Startup States are new, independent, self-governing countries intentionally built from first principles, channelling an entrepreneurial ethos in the design and deployment of modular governance, innovative technologies, and market-aligned systems – delivering legally grounded, deliberate, treaty-enabled statehood.
Startups that are new countries, and new countries that are startups.
-
IPA: /ˈstɑːtʌp steɪts/
-
Phonetic: STAHR-tuhp stayts
Startup State
The term Startup States synthesises two historically distinct yet increasingly convergent domains: startups – entities rooted in iterative creation, private capital; and states – juridically recognised sovereign polities with defined territory, population, and governance, capable of international relations.
- Startup derives from the 20th-century lexicon of Silicon Valley, denoting ventures born from agility, innovation, and lean experimentation. The term signals a departure from rigid hierarchies in favour of adaptive, mission-driven growth.
- State, from the Latin status, acquired political meaning in medieval and Renaissance Europe, evolving under the Westphalian system into the foundational unit of modern international law. A state is recognised under the Montevideo Convention (1933) as possessing a permanent population, defined territory, government, and capacity to enter into relations with other states.
The juxtaposition of these terms forms a neologism: Startup States. It signals not rebellion or reformation, but origination – a new class of statehood grounded in lawful intent and entrepreneurial clarity. These are countries designed with purpose, launched through consent, and governed with precision. Their legal foundations aim to satisfy criteria such as those articulated in the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (1933), whilst securing status through negotiated treaties, sustainable jurisdictional leasing or purchase, and pluralistic diplomacy. The result is a form of statehood no longer inherited by accident, but engineered by agreement.
To the extent that nation-states continue to constitute the prevailing superior, legitimate, recognised legal form and framework for human organisational governance, Startup States acknowledge and operate from within such parameters whilst expressly reserving judgment as to their metaphysical necessity. Whilst some regard the nation-state as axiomatic, Startup States remain agnostic and neutral on such a question or statement. Their formation reflects a pragmatic accommodation to extant global structures: if the nation-state endures as the dominant vessel for the grouping and gathering of humans, then it ought to be reimagined – through intention, legality, and innovation.
Startup States are new, independent, and self-governing countries – deliberately constructed from first principles – anchored in lawful consent and entrepreneurial clarity. They are neither born of secession nor imposed through colonial conquest, but rather emerge through mutually informed, symbiotic agreements that reflect the voluntary will of all parties involved. In this respect, Startup States constitute the antithesis of colonialism and imperialism. Their juridical foundations, based in bilateral or multilateral consent, may serve not only as a repudiation of exploitative historical precedents but also as a credible and constructive response to contemporary neo-colonial and geo-economic subjugation.
Built through modular governance systems, technologically advanced infrastructures, and market-aligned institutional mechanisms, Startup States are designed to foster human dignity, constitutional integrity, and durable prosperity. They offer not simply a response to the limitations of existing political orders but a deliberate design with clarity of purpose and ethical intent.
In their most legally conscientious and diplomatically robust form, Startup States are optimally established through cooperative formations—pursuant to lawful agreements with recognised sovereign powers. These are typically formalised via treaties, long-term leases, or the lawful transfer of uninhabited and uncontested territories, thereby grounding sovereignty in mutual recognition rather than coercive assertion. Such juridical constructs often prioritise ecological conservation, environmental custodianship, and the elevation of human liberties, aligning statecraft with ethical stewardship. Jurisdictional frameworks under these arrangements may manifest as concurrent sovereignty or condominium governance, wherein both parties exercise defined legal competences while retaining distinct sovereign status. This consensual sovereignty is not only legally orthodox and diplomatically credible, but also institutionally scalable—offering a post-Westphalian formation model that furnishes the strongest basis for de jure recognition under public international law. This pathway represents the most durable, peaceful, and strategically sound method of Startup State creation—anchored in law, cooperation, and foresight.
Where formal cooperation with recognised states is unavailable or delayed, Startup States may instead arise through decentralised, non-territorial, or extra-territorial modalities. These include the deployment of open-source governance protocols, blockchain-based administrative systems, or community-led assertions of functional sovereignty across cyberspace, the high seas, terra nullius, or extra-planetary domains. While such models reflect jurisdictional entrepreneurship and commendable innovation, they operate in a legal grey zone—not yet fully acknowledged by the current international legal regime, which remains largely shaped by pre-digital, territory-centric norms. As a result, these pathways remain suboptimal, both in terms of predictable recognition and legal resilience, even though they may embody consensual futurism and articulate peaceful alternatives to the status quo. Until international law evolves to accommodate such emergent models, these forms of statecraft may remain aspirational rather than fully operational in the eyes of traditional international systems.
Startup States do not seek to undermine or replace existing countries through coercion or fragmentation. Rather, they offer voluntary, opt-in alternatives characterised by consent, clarity, and competence. Their objective is not disruption but demonstration – of what countries are when architected with deliberation, legitimacy, and aligned purposes.
Accordingly, Startup States are not speculative constructs nor ideological abstractions. They constitute operational, evolving, and legally conscientious frameworks for 21st-century state formation and beyond.
Startup States may be operated on a for-profit, non-profit, mutual-benefit, or public-benefit basis, or any combination thereof.
A Startup State is a brand new kind of country. It isn’t created by war or by chance—it’s built deliberately, from the ground up. People or teams create it with care, often by working together with an existing country that agrees to help. This relationship benefits both sides: the Startup State gets land or legal support, and the partner country gains investment, innovation, or prestige. These new countries are usually formed on land, but in the future could also exist online or at sea. They use new technologies, fair rules, and fresh ideas to give people more freedom, safety, and opportunity. They are built to grow, adapt, and serve people well.
The term Startup States will come to define a new frontier in sovereignty and governance. It will be used in diplomatic forums, legal journals, and futurist policymaking circles to describe countries intentionally designed from scratch through lawful agreements, not conflict. Unlike breakaway regions or micronations, Startup States will distinguish themselves by forming through treaties, leases, or condominium arrangements—establishing sovereignty by consent, not by force. The term will become central to debates about jurisdictional competition, governance innovation, and state formation in the digital and decentralised age. It will also be adopted in venture capital, international development, and global legal theory as a reference to scalable, treaty-based statecraft with long-term alignment between stakeholders.
- By leasing coastal land from a small island nation, the team will negotiate the foundation of the world’s first fully climate-neutral Startup State.
- Unlike secessionist movements, Startup States will focus on legal consent and contractual sovereignty, offering win-win models for both host and partner nations.
- The new Startup State will be launched via a multilateral treaty with two Pacific governments, blending financial innovation, regenerative development, and full diplomatic recognition.
- A consortium of technologists, legal scholars, and investors will unveil a Startup State operating under a co-governed legal framework, with AI-assisted adjudication and opt-in citizenship.
- By purchasing uninhabited land and entering into a revenue-sharing treaty, the Startup State will emerge as a new jurisdiction attracting entrepreneurs and digital nomads.
comparative constitutional design, comparative constitutionalism, decentralised legal systems, decentralised political systems, digital governance, digital governance systems, disaster resilience and humanitarian corridors, economic development, environmental governance, ethics of governance, futurist think tanks, geoeconomics and jurisdictional arbitrage, governance technology, international development, international law, international law and treaty studies, jurisdictional design, migration and demographic planning, political science, post-sovereign theory, post-Westphalian diplomacy, sovereign wealth strategies., special purpose jurisdictions, transnational development policy, transnational innovation, treaty-based diplomacy, venture capital, venture-funded public infrastructure
algorithmic citizenship, aspirant countries, autonomy, blockchain-based identity, charter cities, cloud governance, condominia, decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs), digital nations, emergent countries, experimental jurisdictions, free cities, governance technology, jurisdictional leasing, micronations, network states, non-territorial polities, offshore governance, opt-in governance, post-national states, proto-states, recognition-by-treaty, seasteads, self-rule, self-rule zones, sovereign wealth strategies, sovereignty, special economic zones, special economic zones (SEZs), states with limited recognition, sui generis, sui generis entities, terra nullius, treaty law, unrecognised states
