Dear all, We are happy to announce a new Special Issue on polycentricity in digital governance in *Information, Communication & Society*, edited by Matthew Dylag, Daniëlle Flonk, Cristiana Lauri and Morshed Mannan. Access the Open Access introduction here: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2552374. The SI addresses how polycentricity affects trust and legitimacy in digital governance along four dimensions: governance, actors, values, and tools. - *Governance*: Positions on how to govern the digital realm are dispersed, and perspectives on what should be governed in the first place are diffuse. This has implications for trust and legitimacy: vulnerable groups, for instance, are required to trust opaque techno-social systems. - *Actors*: A wide range of actors has overlapping domains of authority and diverse expertise, such as international organizations, states, digital communities, and users. In order to make polycentric governance work, these actors have to cooperate, often across sectors and borders. - *Values*: Reasons and normative goals for digital governance vary, leading to governance challenges. Different actors focus on different values, for instance, transparency and accountability, freedom of speech, human rights, or sovereignty. Contradicting values can lead to a decay in trust and legitimacy. - *Tools*: A variety of laws, regulations, private rules, norms, standards and technologies are used to govern the digital. A combination of these tools can increase trust and legitimacy, but not every tool is equally effective. With six wonderful and insightful contributions across disciplines and topics: - Matthew Dylag compares how the EU, Canada and the US legislate AI to uncover their underlying policy goals. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2556745 - Morshed Mannan, Primavera De Filippi & Tara Merk research how perceptions about legitimate governance blockchain-based metaverses shape users' decisions to exit, voice or remain loyal. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2523978 - Isadora Borges Monroy assesses deputized surveillance as a central mechanism in data gathering in US policing. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2505696 - Lucas Henrique Muniz Conceição investigates the relationship between digital constitutionalism and democracy, and how individuals navigate governance both as citizens of states and users of digital platforms. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2492572 - Ellie Rennie, Jason Potts & Joshua Tan assess to what extent groups of validators have power over blockchain networks, which requires politics to control. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2455116 - Jan Aart Scholte wrote insightful concluding reflections on polycentricity and legitimacy in digital governance. http://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2026.2624711 Best, Matthew, Daniëlle, Cristiana and Morshed *Dani**ë**lle Flonk **/* *フロンク ダニエラ* *Assistant Professor in International Relations and Politics* *Hitotsubashi University*Faculty of Law Hitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Studies (HIAS) Faculty Building 2, Room 625 d.flonk@r.hit-u.ac.jp | @danielleflonk | *Website <https://hri.ad.hit-u.ac.jp/html/100001780_profile_en.html>* *Recent publications:* Flonk, D., & Debre, M. J. (2025). Hollow multilateralism: How autocracies contest the norms and procedures of international organizations. *International Affairs*, 101(4) 1463–1482. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiaf104 Flonk, D., Jachtenfuchs, M. & Obendiek. A.S. (2024). Controlling internet content in the EU: towards digital sovereignty. *Journal of European Public Policy*, *31*(8), 2316-2342. DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2024.2309179 <https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2024.2309179> Flonk, D. (2021). Emerging illiberal norms: Russia and China as promoters of internet content control. *International Affairs*, *97*(6), 1925-1944. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiab146