{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "ScholarlyArticle",
  "@id": "https://miklian.org/papers/sovereignty-for-sale-quantifying-the-network-state-economy#article",
  "headline": "Sovereignty for Sale? Quantifying the 'Network State' Economy",
  "name": "Sovereignty for Sale? Quantifying the 'Network State' Economy",
  "author": [
    {
      "@type": "Person",
      "name": "Jason Miklian",
      "sameAs": [
        "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1227-0975",
        "https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=RHlevGEAAAAJ&hl=en",
        "https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jason-Miklian",
        "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q47107618",
        "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Miklian",
        "https://www.globe.uio.no/english/people/aca/jasontm/",
        "https://www.prio.org/people/5833",
        "https://jasonmiklian.com"
      ],
      "@id": "https://miklian.org/#person"
    }
  ],
  "datePublished": "2026",
  "isPartOf": {
    "@type": "Periodical",
    "name": "Working Paper"
  },
  "url": "https://miklian.org/papers/sovereignty-for-sale-quantifying-the-network-state-economy",
  "abstract": "The proliferation of alternative governance structures—from Honduras's Zones of Employment and Economic Development (ZEDEs) to Balaji Srinivasan's theorized 'network states'—has generated both fervent advocacy and sharp critique. Yet neither celebratory techno-libertarian narratives nor reflexive dismissals adequately capture these experiments' actual economic performance, governance outcomes, or implications for state sovereignty. This article advances the first systematic quantitative comparison of charter city and network state economies, drawing on economic output data, capital flows, and governance indicators across 23 jurisdictions between 2015 and 2024. We find that charter cities demonstrate measurable (if modest) economic growth advantages over their host regions, averaging 2.3 percentage points higher GDP growth, while network state-affiliated projects show striking variance in outcomes—with successful cases concentrated in financial services and software development sectors where jurisdictional arbitrage offers competitive advantage. However, we hold that these aggregate figures obscure critical distributional questions: elite capture remains prevalent, local community voice is systematically marginalized, and the 'win-win' rhetoric of promotional materials bears little resemblance to observed power asymmetries. For policymakers navigating this terrain, our analysis suggests that the question is not whether such governance innovations will proliferate—they almost certainly will—but rather what regulatory frameworks might channel their development toward more equitable outcomes.",
  "keywords": [
    "network states",
    "charter cities",
    "special economic zones",
    "governance innovation",
    "sovereignty",
    "digital jurisdiction",
    "economic development"
  ],
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/",
  "isAccessibleForFree": true,
  "inLanguage": "en"
}