Measuring the impact of Track Two dialogues has proven a difficult challenge for the field over many years. Each dialogue is different, which makes a standardized test difficult to achieve. Moreover, different actors wish to measure different things: “value” for money; impact on the conflict; how certain facilitation techniques work; and others. In this article, we present a model that can be used to measure the impact of a dialogue over time, while also encouraging reflective practice in the field. This “Reflective Practice Model” can be used to provide a snapshot of a particular moment – or as a vehicle for the accumulation of a series of such moments – thereby providing a means to observe and measure changes as the dialogue goes on.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Allen, N. and T. Sharp (2017). “Process Peace: A New Evaluation Framework for Track II Diplomacy.” International Negotiation 22, 1: 92–122.
Beardsley, K. (2008). “Agreements without Peace? International Mediation and Time Inconsistency Problems.” American Journal of Political Science 52, 4: 723–740.
Church, C. and J. Shouldice (2002). The Evaluation of Conflict Resolution Interventions: Framing the State of Play. Letterkenny: Browne.
Church, C. and J. Shouldice (2003). The Evaluation of Conflict Resolution Intervention, PART II: Emerging Practice and Theory. Letterkenny: Browne.
Çuhadar, E. and B. W. Dayton (2011). “The Social Psychology of Identity and Inter-group Conflict: From Theory to Practice.” International Studies Perspectives 12: 273–293.
Çuhadar, E. and B. W. Dayton (2012). “Oslo and its Aftermath: Lessons Learned from Track Two Diplomacy.” Negotiation Journal 28, 2: 155–179.
Çuhadar, E., O. G. Genc, and A. Kotelis (2015). “A Greek-Turkish peace project: Assessing the effectiveness of interactive conflict resolution.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 15, 4: 563–583.
Çuhadar, E., B. W. Dayton, and T. Paffenholz (2009). “Evaluation in Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding,” in D. J. Sandolec, S. Byrne, I. Sandole-Staroste, and J. Senehi, editors, Handbook of Conflict Analysis and Resolution. New York, NY: Routledge.
D’Estrée, T. (2019). “Reflective Practice in the Face of Complexity,” in T. D’Estrée, editor, New Directions in Peacebuilding Evaluation. London: Rowman and Littlefield.
D’Estrée, T. P., L. Fast, J. N. Weiss, and M. S. Jakobsen (2001). “Changing the Debate about ‘Success’ in Conflict Resolution Efforts.” Negotiation Journal 17, 2: 101–113.
Faure, G. O. and F. Cede, editors, Unfinished Business: Why International Negotiations Fail. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
Fisher, Ronald J. (2002). “Historical Mapping of the Field of Interactive Conflict Resolution,” in J. Davies, and E. Kaufman, editors, Second Track/Citizens Diplomacy: Concepts and Techniques for Conflict Transformation. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Jones, Peter (2014). “U.S.-Iran Nuclear Track Two from 2005–2011: What Have We Learned, Where are We Going?” Negotiation Journal 30, 4: 347–366.
Jones, Peter (2015). Track Two Diplomacy: In Theory and Practice. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Jones, Peter (2019). “Talking for the Sake of it, or Making a Difference? Assessing and Evaluating Track Two Diplomacy,” in T. D’Estrée, editor, New Directions in Peacebuilding Evaluation. London: Rowman and Littlefield.
Jones, Peter (2021). “‘Paved with Good Intentions:’ Best Practices in the Ethics of Track Two Interventions.” International Negotiation 26, 1, this issue.
Kelman, Herbert (2008). “Evaluating the Contributions of Interactive Problem Solving to the Resolution of Ethnonational Conflicts.” Peace and Conflict 14: 26–60.
Malhotra, D., and S. Liyanage (2005). “Long-Term Effects of Peace Workshops in Protracted Conflicts.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 49, 6: 908–924.
Mitchell, Christopher (2001). “From Controlled Communication to Problem Solving: The Origins of Facilitated Conflict Resolution.” International Journal of Peace Studies 6, 1. At: https://www.gmu.edu/programs/icar/ijps/vol6_1/Mitchell2.htm.
Patton, M. Q. (2010). Developmental Evaluation: Applying Complexity Concepts to Enhance Innovation and Use. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Rothman, J. (2014). “The Reflexive Mediator.” Negotiation Journal, 30, 4: 441–453.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Stern, P. C. and D. Druckman (2000). “Evaluating Interventions in History: The Case of International Conflict Resolution.” International Studies Review 2, 1: 33–63.
The Economist (2020). “Private Diplomacy: Not Your Average Diplomats.” January 23. At: https://www.economist.com/international/2020/01/23/conflict-resolution-relies-increasingly-on-diplomatic-back-channels.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 703 | 141 | 7 |
Full Text Views | 100 | 17 | 2 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 223 | 35 | 3 |
Measuring the impact of Track Two dialogues has proven a difficult challenge for the field over many years. Each dialogue is different, which makes a standardized test difficult to achieve. Moreover, different actors wish to measure different things: “value” for money; impact on the conflict; how certain facilitation techniques work; and others. In this article, we present a model that can be used to measure the impact of a dialogue over time, while also encouraging reflective practice in the field. This “Reflective Practice Model” can be used to provide a snapshot of a particular moment – or as a vehicle for the accumulation of a series of such moments – thereby providing a means to observe and measure changes as the dialogue goes on.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 703 | 141 | 7 |
Full Text Views | 100 | 17 | 2 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 223 | 35 | 3 |