2007), would all fall into those categories. Often these articles highlight contentions and innovation pressures in policy thinking.…”