Decision Sovereignty: Case Studies

This volume presents four empirical case studies applying the Decision Sovereignty Framework developed in Fritz, Fritz-Kalish and Bodrova (2025). The framework formalises the variable Y = d(P) · S, where d(P) is decision capability — decision quality as a function of predictive capacity, P — and S is decision sovereignty — the structural capacity of an institutional system to transmit decisions into outcomes without blockage, attenuation, or reversal. The four cases are selected to span the complete outcome space of the framework. Case 1 (The Berkeley AI Paradox) illustrates a congestion failure: high d(P) with positive alignment, but execution infrastructure overwhelmed as AI-generated decision volume exceeded the stability boundary ρ*. Case 2 (TCG Pty Ltd) illustrates sustained high-S execution through a distributed architecture that expanded execution capacity in proportion to capability investment over more than five decades. Case 3 (Global Access Partners) illustrates pre-commitment sovereignty construction — deliberately raising governance capacity G before formal decision load arrives. Case 4 (Robodebt) illustrates the amplification failure mode: negative alignment (S_net < 0) combined with high automated execution magnitude, producing Y < 0 that grew more negative as scale increased. Each case reports DSI component scores (A, C, E, V), structural regime classification, and the mechanism through which the framework's predictions are consistent with the observed outcome. Evidence classification is explicit: the Robodebt case carries the strongest evidentiary load (Royal Commission record, parliamentary testimony, peer-reviewed academic analysis); the Berkeley case is illustrative only, pending peer-reviewed replication. This volume is a companion to the foundational article Fritz, Fritz-Kalish and Bodrova (2025), published in the Journal of Behavioural Economics and Social Systems, Vol. 7, Nos 1–2 (DOI: 10.54337/ojs.bess.v7i1-2.11417) and the theoretical paper Fritz and Fritz-Kalish (2026), Decision Sovereignty: A Formally Derived Transmission Variable for Economic Theory, Global Access Partners, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19588486.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-04-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19588813
Primary Topic
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Decision Sovereignty: Case Studies

Peter Fritz, Catherine Fritz-Kalish
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
International Relations and Foreign Policy
article

Decision Sovereignty: Case Studies

Peter Fritz, Catherine Fritz-Kalish
article en

Abstract

This volume presents four empirical case studies applying the Decision Sovereignty Framework developed in Fritz, Fritz-Kalish and Bodrova (2025). The framework formalises the variable Y = d(P) · S, where d(P) is decision capability — decision quality as a function of predictive capacity, P — and S is decision sovereignty — the structural capacity of an institutional system to transmit decisions into outcomes without blockage, attenuation, or reversal. The four cases are selected to span the complete outcome space of the framework. Case 1 (The Berkeley AI Paradox) illustrates a congestion failure: high d(P) with positive alignment, but execution infrastructure overwhelmed as AI-generated decision volume exceeded the stability boundary ρ*. Case 2 (TCG Pty Ltd) illustrates sustained high-S execution through a distributed architecture that expanded execution capacity in proportion to capability investment over more than five decades. Case 3 (Global Access Partners) illustrates pre-commitment sovereignty construction — deliberately raising governance capacity G before formal decision load arrives. Case 4 (Robodebt) illustrates the amplification failure mode: negative alignment (S_net < 0) combined with high automated execution magnitude, producing Y < 0 that grew more negative as scale increased. Each case reports DSI component scores (A, C, E, V), structural regime classification, and the mechanism through which the framework's predictions are consistent with the observed outcome. Evidence classification is explicit: the Robodebt case carries the strongest evidentiary load (Royal Commission record, parliamentary testimony, peer-reviewed academic analysis); the Berkeley case is illustrative only, pending peer-reviewed replication. This volume is a companion to the foundational article Fritz, Fritz-Kalish and Bodrova (2025), published in the Journal of Behavioural Economics and Social Systems, Vol. 7, Nos 1–2 (DOI: 10.54337/ojs.bess.v7i1-2.11417) and the theoretical paper Fritz and Fritz-Kalish (2026), Decision Sovereignty: A Formally Derived Transmission Variable for Economic Theory, Global Access Partners, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19588486.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Access to Wholistic and Productive Living Institute (US)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
International Relations and Foreign Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.