Track II diplomacy: action research shifting paradigms in foreign policy making
Dr. Pinar Akpinar writes about recent action research in foreign policy…
“Foreign policy remains one of the most elite-driven domains of public life. Decisions are typically made behind closed doors, by a narrow circle of state officials, often under conditions of urgency and political pressure. Yet the challenges foreign policy seeks to address today—from migration and climate change to public health and food security—are deeply social, transnational, and lived by people far beyond diplomatic corridors.
So, what would it mean to design foreign policy collaboratively?
This blog post draws on our recent research integrating Participatory Action Research (PAR) with Track II diplomacy to explore EU–Türkiye cooperation in North Africa. Rather than treating diplomacy as a fixed, state-centric practice, we approached it as a co-creative process—one that can be opened up to dialogue, reflection, and shared learning.
Why foreign policy needs participatory methods
Track II diplomacy is often described as the informal side of international relations. It brings together academics, civil society actors, business leaders, policy experts, and sometimes former officials to explore ideas that are difficult to discuss at the official Track I level. Historically, Track II initiatives have focused heavily on security issues and confidence-building between adversaries.
Participatory Action Research offers something complementary but distinct. PAR is grounded in joint inquiry, iteration, and shared ownership of knowledge. It does not assume that researchers already know the right questions or solutions. Instead, it creates structured spaces where stakeholders collectively explore problems, imagine alternatives, and test practical pathways forward.
Why North Africa and why EU–Türkiye relations
Relations between Türkiye and the EU have been strained for over a decade. At the same time, both actors remain deeply engaged in North Africa—particularly Morocco, Algeria, and Egypt. These countries sit at the crossroads of Europe, the Middle East, and Sub-Saharan Africa and are central to debates on migration, energy security, climate adaptation, food systems, and post-pandemic recovery.
North Africa therefore offered a valuable space to ask whether participatory processes could help identify pragmatic, low-conflict areas of cooperation despite political stalemates.
What PAR revealed
Using search conferences, interviews, and expert surveys, stakeholders prioritized five key areas: education and mobility, public infrastructure, health, renewable energy, and food security. These were seen as politically feasible, socially impactful, and capable of generating tangible benefits across regions.
Beyond policy outputs, PAR revealed deeper insights about diplomacy itself: shrinking civic space, the limits of linear policy transfer, and the potential of participatory methods to partially desecuritize foreign policy by shifting attention to shared social challenges.
Even if PAR does not replace traditional diplomacy, it complements it. Particularly in times of geopolitical fragmentation and democratic fatigue, it offers a way to open cracks in rigid systems and to design shared futures collaboratively.
Link to the open article by Pinar Akpinar and Oğuz Nuri Babüroğlu
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01436597.2025.2556319
Latest posts by Hilary Brad (see all)
- Politics of Love in Action Research – Hilary Bradbury, 2026 - February 3, 2026
- On Becoming More Reflexive Research-Practitioners in Action - February 3, 2026
- Research create changes as your inner world changes by Julia Kukard - February 3, 2026