Democratic Hopes in the Polycentric City

The polycentric model of municipal governance suggests that multiple jurisdictions may approximate an efficient market for local public services: citizens move to jurisdictions offering services they value at tax rates they are willing and able to pay. The model is appealing to political theorists for its empha-sis on free association and responsive governance, but problematic insofar as institutions prescribed by the model permit exclusionary practices and objectionable inequalities. I argue for a revised con-ception of polycentricity: efficient spatial patterns of boundaries and services are acceptable only if they are consistent with (inter alia) fair opportunities for both mobility and loyalty to place. This sug-gests a vision of the polycentric city in which fairness and contestation are as important as freedom and efficiency. The polycentric model of municipal governance suggests that multiple juris-dictions may approximate an efficient market for a range of public services. As a normative ideal, the model should appeal to liberals and libertarians for its emphasis on freedoms of choice and association: citizens are free to move to jurisdictions that provide the services they value, at the price they are willing and able to pay. When preferences, service quality, tax rates, and budget constraint