Centralization and decentralization for resilient infrastructure and complexity
Centralization and decentralization for resilient infrastructure and complexity
复制标题
DOI：
10.1088/2634-4505/ac0a4f
复制
发表时间：
2021-09-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Chester, Mikhail
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Helmrich, Alysha;Markolf, Samuel;Chester, Mikhail
人们越来越认识到，我们的基础设施系统应对不稳定、不确定和日益复杂的环境的能力对于恢复能力至关重要。集中式、分散式和分布式系统的概念在基础设施文献和讨论中普遍存在，人们似乎越来越关注这些配置如何支持或阻碍弹性的适应性和变革能力。似乎没有一致努力来协调这些概念的使用方式以及不同配置对基础设施系统的含义。这是有问题的，因为基础设施的构建和管理方式直接影响其应对日益增加的复杂性的能力。我们回顾了基础设施部门的集中化、分散化和分布式（统称为分散/集中化）的框架，揭示了导致多义框架的不相称的使用。去中心化/集中式网络的特点通常是靠近资源、分配能力、产品量和连接数量。基础设施部门治理去中心化的特点是掌握决策权的参与者数量。值得注意的是，治理结构在基础设施去中心化/中心化文献中经常被忽视。接下来，我们描述如何将去中心化/集中化概念应用于新兴的弹性基础设施理论，确定它们支持弹性原则的条件。虽然集中式系统在实践中占主导地位，而去中心化系统在弹性文献中得到推广，但所有三种配置（集中式、去中心化和分布式）都被发现与各种稳定和不稳定背景下的弹性能力相一致。展望未来，我们建议通过网络治理的角度建立去中心化/中心化的多维框架，其中在稳定和不稳定之间转换的能力至关重要，信息是关键的调解者。
The capacities of our infrastructure systems to respond to volatile, uncertain, and increasingly complex environments are increasingly recognized as vital for resilience. Pervasive across infrastructure literature and discourse are the concepts of centralized, decentralized, and distributed systems, and there appears to be growing interest in how these configurations support or hinder adaptive and transformative capacities towards resilience. There does not appear to be a concerted effort to align how these concepts are used, and what different configurations mean for infrastructure systems. This is problematic because how infrastructure are structured and governed directly affects their capabilities to respond to increasing complexity. We review framings of centralization, decentralization, and distributed (referred to collectively as de/centralization) across infrastructure sectors, revealing incommensurate usage leading to polysemous framings. De/centralized networks are often characterized by proximity to resources, capacity of distribution, volume of product, and number of connections. De/centralization of governance within infrastructure sectors is characterized by the number of actors who hold decision-making power. Notably, governance structures are often overlooked in infrastructure de/centralization literature. Next, we describe how de/centralization concepts are applied to emerging resilient infrastructure theory, identifying conditions under which they support resilience principles. While centralized systems are dominant in practice and decentralized systems are promoted in resilience literature, all three configurations-centralized, decentralized, and distributed-were found to align with resilience capacities in various contexts of stability and instability. Going forward, we recommend a multi-dimensional framing of de/centralization through a network-governance perspective where capabilities to shift between stability and instability are paramount and information is a critical mediator.