Each concept is read twice: whether the approach carries it, and whether the approach's own sources claim it. A concept that is absent and was never claimed is a gap in the field rather than a failure of the work, and is marked out of scope.
Many centers under shared meta-rules
PartialClaimed · partialDefinition · Michael Polanyi, The Logic of Liberty (1951)
Many independent decision centers, each acting on its own — but under one common framework of rules that all of them acknowledge. The shared framework is what makes it a system rather than a scatter.
Analysis
The centers are real and their plurality is the whole point, with many trusts each under its own deed and fiduciary terms set against the one-size-fits-all approach. The framework they share is the law of trusts itself, which the mechanism presupposes rather than sets out, and no meta-rule is given that the trusts hold towards one another. The third paper runs the other way and proposes one international structure with many parties inside it, which is a center with plural membership rather than plural centers.
Overlapping jurisdiction
AbsentNot claimed · out of scopeDefinition · Vincent Ostrom, Tiebout & Warren (1961)
The centers' authority overlaps on purpose — the same case can fall under more than one — and the friction between them is treated as a feature, worked out through interaction rather than prevented by a clean division of turf.
Analysis
Membership decides which regime governs, and it governs alone. Exit is the entire relation between trusts, and exit removes the case from one center instead of leaving it to be worked out between two. Data that touches people in different trusts, or a training corpus assembled across several, falls under no shared forum, and no friction between centers is treated as worth having.
Subsidiarity and nesting
PartialNot claimedDefinition · Johannes Althusius (1603); Elinor Ostrom, Governing the Commons (1990)
Decisions are made at the most local level capable of making them, and local units nest inside larger ones that handle what the local level cannot. Authority is layered — neither centralized nor flatly fragmented.
Analysis
A layer above the individual does exist and does real work: the cooperative negotiates terms no member could obtain alone, and the international framework sits above the collections it governs. That is subsidiarity's logic running upward. The rule is what is missing, since nothing states which decisions belong to the member, which to the trust and which above it, and no matter escalates because a trust could not settle it. Credit unions are offered as the closest existing institution, but the analogy stops at the single cooperative.