L.Lozny. Sphere of authority as an analytical tool to assess the level of political (dis)aggregation

Managing Editor, Human Ecology, Hunter College, The City University of New York, Ludomir R. Lozny.
I examine a proposition that participatory polycentric governance is a successful strategy for communal resilience and stability. Participants became interdependent, willing, and capable of following communication networks to create sustainable wellbeing. On a larger scale, I address the dilemma whereby the self-interest behavior of social actors would seemingly limit the potential for collective action and group cohesion and suggest that collective action provides notable material and other advantages across social sectors. Collective action creates specific forms of social interaction common to nonindustrial and industrial communities. The rulers and the ruled interact according to a consensus-based incentives distribution (and redistribution). The economic benefit of collective action lies in the provision of common-pool resources through cooperative activities beyond what would be expected from individual consumer rationality.
Two hypotheses guide my research:
1. Participatory polycentric governance is a successful strategy for sustainable wellbeing,
and
2. Under certain conditions, a network of communal organizations of different scales becomes a successful alternative to centralized decision-making.
In a polycentric structure, a federation of independent governing bodies, organized as a set of nested institutions focused on a common goal, contributes to effective, beneficial to all parties involved, sustainable wellbeing. Varied strategies link local segments into larger administrative systems to manage public goods, solve cooperator problems, and combine direct (and costly) administration with the creation of locally managed para-governmental organizations and spheres of authority to achieve cooperation goals. Specific regulations are necessary, but central government ruling may limit individual access to shared resources. Participatory polycentric governance seems a feasible alternative. ‘Polycentricity’ is a normative approach to governance, which stresses the degree to which higher levels of government should not crowd out self-organization at lower levels. I thus challenge the conventional wisdom that common property is poorly managed and should be either regulated by central authorities or privatized. Based on presented case studies of user-managed land, fish stocks, pastures, woods, and (ground) water, etc., I conclude that the outcomes are often better than predicted by standard economic models.