Jurisdictional dissipation is the mirror image of concentration. Concentration lets one actor decide too much; dissipation leaves no actor able to decide enough, so a recognized standing failure goes unremedied because responsibility has scattered past the point where anyone can act. Both are failures of the same thing — correctability — which is why NWG does not treat “distributed” as the objective in itself. The target is jurisdiction that is appropriately bounded and sufficiently capable: enough authority to act, distributed enough to stay correctable. It belongs on the irreversibility register beside the concentration red lines, as their matched pair. See deciding without a final authority.
Jurisdictional dissipation
The failure opposite to concentration: responsibility so distributed that no institution retains enough jurisdiction to remedy a recognized standing failure. Because both poles break correctability, "distributed" is not the goal; the goal is jurisdiction that is appropriately bounded and sufficiently capable — enough to act, distributed enough to stay correctable.