After losing their once prominent roles in world politics (rivalry cities in ancient Greece, trade in medieval Italian cities, etc.), subnational actors such as local governments, cities and local authorities are now re-engaging. and the diplomatic sphere in systems governed primarily by nation-states (Nganje 2024). As globalization and complex interdependence increasingly define international relations, these sub-state actors assert themselves on the world stage through paradiplomacy, which refers to the participation of non-state actors in the realm of international relations, especially through permanent establishment. We’ve found a new way to make an impact. or temporary contact with other actors in this area.
The formation of transnational networks is one of the main mechanisms mobilized by subnational actors, especially cities and mayors, to advance their paradiplomatic plans. Transnational networks refer to cross-border connections between subnational actors to collaborate or form new relationships for shared economic, political, cultural, and social agendas without the involvement of national government actors (Bansard et. al., 2017). . The first examples of such networks were established before the First World War, such as the International Federation of Housing and Planning, founded in 1913, but the number of networks increased significantly in the second half of the 20th century (Tortola & Couperus 2022).
By participating in these transnational networks, subnational actors can collectively leverage their voices and resources to shape the outcomes of international negotiations, especially through the development of partnerships with international organizations. Thus, they can amplify their influence and gain a more tangible presence on the global stage (Durmuş & Oomen, 2022). These networks enable more inclusive and diverse forms of diplomacy, reflecting the interconnected and multifaceted nature of the modern world. . The main purpose of this short contribution is to highlight the important role and benefits of transnational networks in the paradigm diplomacy of subnational actors.
Many current global issues, such as climate change and migration, have local impacts, including natural disasters that damage local infrastructure or increased pressure on local services due to population growth. This leads regional sub-state actors to respond to these global challenges in order to protect themselves from the negative consequences of these challenges. In most cases, subnational actors do not have the resources, experience, or skills needed to better address these issues individually. By collaborating under the roof of a multinational network, we can pool limited resources to find common solutions for the benefit of all, and share past knowledge, best practices and experiences to guide the actions of our colleagues.
Transnational networks may have burden sharing or joint influence among participants. One of the most notable examples of this is C40, which is lobbying heavily for central government to address the spending and financing gaps that cities face developing low-carbon infrastructure to reduce emissions (Smeds, 2019). Additionally, participation in transnational networks allows subnational actors to mobilize resources, access tested solutions, and build resilience to global challenges at the local level (Gordon & Johnson 2018).
Subnational actors have increasingly sought a role in shaping international norms and influencing the global negotiating agenda. For example, the United Nations Habitat Program has ensured that subnational actors have access to international norm formation related to migration or human rights such as the right to housing (Durmuş & Oomen, 2022). Acting alone, its impact on global negotiations will still be limited. Nonetheless, by forming transnational networks, these actors can significantly strengthen their lobbying power, bringing to the forefront the perspectives and demands of diverse local groups (Gordon & Johnson, 2018). These networks allow subnational actors to collectively amplify their voices to more effectively influence the outcomes of international agreements and advocate for inclusion in policy setting spaces where their actions are essential to implementing climate adaptation and mitigation measures. For example, the Paris Agreement’s inclusion of non-state actors such as cities, business groups, civil society actors, and academic researchers reflects the growing importance of transnational partnerships, especially with regard to climate action ( Maclean, 2020 ). The agreement recognized the value of the contribution of non-state actors, such as cities and private organizations, in achieving climate goals. These networks not only contribute to a diverse climate action environment, but also pressure national governments to adopt stronger commitments (Hale 2018).
Although states have a privileged role in defining the global climate change regime and its norms, many of the actions to achieve higher levels of mitigation or adaptation are taken by subnational, local actors (Roppongi, 2016). Subnational and local actors play an important role in implementing international climate standards through their roles in key emission sectors such as public transport and waste management. As a result, many of them now have climate action plans. The structure of transnational networks also allows subnational actors to integrate pressing local issues into the global negotiation agenda (Kaminski 2023). By acting together in transnational networks, subnational actors can integrate urgent agendas into the international negotiation process.
By participating in transnational networks, subnational actors can stay up-to-date on global developments and learn from each other’s experiences in dealing with problems such as climate change and economic downturns. (Trivigno-Salazar 2023). They gain insight into the strategies implemented by their peers, allowing them to critically evaluate their own capabilities and performance. Such benchmarking promotes motivation to improve by learning from the successes and failures of others, especially as constituted by the socialization process. This allows subnational actors to adopt new norms and adapt their practices to successful patterns observed within the network.
Lee (2019) identified this entire process as socialization, through which subnational actors adopt some norms and acquire behavioral patterns. Transnational networks are increasingly supporting adaptive governance by enabling subnational actors to experiment, improve and disseminate sustainable practices suited to local challenges. Despite the potential benefits of these transnational networks, scholars have noted a persistent Western-centric bias that leads network participants to replicate models from Western developed countries (Kaminski 2023). This is because networks are often formed by members of the Global North who bring with them established norms that may not fully resonate with actors in the Global South. This imbalance can put pressure on non-Western members to follow Western practices. Even if it does not fit local needs or circumstances. These implications, although not always obvious, highlight the need for more equitable participation in transnational networks to ensure that diverse perspectives and priorities are respected.
Transnational networks help subnational actors promote local climate action through collaboration by setting shared goals, monitoring progress, and providing financial and technical support (Tosun & Leopold 2019). That is, as a source of motivation, networks encourage subnational actors to pursue and implement well-coordinated policies at the local level, such as the European Union’s Climate and Energy Market Covenant. European Union climate and energy goals. Additionally, transnational networks often support joint research on issues of mutual interest that provides data-driven solutions for local actors. In this way, network members can solve common problems by working together to develop and implement better, more ambitious strategies (Kaminski 2023). Transnational networks addressing the most pressing climate change issues for local governments are evidence of this (Niederhafner 2013). These networks strengthen global climate governance by supporting the active participation of local governments and strengthening accountability through transparent reporting structures and resource sharing.
Transnational networks of subnational actors provide dynamic, multilevel governance structures that allow subnational actors to bypass traditional diplomatic constraints and engage directly with global challenges such as climate change, economic instability, and public health crises. By fostering cross-border cooperation, these networks provide essential technical assistance, help share knowledge, and mobilize funds to effectively address regional challenges. They are therefore highly critical of the paradigm diplomacy of sub-state actors. As these networks expand, they bring new hope for solving humanity’s pressing problems through local action aligned with global goals. This decentralized approach not only democratizes solving global problems, but also empowers subnational actors to influence international policy and build resilient and adaptable frameworks for sustainable development at the local level. This lays the foundation for the long-term, cross-sector collaboration essential to solving complex global problems that transcend borders.
References
Bansard, JS, Pattberg, PH, & Widerberg, O. 2017. “Cities to the Rescue? Assessing the performance of transnational city networks in global climate governance”. International environmental agreements: politics, law and economics17(2): 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-016-9318-9
Durmuş, E. & Oomen, B. 2022. “Transnational urban networks and their contribution to the creation of international legal norms: the case of migration”. local government research48(6): 1048-1069
Gordon GJ & Johnson, CA 2018. “City networks, global climate governance and the path to 1.5C”. Current views on environmental sustainability30:35-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.02.011
Hale, T. 2018. “The role of sub-state and non-state actors in international climate processes”. Chatnam House research paper. https://www.chathamhouse.org/2018/11/role-sub-state-and-non-state-actors-international-climate-processes
Kaminski, T. 2023. “Southeast Asian cities as co-producers of ecological knowledge in transnational urban networks.” Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography44: 58-74. https://doi:10.1111/sjtg.12465
Lee, T. & Jung HY 2018. “Mapping inter-city networks for climate change response: geographical basis, link modality, functions, and activities”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 182: 96-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.034
MacLean, J. 2020. “Rethinking the role of non-state actors in international climate governance”. Loyola University Chicago Review of International Law, 16(1): 21-43.
Nganje, F. 2024. “African Institutions in Transnational Urban Networks: The Case of the City of Johannesburg”. Local and Federal Research34(3): 315-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2021.1962306
Niederhafner, S. 2013. “Comparison of transnational urban network functions in Europe and Asia”. Asian European Journal11: 377-396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-013-0365-3
Roppongi, H. 2016. “The role of sub-state actors in climate change policy: the case of Tokyo”. asian vision86.
Smeds, E. 2019. “Unpacking the Politics of the C40: Two Decades of ‘Critical Friendship’”. global policy10(4): 720-722.
Tortula PD & Couperus, S. 2022. “Differential cooperation through local authority networks: challenges and opportunities. international audience57(1): 54-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2022.2011140
Tosun, J. & Leopold, L. 2019. “Coordinating urban water management and climate governance: insights from transnational urban networks.” water11(701). https://doi:10.3390/w11040701
Triviño-Salazar, J.C. 2023. “Transnational Urban Networks on Migration and Integration and the Governance of Regional Cooperation: Building a Nexus.” International Migration Review57(4): 402-426. https://10.1177/01979183231154558
Additional Resources on E-International Relations
