認同平行外交乃學界針對省、州級次國家政府為追求政治自主身份而走上國際的外交行為。既有研究指出認同平行外交源自民族主義,以民族建國為目的,並以此推論來理解認同平行外交。本研究認為此看法有待補充,蓋民族主義未必以建國為唯一實踐途徑,傳統民族主義追求主權獨立,然而國家內民族主義追求治權獨立,二者都可能走向認同平行外交的模式。因此有必要細究這兩種不同的民族主義採用認同平行外交時,於作法與成效上的異同。 本研究並藉魁北克個案分析,以為未來相關研究歸納理論通則之參考。發現,走傳統民族建國路線較諸走國家內民族主義路線的認同平行外交,前者傾向選擇越過原主權國家直接訴求國際支持;後者較願意循體制內方式與原主權國家談判走上國際的方式。然而二者亦有諸多共通點。無論繞道渥太華、或是取道渥太華,兩者都相當在意魁北克的獨特性是否受到該有的保障。再者,加拿大聯邦對二者的基本立場並沒有差別,而始終僅同意給予其功能性外交活動空間。不過國際大國的態度對於事情的發展又有關鍵性的影響。魁北克獨派與聯邦派政府其實是互補的,兩種不同風格的外交作法,各自以不同的作法為魁北克開啟不同的可能。
It is a growing phenomenon that more subnational states or provincial governments intend to pursue their own political identities through the so-called strategy of identity-based paradiplomacy, which academic circles understand as a product of nation-building nationalism. This paper argues that there shall be a broader understanding of identity-based paradiplomacy, as the routes of nationalism are getting more diversified. The paper further distinguishes paradiplomacy following the path of traditional nation-building nationalism from that of the modern subnational nationalism, which fights for national identity and exclusive rights of homerule from central government while remains flexible regarding constitutional choices. Quebec is then taken for a case study. The analysis reveals that identity-based paradiplomacy of different paths show different characters in terms of policy implementation. However, both are identical in demanding a distinctive status for Quebec in the international society. The Canadian Government concedes to neither paths. Nevertheless, the attitude of international powers could be a crucial factor in determining the result of Quebec's paradiplomacy.