Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Explaining paradiplomacy: do local pro-international structures and political support matter?

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Global Public Policy and Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

International governmental networks used to be centralized. However, the formal and informal decentralization of diplomatic relations through local governments and regions has placed the subnational governments as international actors. The subnational parallel pursuit of international relations has been termed paradiplomacy. Knowing “why or how” subnational governments engage in paradiplomacy is relevant because international networks have the potential to foster innovation, cooperation, transfer of knowledge, and international aid. However, not all jurisdictions engage in international relations despite the potential symbolic and material benefits. Scholars have explained local engagement in international relations through economic, cooperative, and political considerations. Without denying their explanatory power, we hypothesize that organizational structures, specifically local pro-international structures, foster paradiplomacy, while political support discourages paradiplomatic activities. To investigate subnational variation in paradiplomacy engagement, we rely on a survey covering all 5565 Brazilian municipalities in 2012. Findings suggest the existence of local pro-international structures is positively correlated with municipal international projects and municipal participation in international networks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (1998). Multi-network management: Collaboration and the hollow state in local economic policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8, 67–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguirre, I. (1999). Making sense of paradiplomacy? An intertextual enquiry about a concept in search of a definition. Regional & Federal Studies, 9(1), 185–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avellaneda, C. N. (2009). Municipal performance: Does mayoral quality matter? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(2), 285–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldridge, J. V., & Burnham, R. A. (1975). Organization innovation: Individual, organizational, and environmental impacts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20, 165–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, E. M., & Betz, M. (1975). A comparative analysis of organizational conflict in schools. Sociology of Education, 48, 59–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M., Blau, M., Herman, J. L., & Schoenherr, R. A. (1971). Structure of organizations (Vol. 10). Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M., Heydebrand, W. V., & Stauffer, R. E. (1966). The structure of small bureaucracies. American Sociological Review, 37, 179–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cason, J. W., & Power, T. J. (2009). Presidentialization, pluralization, and the rollback of Itamaraty: Explaining change in Brazilian foreign policy making in the Cardoso-Lula era. International Political Science Review, 30(2), 117–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaloux, A., & Paquin, S. (2013). Green paradiplomacy and water resource management in North America: The case of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 19(3), 308–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, G. (2012). Europe and beyond: The development of sub-state paradiplomacy with special reference to Catalonia. Romanian Journal of Society and Politics, 7(1), 7–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constantinou, C. (2016). Everyday diplomacy: Mission, spectacle and remaking of diplomatic culture. In J. Dittmer & F. McConnell (Eds.), Diplomatic cultures and international politics: Translations, spaces and alternatives (pp. 23–40). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornago, N. (2000). Exploring the global dimensions of paradiplomacy. Functional and normative dynamics in the global spreading of subnational involvement in international affairs. In Workshop on constituent units in international affairs. Forum of Federations. Alemania, Octubre.

  • Dalton, D. R., Todor, W. D., Spendolini, M. J., Fielding, G. J., & Porter, L. W. (1980). Organization structure and performance: A critical review. Academy of Management Review, 5(1), 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, F. (2014). The internationalization of regions: Paradiplomacy or multi-level governance? Geography Compass, 8(10), 689–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dommergues, P. (1992). The strategies for international and interregional cooperation. Ekistics, 59(352/53), 7–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duchacek, I. (1990). Perforated sovereignties: towards a typology of new actors in international relations. In Federalism and international relations: The role of subnational units (Vol. 1(2)).

  • Duchacek, I. D. (1984). The international dimension of subnational self-government. Publius: the Journal of Federalism, 14(4), 5–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, S. (2005). Developing and testing an integrative framework of public sector leadership: Evidence from the public education arena. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 197–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, B., Van de Walle, S., & Hammerschmid, G. (2019). Institutions or contingencies? A cross-country analysis of management tool use by public sector executives. Public Administration Review, 79(3), 330–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grydehøj, A. (2014). Goals, capabilities, and instruments of paradiplomacy by subnational jurisdictions. In Local actions in a global context: paradiplomacy by subnational jurisdictions (pp. 10–20).

  • Hage, J., & Aiken, M. (1969). Routine technology, social structure, and organization goals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 366–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hage, J., & Dewar, R. (1973). Elite values versus organizational structure in predicting innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 78, 270–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harakan, A., Mustari, N., & Abel, A. K. (2021). Sustainable energy investment through paradiplomacy practices in South Sulawesi, Indonesia. In E3S Web of conferences (Vol. 277). EDP Sciences.

  • Hocking, B. (1993). Non-central governments and multilayered diplomacy. In Localizing foreign policy (pp. 31–69). Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Issundari, S. (2018). Paradiplomacy and Indonesian public diplomacy. In 2018 3rd International conference on education, sports, arts and management engineering (ICESAME 2018) (pp. 156–159). Atlantis Press.

  • Jackson, T. (2018). Paradiplomacy and political geography: The geopolitics of substate regional diplomacy. Geography Compass, 12(2), e12357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joenniemi, P., & Sergunin, A. (2014). Paradiplomacy as a capacity-building strategy: The case of Russia’s northwestern subnational actors. Problems of Post-Communism, 61(6), 18–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M. J., & Aldecoa, F. (1999). Paradiplomacy in action: The foreign relations of subnational governments. Frank Cass & Co.

  • Keating, M. (2000). Paradiplomacy and regional networking. In Forum of federations: An international federalism, Hanover.

  • Kincaid, J. (1990). Constituent diplomacy in federal policies and the nation-state: Conflict and co-operation. In Federalism and international relations: The role of subnational units, 54–75.

  • Kuznetsov, A. (2014). Theory and practice of paradiplomacy: Subnational governments in international affairs. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 1–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leandro, F. J., & Simões, J. (2020). The role of paradiplomacy in innovation: The case of African Portuguese-Speaking countries. PaKSoM 2020, 65.

  • Lecours, A. (2008). Political issues of paradiplomacy: Lessons from the developed world. Netherlands Institute of International Relations’ Clingendael’.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, T., & Song, Y. (2021). Trajectories to becoming international relations actors in China’s BRI Initiative: A comparative study of the Guangdong and Yunnan provinces. The Pacific Review, 34(5), 778–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maia, J. N. B., & Saraiva, J. F. S. (2012). A paradiplomacia financeira no Brasil da República Velha, 1890–1930. Revista Brasileira De Política Internacional, 55(1), 106–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMillan, S. L. (2009). Looking beyond the national level: Foreign direct investment attraction in US states. International Interactions, 35(2), 155–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J. (2000). Politics and the bureaucracy: Policymaking in the fourth branch of government (4th ed.). Harcourt College Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meireles, T. O. (2016). Da diplomacia federativa à cooperação internacional federativa. Dissertação de Mestrado, Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.

  • Milani, C. R., & Ribeiro, M. C. M. (2011). International relations and the paradiplomacy of Brazilian cities: Crafting the concept of local international management. BAR-Brazilian Administration Review, 8(1), 21–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mukti, T. A. (2019). Paradiplomacy and the future of Aceh government. In 1st Aceh global conference (AGC 2018). Atlantis Press. (Vol. 10).

  • Nganje, F. (2014). Paradiplomacy and the democratisation of foreign policy in South Africa. South African Journal of International Affairs, 21(1), 89–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Njaramba, R. N. (2019). Role of subnational governments in international relations. Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi.

  • Novialdi, R., Ahmad, R., Muhammad, Z., Saputra, J., & Bon, A. T. (2021) A review of paradiplomacy literature: mini-review approach.

  • O’Toole, L., Jr., & Meier, K. J. (2004). Public management in intergovernmental networks: Matching structural networks and managerial networking. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14, 469–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2020). Official Development Assistance Detailed Summary. https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-data/ODA-2020-detailed-summary.pdf.

  • Paquin, S. (2020). Paradiplomacy. In Global diplomacy (pp. 49–61). Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Paquin, S. (2021). Trade paradiplomacy and the politics of international economic law: The inclusion of Quebec and the exclusion of Wallonia in the CETA negotiations. New Political Economy, 27(4), 597–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prado, D. F. M. (2020). Subnational activism and conflicts within Jair Bolsonaro’s government: An analysis of the Brazilian states’ actions in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) agenda during 2019. Estudos Internacionais: Revista De Relações Internacionais Da PUC Minas, 9(3), 114–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J., Hinings, C. R., & Turner, C. (1968). Dimensions of organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 13, 65–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainey, H. G. (1997). Understanding and managing public organizations (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainey, H. G., Fernandez, S., & Malatesta, D. (2021). Understanding and managing public organizations (6th ed.). Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieger, F. C., & Brum, A. L. (2020). Paradiplomacia e Desenvolvimento Regional: Uma Proposta de Cooperação entre Governos Locais. Rde-Revista de Desenvolvimento Econômico, 3(44).

  • Rodrigues, G. M. A., & Mattioli, T. (2017). Paradiplomacy, security policies and city networks: The case of the Mercocities Citizen Security Thematic Unit. Contexto Internacional, 39, 569–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R., & Davis, G. F. (2007). Organizations and organizing. Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A. M. (2004). Disaggregated sovereignty: Towards the public accountability of global government networks. Government and Opposition, 39(2), 159–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soldatos, P., & Michelmann, H. J. (1992). Subnational units’ paradiplomacy in the context of European integration. Journal of European Integration, 15, 129–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surwandono, S. (2018). The dynamics of paradiplomacy practices in the “Frontier” areas in Indonesia. Journal of ASEAN Studies, 6(2), 137–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vigevani, T. (2006). Problemas para a atividade internacional das unidades subnacionais: Estados e municípios brasileiros. Revista Brasileira De Ciências Sociais, 21(62), 127–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, S. (2007). Paradiplomacy: Scope, opportunities and challenges. The Bologna Center Journal of International Affairs, 10(1), 141–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamorano, M. M., & Rodríguez Morató, A. (2015). The cultural paradiplomacy of Barcelona since the 1980s: Understanding transformations in local cultural paradiplomacy. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 21(5), 554–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, J., Ren, L., & Lovrich, N. (2010). Police organizational structures during the 1990s: An application of contingency theory. Police Quarterly, 13(2), 209–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana University, Bloomington, USA

    Marylis Fantoni & Claudia Avellaneda

Authors
  1. Marylis Fantoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claudia Avellaneda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claudia Avellaneda.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors certify that they have no conflict of interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 4, 5 and 6.

Table 4 LPM regression of paradiplomacy structures and political support (subjective measure) on municipal participation of international city networks
Full size table
Table 5 LPM regression of paradiplomacy structures and political support (subjective measure) on municipal international projects
Full size table
Table 6 Two-way cross tabulation of organization structure on paradiplomatic activities
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fantoni, M., Avellaneda, C. Explaining paradiplomacy: do local pro-international structures and political support matter?. GPPG 2, 353–375 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43508-022-00044-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43508-022-00044-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation