Appendix F

Authority and Jurisdiction Mapping

A browser-local mapper for proposed acts, authority sources, jurisdictional limits, delegation chains, de jure and de facto power, review routes, and the human authorization point.

Available now

Resource map

Inside this resource

Use the sections below to work with this companion resource alongside the book.

01
Proposed-Act Decomposition Available
02
Claimed Authorized Institution Available
03
Authority Source Available
04
Jurisdictional Limits Available
05
Delegation Chain Available
06
Expertise-Authority Gap Available
07
Review and Oversight Available
08
De Jure / De Facto Power Available
09
Human Authorization Point Available
10
Unresolved Jurisdiction Gap Available
11
Integrity Review Available

Working tool

Authority and Jurisdiction Mapper

Decompose a recommendation into discrete public acts, then map who may perform each act, under what authority, with what limits and review routes.

Proposed act Break “implement the policy” into a concrete act: appropriate funds, issue a rule, change a service, procure, license, adjudicate, publish, enforce, or another specific action. Claimed authorized institution Name the institution or office claimed to possess authority for this act. Authority source Constitution, statute, charter, delegation, regulation, treaty, court order, appointment, emergency instrument, or other basis. Write UNKNOWN when not established. Jurisdictional limits Record territory, subject matter, permissible act, duration, threshold, and required procedure. Delegation chain Trace principal → agent relationships and where discretion enters. Expertise / authority gap Who has the strongest relevant knowledge, and how does that differ from who can bind the public? Review / appeal / oversight Identify judicial, legislative, administrative, audit, electoral, ombuds, public-challenge, or other review routes. De jure / de facto power gap Record actors who can steer agenda, funding, information, models, sequencing, or implementation despite lacking formal final authority. Human authorization point Identify the precise step at which analysis becomes a legally or politically authorized decision. Unresolved jurisdiction / coordination gap What ambiguity, cross-boundary dependency, missing power, or coordination requirement must be resolved before lawful implementation?

Integrity review

Review the record; do not score it.

The decision is decomposed into discrete acts.Authority is tied to a source rather than inferred from expertise or popularity.Jurisdictional limits are explicit.Delegation and principal–agent risks are visible.Review routes are recorded.De facto influence is distinguished from de jure authority.The human authorization point is identifiable.Unresolved authority gaps block claims of lawful implementation.

This is a study and practice tool. Completing it does not establish truth, legal authority, democratic legitimacy, implementation readiness, or official provenance.

Find related companion resources.

Browse tools, methods, references, and teaching material by what you are trying to do rather than by appendix letter alone.

All companion resources