Authority Continuity, Runtime Context Change and the Erosion of Admissible Execution
Runtime context change → legitimacy erosion
Execution Legitimacy Drift
Authority Continuity, Runtime Context Change and the Erosion of Admissible Execution
Paper type: Arqua Architecture Paper
Status: Future Research
Publication state: Research Backlog
Version/date: Placeholder
Abstract
Execution Legitimacy Drift addresses the problem that an action may continue executing after the conditions that originally justified it have degraded. The paper owns the transformation from runtime context change to legitimacy erosion. It examines how authority, evidence, policy, environmental state and institutional intent can shift while automated or AI-mediated processes continue to operate under earlier assumptions. Within Arqua’s programme, it extends The Desynchronization of Authority and supports Execution Admissibility Architecture by showing why admissibility must be maintained, not merely established once. It matters for AI-mediated institutional systems because long-running workflows, agents and adaptive systems can preserve procedural momentum while the legitimacy basis beneath them weakens, creating consequence-bearing action that is no longer institutionally justified.
Focus
This paper asks: how does an institution detect and govern the erosion of execution legitimacy when runtime context changes after an action was originally authorised?
Transformation
Runtime context change
↓
Legitimacy erosion
How this relates to Arqua
This paper extends The Alignment Architecture by examining how meaning, execution and admissibility can drift apart over time. It supports Execution Admissibility Architecture and SCIA Runtime by identifying the need for renewed admissibility when authority, evidence or context changes.
Key concepts
- Legitimacy drift
- Authority continuity
- Runtime context change
- Admissibility renewal
- Long-running execution
- Policy decay
- Evidence change
- Consequence control
Read this if
Read this if you work in enterprise architecture, risk, AI governance, operations or institutional governance and need to understand how authorised execution can become illegitimate under changing runtime conditions.
Placeholder note
This paper is currently in development. The placeholder records the architectural position, transformation and relationship to the Arqua architecture programme. Full paper text will be added when the draft is ready for publication.
Related papers
CTA
Start with one high-consequence decision. Identify where meaning, authority, policy, evidence or execution currently becomes uncontrolled.