OBSERVARE

Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026

409

BEYOND CENTRALISM: THE EVOLUTION AND CHALLENGES OF

PARADIPLOMACY IN THE UNITARY STATES – A CASE STUDY OF INDONESIA

LUKMAN HAKIM

l_hakim@widyagama.ac.id

Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, Universitas Widyagama Malang (Indonesia). He earned

his Bachelor’s and Doctoral degrees in Law from Universitas Brawijaya and his Master’s degree

from Universitas Padjadjaran. His academic expertise includes constitutional law, state

institutional law, international law, and legal theory. He has led numerous nationally funded

research projects and published extensively in reputable journals on constitutional reform, state

commissions, and governance. He is also the author of several books on constitutional and state

institutional law.

PURNAWAN DWIKORA NEGARA

purnawan_dn@widyagama.ac.id

Senior lecturer in the Faculty of Law at Universitas Widyagama Malang (Indonesia). He obtained

his Bachelor’s degree from the University of Jember and completed his Master’s and Doctoral

degrees in Law at Universitas Diponegoro. His teaching and research focus on environmental law,

natural resources law, human rights law, spatial planning law, and socio-legal studies. He has

conducted various research projects and community engagement programs related to

environmental protection, legal reform, and cultural preservation.

SIRAJUDDIN

sirajuddin@widyagama.ac.id

Lecturer at the Faculty of Law and Postgraduate Program of Universitas Widyagama Malang

(Indonesia). He obtained his Bachelor’s degree from Universitas Widyagama and completed his

Master’s and Doctoral degrees in Law at Universitas Brawijaya. His research interests include

constitutional law, administrative law, legislative drafting, public policy, and judicial ethics. He

has published numerous books and scholarly articles on constitutionalism, public governance,

and legislative reform, and actively contributes to academic forums on state and administrative

law in Indonesia.

QATRUNNADA HAMPARAN MELATI

qatrunnada.melati@mespom.eu

MSc student in Environmental Sciences, Policy and Management (Erasmus Mundus Joint Master

Programme – MESPOM), studying at Central European University, Austria, the University of the

Aegean, Greece, and Lund University, Sweden. She earned her Bachelor of Social Science from

Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University, Japan, majoring in Asia Pacific Studies. Her research

interests focus on environmental justice, gender and environmental movements, sustainable

development, and social conflicts arising from ecological transformation. She has been actively

involved in environmental advocacy initiatives and youth-based gender equality movements

(Indonesia).

Abstract

Paradiplomacy has emerged as a critical mechanism for subnational governments to engage

internationally in response to globalization and decentralization. While extensively studied in

federal systems, its dynamics within unitary states remain underexplored. This study

examines the evolution and institutionalization of paradiplomacy in Indonesia through

qualitative case studies of West Java Province and the City of Surabaya. Drawing on

Kuznetsov’s multidimensional framework, complemented by theories of multilevel

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

410

governance, actorness, and soft power, the analysis highlights how subnational actors

navigate legal ambiguities, institutional constraints, and political centralization to assert

agency in global governance. Findings reveal that leadership vision, institutional innovation,

strategic networking, and adaptive governance strategies, rather than formal legal authority,

drive successful paradiplomacy in Indonesia. Despite notable achievements, systemic

challenges—such as fragmented coordination, legal uncertainty, and capacity limitations—

constrain the full potential of subnational international engagement. This study expands

paradiplomacy theory beyond federal contexts, emphasizing the importance of informal

mechanisms, networked strategies, and alignment with national development agendas to

enable subnational actors within centralized political systems.

Keywords

Paradiplomacy, subnational governance, multilevel governance, actorness, decentralized

diplomacy.

Resumo

A paradiplomacia surgiu como um mecanismo crítico para os governos subnacionais se

envolverem internacionalmente em resposta à globalização e à descentralização. Embora

amplamente estudada em sistemas federais, sua dinâmica dentro de Estados unitários

permanece pouco explorada. Este estudo examina a evolução e a institucionalização da

paradiplomacia na Indonésia por meio de estudos de caso qualitativos da província de Java

Ocidental e da cidade de Surabaya. Com base na estrutura multidimensional de Kuznetsov,

complementada por teorias de governança multinível, atuação e soft power, a análise destaca

como os atores subnacionais lidam com ambiguidades jurídicas, restrições institucionais e

centralização política para afirmar sua agência na governança global. As conclusões revelam

que a visão de liderança, a inovação institucional, o networking estratégico e as estratégias

de governança adaptativa, em vez da autoridade jurídica formal, impulsionam o sucesso da

paradiplomacia na Indonésia. Apesar das conquistas notáveis, desafios sistêmicos — como

coordenação fragmentada, incerteza jurídica e limitações de capacidade — restringem o

potencial total do envolvimento internacional subnacional. Este estudo expande a teoria da

paradiplomacia além dos contextos federais, enfatizando a importância de mecanismos

informais, estratégias em rede e alinhamento com as agendas de desenvolvimento nacional

para capacitar atores subnacionais dentro de sistemas políticos centralizados.

Palavras-chave

Paradiplomacia, governança subnacional, governança multinível, atuação, diplomacia

descentralizada.

How to cite this article

Hakim, Lukman, Purnawan Negara, Dwikora, Sirajuddin, & Melat, Qatrunnada Hamparan i (2026).

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States – A Case

Study of Indonesia. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations, VOL. 17, Nº. 1, May 2026, pp.

409-428. https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.17.1.21

Article submitted on 5 May 2025 and accepted on 27 January 2026.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

411

BEYOND CENTRALISM: THE EVOLUTION AND CHALLENGES OF

PARADIPLOMACY IN THE UNITARY STATES – A CASE STUDY OF

INDONESIA

LUKMAN HAKIM

PURNAWAN DWIKORA NEGARA

SIRAJUDDIN

QATRUNNADA HAMPARAN MELATI

Introduction

Paradiplomacy—the international engagement of subnational governments—has become

an increasingly significant element of contemporary global governance. While the

phenomenon is well-documented in federal states, its manifestations within unitary

systems have remained underexplored. In Indonesia, the post-New Order

decentralization reforms of 1999 granted provinces and municipalities substantial

autonomy, enabling them to engage in cross-border cooperation in sectors such as

investment, education, climate change, and culture. However, these emerging practices

encounter persistent challenges, notably legal ambiguities, institutional fragmentation,

and coordination hurdles with central authorities, particularly the Ministry of Foreign

Affairs. As global challenges intensify, necessitating local innovation and international

collaboration, the role of subnational actors has become increasingly critical.

This study examines paradiplomacy's evolution and institutional dynamics in Indonesia,

focusing on two illustrative cases: West Java Province and the City of Surabaya. It further

evaluates how legal and institutional frameworks facilitate or constrain subnational

international engagements, providing insights relevant to other unitary states

experiencing decentralization.

Paradiplomacy encompasses the participation of subnational entities—including regions,

provinces, and municipalities—in international relations, often operating alongside or

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

412

independently of national governments (Ciesielska‐Klikowska & Kamiński, 2022; Fantoni

& Avellaneda, 2022; Smith, 2019). This practice has evolved alongside the intensification

of globalization, the deepening of decentralization, and the growing recognition of local

governments' distinct capacities to address economic, political, and cultural challenges

more effectively than centralized authorities. Initially informal and sporadic,

paradiplomacy has developed into a structured and multidimensional domain, bolstered

by technological advancements and increasing demands for local autonomy during the

late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.

Comparative studies highlight the diversity and institutionalization of paradiplomacy

across the globe (Ciesielska‐Klikowska & Kamiński, 2022; Smith, 2019). In Europe and

Latin America, subnational governments have leveraged their geographic, cultural, and

economic attributes to build international partnerships and assert their interests on the

global stage. Even within unitary systems such as China, innovative strategies have

enabled subnational actors to achieve global visibility despite strict central oversight (Liu

& Yao, 2019, 2020). These developments reflect a broader shift from hierarchical

diplomacy models toward more pluralistic and multilayered forms of international

engagement.

A critical dimension in paradiplomacy research is the distinction between federal and

unitary systems. Constitutional arrangements in federal states like Canada and the

United States formally empower subnational governments to conduct international

relations (Lequesne & Paquin, 2017). In contrast, subnational actors in unitary states

must often navigate more stringent central controls, relying on informal or ad hoc

mechanisms that typically require national approval (Liu & Yao, 2019, 2020). Case

studies such as those of Aceh (Indonesia) and Catalonia (Spain) demonstrate how the

degree of subnational autonomy and institutional support varies significantly depending

on the political and legal contexts.

The evolution of paradiplomacy reflects broader transformations in global governance,

wherein local autonomy is increasingly recognized as crucial to practical international

cooperation. While federal systems often offer more supportive environments for

subnational diplomacy, unitary systems produce more fragmented and experimental

practices due to centralized constraints. Understanding this dichotomy underscores the

importance of legal and institutional contexts in shaping the capacities and influence of

subnational actors (Ciesielska‐Klikowska & Kamiński, 2022; Fantoni & Avellaneda, 2022;

Lequesne & Paquin, 2017; Liu & Yao, 2019, 2020; Smith, 2019).

Indonesia's decentralization has generated profound legal and institutional consequences

for subnational engagement in international affairs. The post-Reformasi autonomy laws

devolved fiscal, administrative, and political authority to regional entities, allowing them

to initiate international collaborations aligned with regional socio-economic priorities

(Diprose, 2022; Susiatiningsih et al., 2018). These reforms encouraged a bottom-up

approach to foreign cooperation.

Nonetheless, decentralization also introduced challenges regarding policy coherence and

legal clarity. Studies have noted persistent tensions between local autonomy and central

oversight (Butt, 2019; Susiatiningsih et al., 2018). Inconsistencies in regulatory authority

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

413

and conflicting mandates reveal the pressing need for enhanced intergovernmental

coordination to harmonize subnational diplomacy with national foreign policy (Butt,

2019).

Moreover, decentralization fostered legal pluralism, enabling local administrations to

create region-specific legal and diplomatic mechanisms that enhanced their international

engagement capacities (Butt, 2019; Susiatiningsih et al., 2018). Indonesian local

governments have since actively pursued sister-city partnerships, bilateral cooperation

initiatives, and participation in transnational policy forums, asserting themselves as

contributors to international governance.

Paradiplomacy has proven vital for addressing global challenges such as climate change

and sustainable economic development. Subnational actors have complemented national

policies by tailoring responses to local conditions and leveraging specialized knowledge.

Municipal networks have facilitated the sharing of best practices and joint climate

adaptation initiatives (Smith, 2019). Participation in transnational forums has further

enabled subnational actors to address institutional gaps left by national mechanisms

(Mauad & Betsill, 2019).

Subnational diplomacy also significantly advances economic development through trade

promotion, foreign investment attraction, and sustainable innovation (Bouchet, 2022;

Smith, 2019), particularly as climate resilience and economic competitiveness

increasingly intertwine (Setzer, 2015; Setzer et al., 2020).

Despite its growing relevance, scholarly exploration of paradiplomacy in Southeast Asia

remains limited. Much existing research lacks comprehensive comparative analysis and

remains narrowly focused, particularly regarding unitary states like Indonesia

(Dermawan et al., 2022). This gap highlights the need for a deeper inquiry into how

subnational actors in centralized political systems engage internationally.

Paradiplomacy has provided subnational governments with critical mechanisms to

respond to globalization through localized, adaptive strategies. However, its theoretical

development remains insufficient, especially in Southeast Asia and Indonesia. This study

seeks to address this gap by examining Indonesia's legal, institutional, and strategic

paradiplomacy dimensions, offering broader insights for other unitary states navigating

global governance challenges. Despite existing studies on paradiplomacy, there remains

limited understanding of how subnational actors in unitary states navigate centralized

governance constraints, particularly in Southeast Asia. This study addresses this gap by

examining Indonesia’s subnational diplomacy through two prominent cases.

Literature Review

The scholarly exploration of paradiplomacy initially concentrated on federal states, where

constitutional frameworks grant regional and local governments substantial autonomy to

engage in external relations. Foundational contributions by scholars such as Kuznetsov,

Lecours, and Cornago developed key theoretical models emphasizing the significance of

institutional factors, legal permissibility, and political incentives as critical drivers of

subnational international engagement. Kuznetsov’s multidimensional framework, in

particular, highlighted the crucial role of internal organizational structures and domestic

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

414

political will in shaping paradiplomatic outcomes (Fantoni & Avellaneda, 2022; Jackson,

2017). His model stressed the importance of institutional capacity, including foreign

affairs departments, chambers of commerce, and international liaison offices, in

facilitating effective global engagement.

Building upon this foundation, later scholarship incorporated a variety of theoretical

perspectives, such as institutionalism, network theory, political geography, and, to a

lesser extent, realist approaches. Institutionalists argue that decentralization fosters the

formal capacity of subnational governments to participate internationally by delegating

administrative authority and creating specialized bureaucracies. Network theorists

complement this view by emphasizing the empowerment of subnational actors through

transnational coalitions and partnerships, allowing them to bypass traditional national

diplomatic channels and gain access to knowledge, resources, and political leverage.

Political geography adds another dimension, examining how territorial location and

regional identity shape paradiplomatic strategies (Fantoni & Avellaneda, 2022; Jackson,

2017).

Despite broadening theoretical perspectives, Kuznetsov’s framework remains influential

due to its adaptability across different governance contexts. It identifies two primary

conditions for successful paradiplomacy: establishing pro-international institutional

infrastructures and securing sustained political support from local elites. Empirical

applications of Kuznetsov’s model consistently demonstrate that subnational entities

equipped with dedicated foreign affairs units, stable funding, and political leadership are

better positioned to engage internationally. Scholars have further enriched Kuznetsov’s

model by integrating factors such as globalization pressures, regional identity politics,

and normative concerns within international relations (Fantoni & Avellaneda, 2022;

Jackson, 2017).

Paradiplomatic activity typically operates along three core dimensions: institutional,

legal, and motivational. Institutionally, decentralized governance structures provide

subnational governments the autonomy to establish mechanisms supporting

international outreach, such as foreign cooperation offices and participation in global city

networks. For instance, Indonesian provinces have established international cooperation

units, and cities like Surabaya actively participate in transnational climate initiatives

(Susiatiningsih et al., 2018). These institutional structures align international

engagement with local development goals and foster greater policy responsiveness.

Moreover, effective political leadership has proven essential for legitimizing and

sustaining support for such initiatives.

From a legal perspective, paradiplomacy remains framed within constitutional provisions

that typically reserve foreign policy authority for national governments, particularly in

unitary states. Despite formal restrictions, subnational actors often employ pragmatic

strategies to navigate legal constraints, exploiting ambiguities or utilizing informal

channels. In Indonesia, decentralization laws offer administrative discretion for

international cooperation, yet persistent questions regarding authority and policy

coherence complicate local initiatives (Butt, 2019; Susiatiningsih et al., 2018). This legal

duality underscores the complex interplay between formal limitations and adaptive

practices in subnational diplomacy.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

415

Motivationally, paradiplomacy is driven by diverse objectives, including economic

development, cultural promotion, identity articulation, and political positioning. Local

governments frequently seek international partnerships to attract foreign investment,

expand market access, and elevate global profiles. Other motivations include the

promotion of regional identities and participation in international norm-setting,

particularly in areas such as climate action, education, and public health. Successful

paradiplomatic initiatives are often grounded in visionary leadership, elite consensus, and

broad community support for internationalization (Cantir, 2019; Susiatiningsih et al.,

2018).

Despite its conceptual richness, paradiplomacy scholarship faces several critiques. Its

predominantly case-specific and descriptive nature is a primary limitation, which restricts

broader theoretical generalization across political and legal systems. Furthermore,

research has been disproportionately centered on Western federal systems, resulting in

significant gaps in the understanding of paradiplomatic practices in non-Western and

unitary contexts. This imbalance has contributed to conceptual blind spots, particularly

regarding informal and experimental paradiplomatic activities within centralized political

systems. Additionally, persistent conceptual ambiguity surrounding the term

"paradiplomacy"—which is inconsistently applied across different levels of governance—

continues to undermine its analytical precision (Cantir, 2019; Jackson, 2017).

The literature offers a multidimensional but fragmented understanding of subnational

international engagement. Although diverse theoretical frameworks have illuminated its

institutional, legal, and motivational aspects, substantial gaps remain, particularly in the

operationalization of paradiplomacy in non-Western and unitary states. Kuznetsov’s

model remains a valuable analytical tool, especially when adapted to centralized systems'

specific political and legal contexts. Building on these conceptual foundations, this study

examines the evolution of paradiplomacy in Indonesia—focusing on the cases of West

Java and Surabaya—to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of subnational

diplomacy within unitary states.

While Kuznetsov’s multidimensional framework and its subsequent adaptations offer

valuable insights into the institutional, legal, and motivational dimensions of

paradiplomacy, the majority of existing models have been developed within federal

contexts. As this study will demonstrate, the specific challenges and adaptive strategies

of subnational actors in unitary states such as Indonesia necessitate a critical

reassessment and expansion of these theoretical frameworks.

Method

This study adopts a qualitative case study approach to investigate the evolution of

paradiplomacy within the framework of a unitary state, focusing on Indonesia as the

primary context. Following the post-Reformasi decentralization reforms, provincial and

municipal governments in Indonesia gained increased autonomy, enabling them to

participate in international cooperation initiatives. To capture the diversity of responses

to these institutional changes, two contrasting cases were purposively selected: West

Java Province and the City of Surabaya. These cases represent distinct levels of

subnational governance and diverge in their international strategies—West Java

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

416

emphasizes economic and investment diplomacy, while Surabaya leads in sustainable

urban development and global city networking.

The case study approach was chosen for its effectiveness in producing in-depth,

contextual analyses and facilitating comparative insights between diverse institutional

environments. Rather than seeking broad generalizations, this method prioritizes rich

empirical understanding of complex phenomena—specifically, how local actors navigate

legal, political, and bureaucratic constraints to engage internationally.

Data collection focused on qualitative document analysis. Primary sources included

decentralization laws, local regulations on international cooperation, Memoranda of

Understanding (MoUs), and strategic development plans from both West Java and

Surabaya. Supplementary sources such as peer-reviewed journal articles, policy reports,

and credible media publications were also reviewed to strengthen the analysis and

support triangulation.

The analytical framework is grounded in Kuznetsov’s multidimensional model of

paradiplomacy, encompassing four key dimensions: legal foundations, institutional

capacity, strategic motivation, and external outcomes. This model guided the thematic

coding process, which was used to identify recurring patterns and infer the underlying

logics shaping each locality’s approach to international engagement.

The coding scheme was developed inductively and refined through iterative review,

consistent with the methodological guidance of Sinambela (Sinambela et al., 2024).

Particular attention was given to formalized international initiatives—such as bilateral

agreements and project-based collaborations—to assess their alignment with national

policy frameworks and legal mandates.

Performance indicators were also identified, including the creation of foreign affairs units,

frequency of participation in international forums, and demonstrable results from global

partnerships. These indicators were analyzed with reference to governance benchmarks

from Zeemering to assess strategic capacity and institutional maturity (Zeemering,

2017).

Overall, the integration of case study design and thematic document analysis provides a

rigorous yet flexible framework for exploring subnational diplomacy in centralized political

systems. This approach enables a nuanced understanding of how regional and municipal

governments in Indonesia assert international agency within the confines of a unitary

state architecture.

Results and Discussion

The Growth of Paradiplomacy in Indonesia

Since the early 2000s decentralization reforms, Indonesia has significantly transformed

its subnational governance, especially in the capacity of local governments to engage

internationally. Regional autonomy, formalized through Law No. 22/1999 and refined in

Law No. 23/2014, transferred substantial administrative, political, and fiscal authority to

subnational entities. Although the Constitution reserves foreign affairs for the central

government, globalization pressures—including the imperatives of attracting investment,

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

417

fostering educational exchanges, and enhancing environmental governance—have

incentivized local governments to seek international collaborations.

Government Regulation No. 28/2018 on Regional Cooperation introduced procedural

frameworks permitting subnational governments to establish international partnerships,

subject to approval from central ministries. However, in practice, the implementation of

paradiplomatic initiatives has been uneven. While some regions have effectively

leveraged the regulatory space to develop sustained international partnerships, others

have limited their activities to symbolic engagements. These variations reflect disparities

in institutional capacity, leadership vision, and resource availability across different

localities.

Significantly, paradiplomatic success in Indonesia has been driven by legal reforms,

leadership foresight, institutional innovation, and strategic networking. As Fantoni and

Avellaneda (2022) argue, the mere existence of legal frameworks is insufficient; active

political commitment and the ability to mobilize networks are crucial to success (Fantoni

& Avellaneda, 2022).

Indonesia’s decentralization has enabled subnational governments to articulate region-

specific development priorities within international forums. Cases such as Semarang

City's urban sustainability initiatives (Susiatiningsih et al., 2018), Karawang District’s

agricultural innovation through sister-city programs, and Aceh’s cultural diplomacy

leveraging special autonomy (Dermawan et al., 2022) exemplify how localized strategies

can enhance global engagement.

Nevertheless, paradiplomacy practices remain highly asymmetrical across Indonesia.

Variations in financial resources, bureaucratic competency, and political commitment

have created uneven patterns of international engagement. While provinces like West

Java and cities like Surabaya have institutionalized paradiplomacy, many other local

governments struggle with basic capacity constraints.

Case Study 1: West Java Province

West Java has emerged as a leading actor in Indonesia’s paradiplomatic landscape,

demonstrating how strategic vision and institutional innovation can amplify subnational

global engagement. Under the "Jabar Juara" framework, the provincial government

developed an integrated international cooperation agenda encompassing investment

promotion, education, environmental sustainability, and cultural diplomacy.

One of West Java's most notable innovations has been the establishment of the West

Java Investment Promotion Center (WJIPC) in Singapore, a strategic hub for foreign

direct investment. Mirroring global best practices such as São Paulo's InvestSP, the

WJIPC actively promotes the province's competitive advantages—a skilled workforce,

modern infrastructure, and strategic geographic position (Dermawan, Azmi, et al., 2024).

At the institutional level, West Java has embedded international cooperation within its

administrative structures by creating specialized units and supporting regulations. Local

initiatives, such as agricultural collaborations in Karawang and environmental programs

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

418

in Cirebon, further demonstrate a clear alignment between global engagement strategies

and regional development goals (Affandi & Utami, 2024; Khoerunnisa & Maulana, 2023).

Additionally, West Java’s strategic deployment of soft power tools—through educational

exchanges, cultural festivals, and targeted digital campaigns—has effectively enhanced

its international brand (Dermawan, Alam, et al., 2024). These initiatives showcase how

paradiplomacy can operate not only through formal agreements but also by cultivating

reputational capital.

Overall, West Java's success highlights leadership, institutional readiness, and network

mobilization—rather than formal diplomatic authority—as the principal enablers of

effective subnational diplomacy within unitary systems. The figure below summarizes the

key components of West Java’s paradiplomatic strategies, illustrating how institutional

mechanisms, leadership, and soft power are integrated to support international

engagement.

Figure 1. West Java’s Strategies

Source: Authorship

Case Study 2: Surabaya City

Surabaya has established itself as a pioneer in municipal-level paradiplomacy,

characterized by pragmatic, issue-specific international engagements. The city’s

paradiplomatic efforts center on operational partnerships rather than symbolic

affiliations, with sister-city collaborations with Kitakyushu (Japan), Liverpool (United

Kingdom), and Busan (South Korea) yielding tangible outcomes in areas such as waste

management, public health, and urban innovation (Sinambela et al., 2024; Wardhani &

Dugis, 2020).

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

419

The Green Sister City Program with Kitakyushu exemplifies how informal yet strategic

partnerships can deliver substantial environmental outcomes, including improved waste

management systems and enhanced sustainability practices (Dzazira & Pratama, 2023;

Utomo, 2022).

Institutionally, Surabaya embedded international cooperation within the mayor’s office,

ensuring strategic alignment with municipal development priorities (Amiri, 2022). Beyond

bilateral relationships, Surabaya’s active participation in multilateral networks such as

the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group and ICLEI demonstrates how global urban

coalitions provide critical platforms for municipal paradiplomacy (Ciesielska‐Klikowska &

Kamiński, 2022).

Surabaya’s experience reveals that informal mechanisms—such as city-to-city

exchanges, network memberships, and joint initiatives—are essential for sustaining

subnational international engagement under centralized political constraints. Figure 2

presents Surabaya’s operational model of paradiplomacy, emphasizing its focus on

pragmatic partnerships, issue-specific collaborations, and multilateral urban networks.

Figure 2. Surabaya’s Paradiplomacy Strategies

Source: Authorship

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

420

Challenges in Subnational Foreign Engagement

Despite notable advancements, paradiplomacy in Indonesia faces persistent and

multifaceted challenges:

• Legal Ambiguity: While decentralization laws permit international cooperation, the

lack of detailed procedural frameworks has led to cautious, fragmented practices and

inhibited innovation.

• Institutional Fragmentation: Uneven devolution of administrative authority creates

coordination problems, while limited communication between subnational governments

and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs hampers policy coherence (Asmorojati et al., 2022).

• Political Tensions: Divergent priorities between national and local actors often

produce friction. Central interventions sometimes constrain subnational initiatives

perceived as deviating from national diplomatic agendas (Bouchet, 2022).

• Capacity Constraints: Many local administrations lack trained personnel,

sustainabfitle funding, and institutional memory, limiting their ability to initiate and

maintain robust international partnerships (Dermawan, Alam, et al., 2024).

• Ambivalent Central Government Stance: Subnational diplomacy's simultaneous

encouragement and restriction create an unpredictable operational environment

(Sharma et al., 2020; Smith, 2019), forcing local actors to rely on ad hoc, negotiated

arrangements rather than systematic cooperation.

These challenges reaffirm the need for greater clarity in regulatory frameworks, stronger

intergovernmental coordination, and sustained investment in subnational institutional

capacities. The challenges discussed above are synthesized in the following figure, which

maps the structural and operational barriers faced by Indonesian subnational

governments in conducting foreign engagement.

Figure 3. Challenges in Subnational Foreign Engagement in Indonesia

Source: Authorship

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

421

Linking Empirical Findings to Theoretical Contributions

The Indonesian experience provides empirical validation for the argument that

paradiplomacy theories must be expanded beyond federal contexts. The success of

subnational actors such as West Java and Surabaya illustrates that adaptive strategies,

informal governance mechanisms, and strategic alignment with national priorities are

critical enablers of paradiplomatic agency in unitary states.

Additionally, the findings confirm the significance of informal pathways, multilevel

negotiation, and soft power utilization as indispensable elements of paradiplomatic

practice under centralized governance structures.

Thus, Indonesia's evolving subnational international engagement demonstrates that

even without constitutional authority, subnational governments can act as credible

international players—provided they possess leadership vision, institutional adaptability,

and strategic network-building capacities.

Theoretical Reflection

Understanding paradiplomacy within unitary states like Indonesia necessitates a broader

analytical lens beyond the legalistic frameworks commonly developed for federal

systems. While legal authority remains significant, successful paradiplomacy in

centralized contexts hinges more on adaptive governance mechanisms, informal

strategies, and the dynamic agency of subnational actors operating within centralized

constraints.

Although Kuznetsov’s multidimensional model remains foundational, it requires critical

adaptation to accommodate the specific challenges and opportunities present in unitary

systems. Federal models, which presuppose formal constitutional authority for

subnational diplomacy, often fail to account for the improvisational and negotiated

practices that characterize paradiplomacy in unitary contexts. Existing theoretical

frameworks must therefore be contextualized, incorporating the unique political, legal,

and institutional realities of decentralized but non-sovereign actors.

While Kuznetsov’s multidimensional model provides a valuable analytical foundation, its

application to unitary states demands critical refinement based on empirical realities.

Experiences from other centralized systems show that subnational international

engagement often operates through informal, negotiated mechanisms rather than

through formalized institutional pathways. In China, for example, Liu and Yao (2019,

2020) reveal how Yunnan Province successfully expanded its international presence via

pragmatic regional initiatives and transborder collaborations without explicit

constitutional authority (Liu & Yao, 2019, 2020). These findings highlight the importance

of opportunistic and adaptive strategies over rigid institutional infrastructures in

centralized settings. Similarly, Sharma et al. (2020) demonstrate that Indian states,

despite operating within a quasi-federal but highly centralized framework, leverage

partisan linkages, personalized leadership, and policy entrepreneurship to sustain

international engagements (Sharma et al., 2020). These cases collectively suggest that

subnational actorness under centralized governance structures depends not merely on

institutional endowments, but also on political agility, elite networking, and strategic

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

422

alignment with national priorities. Accordingly, theoretical models must recognize the

informal, dynamic, and context-sensitive nature of paradiplomatic practices in unitary

states, beyond the structural assumptions derived from federal contexts.

Integrating multilevel governance, actorness, and soft power theories complements

Kuznetsov's framework and provides a more comprehensive understanding of

subnational international engagement.

Multilevel governance theory emphasizes the diffusion of authority across multiple tiers.

It suggests that subnational actors can assert themselves internationally not by directly

challenging central authority but by operating within policy spaces that align local

capacities with global agendas (Christie, 2022). In Indonesia, the overlapping spheres of

influence among regional, national, and international actors have enabled cities like

Surabaya and provinces like West Java to participate meaningfully in global governance

processes without infringing on national sovereignty.

The concept of actorness further enriches this analysis by highlighting how subnational

governments can cultivate legitimacy, external recognition, and agenda-setting capacity

despite lacking sovereign status (Liu & Yao, 2020). Case studies, such as Yunnan Province

in China and Surabaya’s leadership in global environmental networks, illustrate that

strategic specialization, institutional credibility, and international networking enable

subnational entities to acquire tangible influence within global governance arenas.

Soft power dynamics also play an increasingly critical role in paradiplomacy. Subnational

governments, such as West Java and Surabaya, utilize cultural diplomacy, education

exchanges, and city branding to project favorable regional identities, attract investment,

and build reputational capital internationally (Dermawan, Alam, et al., 2024; Jiménez-

Castillo et al., 2022). This strategic deployment of soft power has allowed subnational

actors to enhance their international and domestic legitimacy.

An important distinction must be made between paradiplomacy and proto-diplomacy.

While proto-diplomacy often carries secessionist or politically sensitive connotations,

Indonesian paradiplomacy remains development-oriented and aligned with the national

interest. Subnational engagements prioritize functional objectives such as trade

promotion, environmental sustainability, and educational collaboration without

challenging the state's territorial integrity or foreign policy prerogatives. This functionalist

orientation distinguishes Indonesian paradiplomacy as a collaborative complement to

national diplomacy rather than a competitive alternative.

Moreover, legal pluralism and informal strategies emerge as critical mechanisms enabling

paradiplomacy within centralized political frameworks. The absence of detailed legal

procedures compels subnational actors to navigate constraints through pragmatic and

often creative strategies, exploiting legal ambiguities and building informal networks to

sustain international partnerships. This flexibility underscores the innovative capacity of

subnational governments operating within restrictive institutional environments.

Building upon these insights, this study advocates for developing a revised analytical

framework for understanding paradiplomacy in centralized systems. Beyond institutional

capacity and political endorsement, successful paradiplomacy in unitary contexts

depends on the following factors:

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

423

• The degree of legal discretion available to subnational actors,

• The efficacy of informal and networked approaches,

• The strategic alignment between local initiatives and national development agendas,

• The leadership capacity to mobilize credibility and sustain international engagements.

Comparative perspectives further illuminate the structural asymmetries between federal

and unitary systems. In federal states, constitutional autonomy offers a relatively secure

foundation for subnational diplomacy (Lequesne & Paquin, 2017). In contrast, unitary

systems demand more flexible, opportunistic, and context-sensitive strategies due to the

absence of formal mandates. Nevertheless, as West Java and Surabaya have

demonstrated, subnational actors can exercise considerable agency and contribute

substantially to global governance networks even within centralized constraints.

In conclusion, integrating Kuznetsov’s model with multilevel governance, actorness, and

soft power perspectives offers a more holistic and context-sensitive understanding of

paradiplomacy in unitary states. It highlights the dynamic interplay between institutional

innovation, strategic adaptation, and political negotiation that defines subnational

international engagement in contemporary global governance. Building upon this

synthesis, this study proposes a recalibrated model of subnational diplomacy for unitary

systems—characterized by informal strategic agency, leadership-driven negotiation, and

opportunistic alignment with national agendas. Before concluding, it is important to

acknowledge several limitations of this study that may influence the interpretation and

generalizability of its findings. Figure 4 conceptualizes the core enablers of paradiplomacy

in unitary states, integrating legal discretion, informal strategies, strategic alignment,

and leadership capacity into a unified analytical model.

Figure 4. Paradiplomacy in Unitary States: Key Concept

Source: Authorship

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

424

Study Limitations

While this study offers significant insights into paradiplomacy practices within a unitary

state context, several limitations must be acknowledged. First, the qualitative case study

design, although effective for capturing in-depth dynamics, inherently restricts the

generalizability of findings. The focus on West Java and Surabaya provides valuable

illustrative examples but may not fully represent the diverse experiences of other

subnational entities in Indonesia or other unitary states undergoing decentralization.

Future studies incorporating broader cross-regional comparisons could provide a more

comprehensive understanding of the variation in paradiplomatic practices.

Second, the reliance on document analysis and secondary data sources may have limited

the ability to capture real-time political dynamics, informal negotiations, or evolving

intergovernmental relationships that significantly influence subnational diplomacy.

Conducting interviews with policymakers, local officials, and international partners could

enrich the analysis by providing firsthand perspectives and uncovering latent factors

influencing paradiplomacy strategies. Addressing these limitations in future research

would contribute to a deeper and more nuanced theorization of subnational international

engagement in centralized governance systems.

Conclusion

Paradiplomacy in Indonesia has evolved as a pragmatic and adaptive response to the

dual imperatives of globalization and decentralization. Despite operating within a

centralized political framework, subnational governments have progressively asserted

international agency by mobilizing local assets, forging strategic partnerships, and

institutionalizing foreign cooperation mechanisms.

The case studies of West Java Province and the City of Surabaya demonstrate that

effective paradiplomacy in a unitary state depends not primarily on formal constitutional

authority but on leadership vision, institutional innovation, strategic networking, and the

adaptive exploitation of legal and political spaces. Through proactive strategies—

including establishing foreign cooperation units, participating in global city networks, and

deploying soft power tools—these subnational actors have successfully inserted

themselves into global governance processes.

Empirically, this study reveals that while decentralization laws provided an initial legal

foundation for subnational international engagement, the realization of paradiplomatic

potential is highly contingent upon local initiative, institutional capacity, and strategic

alignment with national development agendas. However, the practice of paradiplomacy

across Indonesia remains uneven and fragmented, constrained by persistent challenges

such as legal ambiguities, institutional fragmentation, political contestations, capacity

deficits, and the ambivalent stance of the central government.

Theoretically, the Indonesian experience underscores the need to expand paradigms of

paradiplomacy beyond federal-centric models. Concepts such as multilevel governance,

actorness, soft power dynamics, and informal negotiation strategies must be integrated

to capture the complexities of subnational engagement within centralized systems

accurately. Successful paradiplomacy in unitary states is not merely a function of legal

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

425

permission but a product of adaptive governance, relational strategies, and strategic

navigation of institutional constraints.

To strengthen the development of paradiplomacy in Indonesia and other unitary states,

a series of strategic reforms must be prioritized. First, it is crucial to clarify the legal

mandates that govern subnational international activities. Clearer procedural guidelines

would reduce uncertainty, provide legitimacy, and create space for innovation in local-

level diplomacy. Second, robust intergovernmental coordination mechanisms should be

established or enhanced to ensure that subnational initiatives are coherently aligned with

national foreign policy objectives. This would help prevent overlap, miscommunication,

or policy contradictions between levels of government.

Third, long-term investment in institutional development and human resource capacity

is essential. Local governments must be equipped with the technical expertise,

organizational infrastructure, and trained personnel needed to engage meaningfully and

sustainably on the international stage. Fourth, stronger strategic alignment must be

fostered between local development priorities and the broader goals of global

governance. Doing so would enable subnational actors to contribute more effectively to

shared international agendas while advancing local interests.

Finally, the strategic use of informal mechanisms and networked approaches should be

encouraged. In contexts where formal authority remains limited, leveraging informal

relationships, transnational city networks, and issue-based coalitions can provide viable

pathways for subnational actors to assert influence and sustain global partnerships within

centralized political environments.

Beyond its national relevance, this study contributes to the broader academic discourse

by demonstrating that subnational engagement in international affairs is viable and

impactful even within highly centralized political environments. It challenges the notion

that subnational diplomacy is the exclusive domain of federal systems, showing instead

that dynamic agency, institutional bricolage, and strategic adaptability are equally critical

enablers. This study extends Kuznetsov’s model by incorporating informal negotiation

strategies and multilevel governance dynamics specific to unitary state systems.

Future research should explore comparative paradiplomacy across regions and political

systems, evaluate the long-term policy outcomes of subnational international initiatives,

and investigate emerging modalities such as digital paradiplomacy and global city

diplomacy. Such efforts are vital for reconceptualizing diplomacy in an increasingly

decentralized and interconnected world, where subnational actors are poised to play

greater roles in addressing global challenges.

References

Affandi, R. A., & Utami, P. I. (2024). Global Sustainable Challenges, Local Solutions:

Paradiplomacy and Waste Management in Cirebon. E3s Web of Conferences, 594, 2003.

https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202459402003

Amiri, S. (2022). City Diplomacy: An Introduction to the Forum. The Hague Journal of

Diplomacy, 17(1), 91–95. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-bja10090

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

426

Asmorojati, A. W., Suyadi, S., & Sulaiman, K. F. (2022). Asymmetric Decentralization in

a Unitary State: The Legitimization of the Sultan’s Daughter as the Governor of the

Special Region of Yogyakarta. Jurnal Hukum Novelty, 13(2), 171.

https://doi.org/10.26555/novelty.v13i2.a24079

Bouchet, M. (2022). Strengthening Foreign Policy Through Subnational Diplomacy. The

Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 17(1), 96–108. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-

bja10091

Butt, S. (2019). The Indonesian Constitutional Court: Reconfiguring Decentralization for

Better or Worse? Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 14(1), 147–174.

https://doi.org/10.1017/asjcl.2018.19

Cantir, C. (2019). Kin States in Sub-State Diplomacy Conflict Dynamics. Foreign Policy

Analysis, 16(1), 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/isafpa/ory018

Christie, M. (2022). Bridging Concepts: Multi-Level Governance and Paradiplomacy

Explaining Territorial Changes in Europe. Teorija in Praksa, 766–783.

https://doi.org/10.51936/tip.59.3.766-783

Ciesielska‐Klikowska, J., & Kamiński, T. (2022). Paradiplomacy and Its Impact on EU

Foreign Policy. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 18(1).

https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1223

Dermawan, W., Alam, G. N., Djuyandi, Y., & Ridzuan, A. R. (2024). Unraveling Capability

and Capacity of Parallel Diplomacy Governance in Indonesia: How Far Are Indonesia’s

Regional Governments Ready to Go? Journal of Ecohumanism, 3(7), 1299–1308.

https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v3i7.4292

Dermawan, W., Azmi, F., Darmawan, I., & Djuyandi, Y. (2024). The Contribution of West

Java Research and Development Institutions in Post-Covid-19 Regional Economic

Recovery Through the Use of Foreign Sources. Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 6,

2024ss0414. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2024ss0414

Dermawan, W., Darmawan, I., Mustofa, M. U., & Djuyandi, Y. (2022). Paradiplomacy

Practices in Indonesia: Comparative Analysis Of Aceh‐Quebec. Politics & Policy, 50(2),

363–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12455

Diprose, R. (2022). Striking the Right Balance: Winding Back Indonesia’s ‘Big Bang’

Decentralization. In M. Crouch (Ed.), Constitutional Democracy in Indonesia (pp. 89–

114). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192870681.003.0005

Dzazira, R. H., & Pratama, D. P. (2023). Empowering Urban Diplomacy: Surabaya’s Sister

City Collaboration With Kitakyushu, Japan for Sustainable Development. Journal of

Paradiplomacy and City Networks, 2(1), Layouting.

https://doi.org/10.18196/jpcn.v2i1.17

Fantoni, M., & Avellaneda, C. N. (2022). Explaining Paradiplomacy: Do Local Pro-

International Structures and Political Support Matter? Global Public Policy and

Governance, 2(3), 353–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43508-022-00044-z

Jackson, T. (2017). Paradiplomacy and Political Geography: The Geopolitics of Substate

Regional Diplomacy. Geography Compass, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12357

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

427

Jiménez-Castillo, M. A., Restrepo, C. A. D., Scocozza, M., & Marquez, I. A. B. (2022).

Internacionalización Territorial, Una Estrategia Para El Desarrollo De Las Regiones. RCS.

https://doi.org/10.31876/rcs.v28i3.38459

Khoerunnisa, R., & Maulana, Z. (2023). Para Diplomacy Through Sister City Cooperation:

Efforts to Increase the Potential of the Agricultural Sector in Karawang District. E3s Web

of Conferences, 444, 2045. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202344402045

Lequesne, C., & Paquin, S. (2017). Federalism, Paradiplomacy and Foreign Policy: A Case

of Mutual Neglect. International Negotiation, 22(2), 183–204.

https://doi.org/10.1163/15718069-22001133

Liu, T., & Yao, S. (2019). Beyond the Hinterland: Exploring the International Actorness

of China’s Yunnan Province. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 21(3), 335–370.

https://doi.org/10.1093/irap/lcz026

Liu, T., & Yao, S. (2020). Chinese Paradiplomacy: A Theoretical Review. Sage Open,

10(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019899048

Mauad, A. M., & Betsill, M. M. (2019). A Changing Role in Global Climate Governance:

São Paulo Mixing Its Climate and International Policies. Revista Brasileira De Política

Internacional, 62(2). https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201900209

Setzer, J. (2015). Testing the Boundaries of Subnational Diplomacy: The International

Climate Action of Local and Regional Governments. Transnational Environmental Law,

4(2), 319–337. https://doi.org/10.1017/s2047102515000126

Setzer, J., Murieta, E. S. d., Galarraga, I., Rei, F., & Pinho, M. M. L. (2020).

Transnationalization of Climate Adaptation by Regional Governments and the

RegionsAdapt Initiative. Global Sustainability, 3. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.6

Sharma, C. K., Destradi, S., & Plagemann, J. (2020). Partisan Federalism and

Subnational Governments’ International Engagements: Insights From India. Publius the

Journal of Federalism, 50(4), 566–592. https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjaa017

Sinambela, S. I., Al-Fadhat, F., Mukti, T. A., & Warsito, T. (2024). The Art of Asymmetry

in Sister City Relationships Factors Analysis. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology,

8(6), 313–324. https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2065

Smith, H. J. M. (2019). City Networks and Paradiplomacy as Global Public Policy. 128–

147. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198758648.013.26

Susiatiningsih, H., Farabi, N., Paramasatya, S., & Puspapertiwi, S. (2018).

Decentralization in International Relations: A Study of Semarang City’s Paradiplomacy.

E3s Web of Conferences, 73, 9016. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20187309016

Utomo, A. B. (2022). Paradiplomacy as the Product of State Transformation in the Era of

Globalisation: The Case of Indonesia. Janus Net E-Journal of International Relation,

13(1). https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.13.1.5

Wardhani, B., & Dugis, V. (2020). Greening Surabaya: The City’s Role in Shaping

Environmental Diplomacy. Bandung, 7(2), 236–258. https://doi.org/10.1163/21983534-

00702005

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17, Nº. 1

May 2026, pp. 409-428

Beyond Centralism: The Evolution and Challenges of Paradiplomacy in the Unitary States

A Case Study of Indonesia

Lukman Hakim, Purnawan Dwikora Negara, Sirajuddin, Qatrunnada Hamparan Melati

428

Zeemering, E. S. (2017). An Agenda for Comparing Local Governance and Institutional

Collective Action in Canada and the United States. Urban Affairs Review, 55(3), 858–

886. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087417738094