SEMAINE D'ÉTUDE SUR LE ROLE DE L’ANALYSE ECONOMETRIOUE ETC. [007 
not participate in decisions at any node of higher order than 
the one at which he is located. 
Participation Potential may be computed for various spatial 
patterns of decision-making authority (with reference to a de- 
fined set of decisions). If we normalize these patterns, so that 
in each case the total authority is represented by unity, we are 
in a better position to carry through the calculations (?). In 
table 1 different degrees of spatial decentralization are indicated 
by the several rows, row A representing 1009, centralization 
and row Z representing a very high degree of, if not 100%, 
decentralization. Here, we do not attempt to measure in 
absolute terms the degree of spatial decentralization correspond- 
ing to any allocation among nodes of decision-making authority. 
Rather, we can state that according to certain readily accepted 
criteria, some patterns are more spatially decentralized than 
others. For example, A, B, C, D, E, F, P, Q, S, X and Z 
is an ordering of patterns corresponding to increasingly higher 
degrees of spatial decentralization (*). On the other hand, there 
are no readily accepted criteria by which one can state that of 
patterns H or G (or patterns S or T), one or the other involves 
greater decentralization. Row A represents the highest degree 
of centralization of decision-making authority, all decisions 
being made at the single first-order node. Zero amount of de- 
cisions are made at each 2nd-order, 3rd-order and 4th-order 
node. Row B represents a somewhat less centralized <itua- 
() This step precludes any effect of the variable, the spatial pattern of 
decision-making authority, upon the total amount of authority that may 
exist. (We may implicitly assume that the optimal total amount for any 
given organization has already been determined, or that the total amount 
is prescribed beforehand). In a more general statement this effect should 
be encompassed. 
(’) The readily accepted criteria are: 1) if there are two patterns dif- 
ferent with respect to the amount of decision-making authority at two orders 
of nodes only, then the one having the larger amount of decision-making 
authority at the higher order node is the more decentralized of the two: 
2) if there are two patterns different with respect to three or more orders 
of nodes, and if there is still another pattern which according to criterion (1) 
is more decentralized than one of the two patterns but less than the other 
then the latter is the more decentralized of the two: and so forth 
el 
Isard - pag.