This research article introduces and conceptually analyzes Amerpass as a non-state system of transnational professional identification designed to address structural fragmentation in contemporary mechanisms of professional recognition. Under conditions of increasing transnational mobility, institutional instability, and political rupture, traditional state-based and supranational systems of accreditation often demonstrate limited adaptability, while commercial digital platforms provide visibility without structured verification or institutional accountability. Drawing on interdisciplinary perspectives from sociology of professions, digital identity studies, institutional theory, and media analysis, the study positions Amerpass as a soft-institutional, non-state model oriented toward evidentiary and reputational fixation of professional identity beyond sovereign and commercial dependencies. The article distinguishes professional identity from personal legal identification and proposes a framework centered on multi-source verification, contextualized documentation of professional trajectories, and distributed institutional responsibility. A comparative analysis is conducted between three dominant models of professional representation: supranational standardization systems (e.g., Europass), commercial networking platforms (e.g., LinkedIn), and the proposed Amerpass framework. As illustrated in the comparative matrix (Section 4.4, pp. 11–12), these systems differ in institutional foundation, verification logic, accountability structure, dependence on state or commercial authority, and functionality under conditions of institutional rupture. The analysis demonstrates that while Europass facilitates administrative compatibility within stable regimes and LinkedIn enhances digital visibility, neither provides a structured, non-state, reputationally accountable mechanism for professional coherence in crisis contexts. The study further examines structural risks inherent in non-state identification systems, including symbolic confusion with state authority, trust deficits, commercialization pressures, and scalability constraints. These risks are treated as structural conditions rather than operational deficiencies, emphasizing the importance of strict legal delimitation, procedural transparency, and controlled growth. Amerpass is not presented as a finalized institution but as an evolving research framework contributing to interdisciplinary discourse on new forms of professional legitimization in a transforming global order. The article situates the model within debates on transnational mobility, institutional rupture, reputational capital, and soft institutionalism, offering a conceptual foundation for future empirical evaluation and comparative research. The version deposited in Zenodo is a peer-reviewed research article intended to support open academic access, citation, and further interdisciplinary study in the fields of professional identity, digital governance, and non-state institutional innovation. The content corresponds to the author’s original scholarly contribution and has not been substantively modified.
Igor Leonov (Thu,) studied this question.