Download this publication - PULP

300 Chapter 13
other forms of social ordering, namely, contract and voting. He argued that
various types of decisions are ideally suited to one of these types of social
ordering, and in so doing, sought to draw out the limits of adjudicative
decision making. In particular, Fuller argued that a polycentric matter is
one that is not well-suited to adjudicative resolution, since a polycentric
matter is one in which there is a matrix of interrelated issues, where the
effect of altering one of the factors would have unpredictable consequences
on the rest of the issues in the matrix. He used the by now well-known
illustration of the spider’s web, where the plucking of one strand on the web
would result in a complex set of changes throughout the web:
We may visualise this kind of situation by thinking of a spider web. A pull on
one strand will distribute tensions after a complicated pattern throughout the
web as a whole. Doubling the original pull will, in all likelihood, not simply
double each of the resulting tensions but will rather create a different
complicated pattern of tensions. This would certainly occur, for example, if the
doubled pull caused one or more of the weaker stands to snap. This is a
‘polycentric’ situation because it is ‘many centered’ – each crossing of strands
is a distinct center for distributing tensions. 41
Fuller derived his idea of polycentricity from the work of Polanyi, who
developed the concept of polycentricity to argue that there are inherent
informational constraints on any person making a central decision on a
complex set of facts. For this reason, polycentric central state decisions
regarding budgetary allocation are inappropriate, and should be left to
market forces and ‘spontaneous mutual adjustment’. 42
Individuals within the system should ‘evaluate by their independent
mutual adjustments the polycentric task of optimum allocation of resources
and distribution of products’ to resolve complex polycentric tasks, rather
than attempt to solve the task centrally. 43 Fuller used Polanyi’s concept of
polycentricity to argue that when a matter is significantly polycentric, it
becomes problematic for the issue to be resolved through a centralised decisionmaking
process. His argument was directed primarily at curbing the use, by
legislatures, of administrative agencies to resolve complex matters with
significant polycentric consequences. 44 His objections to this type of
decision making are, however, relevant also to the judicial resolution of disputes
with significant polycentric implications.
It is important to note that polycentricity, or non-polycentricity, are
not absolute categories. Rather, polycentricity is a matter of degree, and
most decisions before a court have some elements of polycentricity. The
greater the degree of polycentricity, the more difficult the decision will be
41
Fuller (n 39 above) 395.
42 M Polanyi The logic of liberty: Reflections and rejoinders (1951) 170 - 184.
43 Polanyi (n 42 above) 179.
44
JWF Allison ‘Fuller’s analysis of polycentric disputes and the limits of adjudication’
(1994) 53 Cambridge LJ 367 370.