MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Bibliometric Analysis of Paradiplomacy Research on The Scopus Database Using the VOSviewer Application

2025· article· en· W6963449950 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCross-Border Cooperation and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusDecentralizationField (mathematics)Bibliographic databaseSubject (documents)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article seeks to examine the evolution of studies on paradiplomacy thoroughly. This is crucial due to the substantial advancement of this subject in international relations research. This research employs bibliometric analysis using the VOSviewer tool to examine and visually represent the progression of paradiplomacy research in the Scopus database. Within the Scopus database, a total of 214 documents from the years 1984 to 2023 were found that specifically mentioned paradiplomacy. Canada has the most contributors who discuss paradiplomacy, specifically 34 documents. Most articles on paradiplomacy, specifically 68.0%, focus on the social sciences. Simultaneously, Stéphane Paquin holds the record for the highest number of documents authored, totaling ten. From 1984 to 2023, researchers in the field of paradiplomacy focused on 15 topics. These topics included subnational government, United States, diplomacy, diplomatic relations, cultural paradiplomacy, free trade, European Union, Quebec, decentralization, developing countries, federalism, assemblage theory, foreign relations, foreign policy, and sub-state diplomacy. Regarding the advancement of paradiplomacy research, several factors contribute to its development. These factors include the implementation of decentralization in various countries and the growing recognition among sub-state actors of the benefits they can achieve through paradiplomacy activities. This study concludes that between 1984 and 2023, the research on paradiplomacy primarily examined the interests of sub-state actor entities and their paradiplomacy activities. This is evident in the 15 topics received significant attention from paradiplomacy researchers during this period.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0340.211
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.571
GPT teacher head0.712
Teacher spread0.140 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicCross-Border Cooperation and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207