The role and influence of Foreign Policy Epistemic Communities on Post-Apartheid South Africa's Foreign Policy Decision-Making

Foreign policy decision-making and state behaviour have long been analysed and explained through systemic theories such as realism, liberalism, and constructivism, as well as through Graham Allison’s rational actor, organisational processes, and governmental politics models. However, the role and influence of civil society and other non-state actors, including foreign policy epistemic communities, in foreign policy processes and decision-making remain insufficiently examined, particularly in the South African context. This study explores the roles and influence of foreign policy epistemic communities in post-apartheid South Africa’s foreign policy decision making. It employs an integrated foreign policy decision-making framework that incorporates Allison’s models and the levels of analysis in international relations, while placing central emphasis on Peter Haas’s concept of epistemic communities. Methodologically, the study adopts a qualitative multi-case study design, drawing on semi-structured key informant interviews, supported by document analysis and secondary data. Through three case studies, namely South Africa’s membership and positioning in the BRICS grouping, its climate change diplomacy and positioning at the annual UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP) meetings, and its mediation and peacekeeping efforts in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the study examines the roles and extent of influence of foreign policy epistemic communities, defined as networks of experts with policy-relevant specialised knowledge.
The findings show that post-apartheid South African foreign policy decision-making remains primarily state-centric and is shaped by strategic interests, established organisational processes, and political bargaining. Across the three cases, foreign policy epistemic communities contribute mainly by interpreting and framing uncertainty, producing knowledge, and shaping policy discourse. However, their influence on decisions remains indirect, uneven, and difficult to trace empirically. Although these communities provide knowledge, expertise, and policy advice, their influence is mediated by executive dominance, bureaucratic hierarchies, competing government priorities, and selective engagement with, and uptake of, expertise by decision-makers. The study further finds that epistemic influence is strongest at the level of interpretation, with some evidence of the institutionalisation of ideas, but limited overall impact on final decisions. It concludes that, while foreign policy epistemic communities play an important role in knowledge production, policy advice, and public discourse, state actors remain the primary agents and retain ultimate authority over foreign policy decisions. 
The uptake of expert knowledge is therefore selective and contingent on political authority, institutional access, and alignment with prevailing policy priorities. Accordingly, the study recommends more systematic and intentional engagement between epistemic communities and decision-makers in policy processes relating to BRICS, climate change diplomacy, and peace and security. More specifically, it recommends that this relationship be institutionalised through the previously conceived South African Council on International Relations (SACOIR), or a similar entity, constituted as a statutory and adequately resourced body. Such a structure could support more inclusive, trust-based, and coherent evidence-informed foreign policy decision-making. This study contributes to scholarship on the roles and influence of foreign policy epistemic communities in post-apartheid South African foreign policy decision-making. 
Keywords: Foreign Policy Decision-Making; Epistemic Communities; BRICS; Climate Change; Democratic Republic of Congo.