Survey Article

Føllesdal, A. (1998). Survey Article: Subsidiarity. Journal of Political Philosophy, 6(2), 190-218.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

1998

Volume

6

Issue

2

Pages

190-218

ISSN

1467-9760

DOI

10.1111/1467-9760.00052

DOI registrant

Wiley

Link

https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9760.00052

Cited from

military_strategic_studies, philosophy, political_science

Cited by

3 citations across 3 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Authority Delegation Under Uncertainty
  • Authority Delegation Under Uncertainty is distinct from Subsidiarity. Subsidiarity (a governance principle, often a prime candidate) states that decisions should be made at the lowest competent level, closest to the problem, a normative claim Føllesdal (1998) reconstructs across Catholic social teaching and EU constitutional theory.

    This sourceReconstructs subsidiarity across Catholic social teaching and EU constitutional theory as the claim that decisions belong at the lowest competent level.

• Autonomy
  • The subsidiarity principle, decide at the lowest competent level, transfers from federalism to platform governance, regulatory layering, and federated software

    This sourceAnalyzes the subsidiarity principle — decide at the lowest competent level — as a scoped, nested allocation of self-government.

• Local Autonomy & Tiered Escalation
  • Subsidiarity & Decentralization. Subsidiarity, as Føllesdal (1998) argues in his philosophical analysis of the doctrine, holds that authority should reside at the level closest to the problem.

    This sourceSurvey article: Subsidiarity. Journal of Political Philosophy, 6(2), 190–218. Reconstructs the principle of subsidiarity across Catholic social teaching, Althusian federalism, and EU constitutional theory; defines it as the normative claim that decisions belong at the lowest competent level — independent of whether contingencies are foreseen.

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 3 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.

Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:2e4057257249 · see in the full table