Polycentric Governance as a Practical Strategy for Balanced Policing: A Cross-Cultural Analysis

Abstract

Polycentricity is a normative approach to governance. It stresses the degree to which higher levels of formal governance should not crowd out self-organization at lower levels. As central government ruling may limit individual access to shared resources, participatory polycentric governance seems a feasible alternative. Under such a scheme, varied strategies combine local political segments into larger administrative systems. They help 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. 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 well-being. Thus, I challenge the conventional wisdom that common property is poorly managed and should be regulated by central authorities or privatized. Employing the data for user-managed land, fish stocks, pastures, woods, and (ground) water, I argue that participatory polycentric governance improves communal resilience and stability. Participants became interdependent, willing, and capable of designing and following communication networks to create sustainable well-being. I conclude that the outcomes of such arrangements are often better than predicted by standard economic models.