Polycentric governance can combine local experimentation and shared constraints across nested levels; it redistributes rather than eliminates power and creates coordination, duplication, and accountability costs of its own.

Polycentric governance places decision capacity in multiple formally independent or semi-autonomous centers operating at overlapping or nested scales, rather than locating all authority in one center. Local units can use contextual knowledge, try different rules, and adapt; shared boundaries, standards, monitoring, conflict-resolution channels, or higher-level constraints can coordinate interactions and address spillovers. This architecture changes where power is exercised but does not abolish it: authority remains in boundary setting, resource control, monitoring, appeals, interoperability, and escalation. Multiple centers may also duplicate work, fragment responsibility, create inconsistent rules, or make cross-domain action slower. The proposition is conditional, not an endorsement of decentralization by default. For LivingIP, differentiated agents and a shared Core are a polycentric hypothesis that requires explicit jurisdictions, interfaces, accountability, and comparison with simpler centralized arrangements.