This would be done as a measure of policies that were taken by a previously established non polycentric government. His second argument is related to the cost effectiveness whereby the groups in advantageous position would be liable to pay more cost which previously was implemented on victim groups. The third and a major argument comes in form of cost effectiveness in form of communication where the lower group would be facilitated but keeping in mind that they would be able to construct a better position for themselves. The fourth and the last argument is about lowering the transaction cost by a strategy where the groups would be able to form a governance of their own.
On the other hand the approach of Lechner is more sociological in nature. His parameters of arguments are based on how the society looks towards a government or for that matter democracy in general. His perception of ordinance is mainly based on the structures of social conditions where the norms changes with greater political perspectives. For the purpose he instruments Latin America into the article as the formulation of democracy is far less than perfect in general sense. Lechner believes that the major variables are the condition of state, network and market for the determination of specific political status.
The approach of Mc
The approach of McGinnis is lucid but well formulated. He develops the Components of Polycentric Governance where opportunities and group rights are looked upon in the context of market failure. He was indulges in the protection of diversity of institutions and defines the formats of Governance Institutions. The approach of McGinnis relates Polycentric Equilibrium under Governance Costs but deals meticulously about the formulation of Polycentricism in a problem centered mode. In doing so he indicates the nucleus of Polycentricism where the Polycentric System depends on the Equilibrium that should be backed by the authorities of the Governance. The entire matter could thus be enumerated as a look into the aspects of social capital and unequal distribution. As a result the Polycentric Governance comes at the risk of losing balance as the sustainability challenge becomes tough. In this context the Polycentricism is pressurized by political pressure. The situation is dealt well by McGinnis as he indicates the example of the Holy Roman Empire while depicting the balance Polycentric Governance. Moreover, he also states his concerns over the future of European Union in a polycentric format. (McGinnis, 1-27)
Lechner's perception of analysis is based in three major points. The first is Political coordination where the prime importance is given on the variables such as leadership, regulation and representation and subsidiary pattern of the government that depends on capricious properties like deliberate governance system, public governance system or centralized governance system. The second most important aspect of his perspective is the market structure in the context of Social coordination through the market where the main determinants are variables like non deliberate, horizontal, private and decentralized more of operations. The third important sector of Lechner is the aspect of networking under the context of Social coordination. Here the chief determinants emerge as capacity for