In accordance with the growing engagement of substate entities (SE) in international affairs, paradiplomacy [foreign policy actions of SEs] and protodiplomacy [secessionist form of paradiplomacy] represent an expanding debate in which SEs are characterized as: (1) “complementary” or “extra” units to traditional states, (2) neofunctionalist constituents of [European] regional integration, and (3) constructivist [green, global or nationalist] units of global governance. The level/scope of sharing state-power is a key issue in the debates setting the frontiers for paradiplomacy, eventually limiting the political-economic space for substate development in a state-centric world of politics. Beyond the mainstream views, this study proposed a new model with SEs being the “Schumpeterian” pioneers of governance, international development and conflict. In the context of dynamically evolving global political economy and the deformation/failure of post-colonial states, SEs are increasingly “pro-active” units with state-alike functions of territoriality, security, constitution making, international agreements and even “hard-policy” engagement, clearly seen in the Kurdish regions. Comparing the key intrinsic case: the quadri-regional Kurdish paradiplomacy (between Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran) with Quebec and Catalonia, this study focuses on progressive vs. antagonist policies/practices of states towards SEs. Investigating the intersection between paradiplomacy, international development and conflict in divided societies, this study argues that progressive power-sharing yields superior outcomes compared to rigid centralized systems of state-power. Solid evidence shows how SEs have diverse enhanced roles of building capacity, resilience, and self-competency in various areas of policy through the use of paradiplomacy, with the premise of tackling contemporary challenges of world politics.
","abstract_html":"<p>In accordance with the growing engagement of substate entities (SE) in international affairs, paradiplomacy [foreign policy actions of SEs] and protodiplomacy [secessionist form of paradiplomacy] represent an expanding debate in which SEs are characterized as: (1) “complementary” or “extra” units to traditional states, (2) neofunctionalist constituents of [European] regional integration, and (3) constructivist [green, global or nationalist] units of global governance. The level/scope of sharing state-power is a key issue in the debates setting the frontiers for paradiplomacy, eventually limiting the political-economic space for substate development in a state-centric world of politics. Beyond the mainstream views, this study proposed a new model with SEs being the “Schumpeterian” pioneers of governance, international development and conflict. In the context of dynamically evolving global political economy and the deformation/failure of post-colonial states, SEs are increasingly “pro-active” units with state-alike functions of territoriality, security, constitution making, international agreements and even “hard-policy” engagement, clearly seen in the Kurdish regions. Comparing the key intrinsic case: the quadri-regional Kurdish paradiplomacy (between Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran) with Quebec and Catalonia, this study focuses on progressive vs. antagonist policies/practices of states towards SEs. Investigating the intersection between paradiplomacy, international development and conflict in divided societies, this study argues that progressive power-sharing yields superior outcomes compared to rigid centralized systems of state-power. Solid evidence shows how SEs have diverse enhanced roles of building capacity, resilience, and self-competency in various areas of policy through the use of paradiplomacy, with the premise of tackling contemporary challenges of world politics.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Bingol, Haluk Baran"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy in International Conflict Management (Ph.D. INCM)","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Conflict Management","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Dr. Jesse Benjamin","Dr. Richard Vengroff","Dr. Anne Richards"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2016,"date_issued":"2016-11-30T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2016-11-30T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:44:06Z","subjects":["Paradiplomacy","Conflict","International development","Quebec","Catalonia","Kurdistan","Comparative Politics","Diplomatic History","International and Area Studies","International Relations","Peace and Conflict Studies","Political Economy","Political History","Political Theory","Regional Economics"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/incmdoc_etd/8","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Dr. Jesse Benjamin","Dr. Richard Vengroff","Dr. Anne Richards"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Bingol, Haluk Baran"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2121-11-29T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Conflict Management"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy in International Conflict Management (Ph.D. INCM)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Paradiplomacy","Conflict","International development","Quebec","Catalonia","Kurdistan","Comparative Politics","Diplomatic History","International and Area Studies","International Relations","Peace and Conflict Studies","Political Economy","Political History","Political Theory","Regional Economics"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/incmdoc_etd/8"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["In accordance with the growing engagement of substate entities (SE) in international affairs, paradiplomacy [foreign policy actions of SEs] and protodiplomacy [secessionist form of paradiplomacy] represent an expanding debate in which SEs are characterized as: (1) “complementary” or “extra” units to traditional states, (2) neofunctionalist constituents of [European] regional integration, and (3) constructivist [green, global or nationalist] units of global governance. The level/scope of sharing state-power is a key issue in the debates setting the frontiers for paradiplomacy, eventually limiting the political-economic space for substate development in a state-centric world of politics. Beyond the mainstream views, this study proposed a new model with SEs being the “Schumpeterian” pioneers of governance, international development and conflict. In the context of dynamically evolving global political economy and the deformation/failure of post-colonial states, SEs are increasingly “pro-active” units with state-alike functions of territoriality, security, constitution making, international agreements and even “hard-policy” engagement, clearly seen in the Kurdish regions. Comparing the key intrinsic case: the quadri-regional Kurdish paradiplomacy (between Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran) with Quebec and Catalonia, this study focuses on progressive vs. antagonist policies/practices of states towards SEs. Investigating the intersection between paradiplomacy, international development and conflict in divided societies, this study argues that progressive power-sharing yields superior outcomes compared to rigid centralized systems of state-power. Solid evidence shows how SEs have diverse enhanced roles of building capacity, resilience, and self-competency in various areas of policy through the use of paradiplomacy, with the premise of tackling contemporary challenges of world politics.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Paradiplomacy and Protodiplomacy in World Practice: A Comparative Case Study of Conflict and International Development in Quebec, Catalonia and Kurdistan"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Dr. Jesse Benjamin","Dr. Richard Vengroff","Dr. Anne Richards"],"dc:creator":["Bingol, Haluk Baran"],"dc:date.available":["2121-11-29T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["In accordance with the growing engagement of substate entities (SE) in international affairs, paradiplomacy [foreign policy actions of SEs] and protodiplomacy [secessionist form of paradiplomacy] represent an expanding debate in which SEs are characterized as: (1) “complementary” or “extra” units to traditional states, (2) neofunctionalist constituents of [European] regional integration, and (3) constructivist [green, global or nationalist] units of global governance. The level/scope of sharing state-power is a key issue in the debates setting the frontiers for paradiplomacy, eventually limiting the political-economic space for substate development in a state-centric world of politics. Beyond the mainstream views, this study proposed a new model with SEs being the “Schumpeterian” pioneers of governance, international development and conflict. In the context of dynamically evolving global political economy and the deformation/failure of post-colonial states, SEs are increasingly “pro-active” units with state-alike functions of territoriality, security, constitution making, international agreements and even “hard-policy” engagement, clearly seen in the Kurdish regions. Comparing the key intrinsic case: the quadri-regional Kurdish paradiplomacy (between Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran) with Quebec and Catalonia, this study focuses on progressive vs. antagonist policies/practices of states towards SEs. Investigating the intersection between paradiplomacy, international development and conflict in divided societies, this study argues that progressive power-sharing yields superior outcomes compared to rigid centralized systems of state-power. Solid evidence shows how SEs have diverse enhanced roles of building capacity, resilience, and self-competency in various areas of policy through the use of paradiplomacy, with the premise of tackling contemporary challenges of world politics.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/incmdoc_etd/8"],"dc:subject":["Paradiplomacy","Conflict","International development","Quebec","Catalonia","Kurdistan","Comparative Politics","Diplomatic History","International and Area Studies","International Relations","Peace and Conflict Studies","Political Economy","Political History","Political Theory","Regional Economics"],"dc:title":["Paradiplomacy and Protodiplomacy in World Practice: A Comparative Case Study of Conflict and International Development in Quebec, Catalonia and Kurdistan"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Conflict Management"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy in International Conflict Management (Ph.D. INCM)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:44:06Z"}