The Mistake Holding Mexican Cities Back

International engagement does not happen by chance, nor is it an automatic byproduct of globalization. For local international action to deliver real and lasting benefits, it must be strategically planned, institutionally grounded, and aligned with territorial development goals. In an increasingly competitive global environment, cities that improvise their international outreach risk wasting resources, missing opportunities, and producing low-impact results.

Today, cities are at the center of the global economy. They are home to more than 55% of the world’s population and generate nearly 60% of global GDP. Local governments have therefore become key actors in international trade, multilateral cooperation, and the implementation of global agendas. Yet not all cities participate on equal footing. Those with a clear internationalization strategy are better positioned to attract investment, technical cooperation, innovation, and global visibility. Those without one often rely on fragmented, short-term initiatives with limited returns.

Planning internationalization begins with a fundamental principle: every city is different. There are no universal formulas or one-size-fits-all models. A territorial approach recognizes that each city or state has its own productive strengths, institutional capacities, social capital, and structural challenges that should shape its global engagement.

Under this approach, the territory is understood as a living system composed of public institutions, private actors, and social organizations. Internationalization therefore ceases to be the responsibility of a single government office and becomes a collective project, capable of aligning economic, social, cultural, and environmental interests. Involving the private sector, academia, civil society, and organized citizens strengthens both the legitimacy and the durability of the strategy.

International strategies built on a territorial approach tend to be participatory, multisectoral, and multilevel. Most importantly, they are more likely to survive political transitions and evolve into long-term development visions rather than temporary government initiatives.

Planning international engagement requires treating it as public policy, not as an ancillary activity. This demands a cultural shift within many local governments—from a narrowly local mindset to one that views the city or territory as an actor in the global system.

When international action is embedded in municipal or state development plans, it becomes transversal. It connects with economic development, tourism, culture, environmental policy, innovation, mobility, and diaspora engagement. It also enables alignment with global frameworks such as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, whose implementation depends on local-level competencies for roughly 65% of its targets.

Viewing internationalization as public policy also means setting clear objectives, assigning responsibilities, defining timelines, and establishing performance indicators. Without these elements, international action risks becoming a series of disconnected efforts that are difficult to evaluate or justify to the public.

Governance and Stakeholder Engagement

A core pillar of international planning is territorial governance. Cities that achieve the greatest international impact are those that design their strategies through dialogue, coordination, and shared responsibility among multiple stakeholders.

Comparative experience shows that the most robust strategies actively involve business chambers, universities, research centers, social organizations, cultural leaders, and migrant communities. This broad participation not only improves decision-making but also enhances the political legitimacy of international engagement.

Cities that build internal consensus before projecting themselves abroad are better positioned to attract strategic partners, sustain international commitments, and translate cooperation into tangible benefits for their residents.

Effective internationalization requires practical tools. Among the most important are an international diagnostic of the territory, identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks; a city international profile, summarizing economic, social, and cultural attributes; and a clear definition of priorities aligned with the broader development agenda.

It is also critical to distinguish between territorial promotion and strategic internationalization. While investment and tourism attraction matter, international action should not be reduced to marketing. Technical cooperation, policy exchange, urban innovation, and cultural diplomacy generate long-term value that goes beyond immediate economic returns.

Budget allocation and a clearly defined institutional model are essential signals of political commitment. Without resources or structure, even the best plans remain theoretical.

Strategic planning only works when accompanied by institutionalization. International affairs offices or equivalent structures help coordinate efforts, professionalize staff, and ensure continuity beyond electoral cycles.

Mexico has made meaningful progress in this area. The number of state-level international affairs offices has grown from 10 in 2010 to 25 today, and an increasing number of municipalities are developing structured international strategies. This institutional strengthening has been key to shifting from reactive international engagement to planned and strategic internationalization.

Any international strategy must be measurable. Some outcomes are quantitative—investment attracted, cooperation projects launched, agreements signed—while others are qualitative, such as institutional learning, cultural openness, stronger negotiation capacity, or international positioning.

Recognizing both dimensions allows local governments to communicate results more effectively and to strengthen public accountability, reinforcing trust in international action as a legitimate public endeavor.

Planning a city’s internationalization is not a technical exercise; it is a long-term political decision. In an interconnected world, cities that successfully align their territorial identity with a global vision are better prepared to navigate crises, seize opportunities, and improve quality of life.

When designed with a territorial and institutional approach, internationalization ceases to be a privilege of large metropolitan areas and becomes a strategic tool available to local governments committed to sustainable development. The real challenge is not entering the global arena, but doing so with direction, coherence, and purpose.

Written by: Editorial

#GlobalCities #LocalGovernance #LocalInternationalAction