Publisher： Cambridge University Press
E-ISSN： 1469-2112|4|2|187-216
ISSN： 0007-1234
Source： British Journal of Political Science, Vol.4, Iss.2, 1974-04, pp. : 187-216
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
In the study of power structures, whether of the local community or the national society, three main approaches have been proposed: the reputational, the sociology of leadership and the issue approaches. Of these the least popular in practice is the last-named, which would attempt to discover ‘who rules?’ through an analysis of actual decision-making in a series of issues. This is particularly true of studies of national power, where evidence on how high-level political decisions were made is cited only to illustrate or exemplify an argument.² Although some studies of local community power have relied primarily on the issue method, studies of national power have almost invariably utilized the sociology of leadership method,³ and no systematic comparative analysis of a sample of national issues has been made. Since even those writers like Bachrach and Baratz who have raised objections to ‘the assumption that power is totally embodied and fully
Related content
Review of Politics, Vol. 31, Iss. 4, 1969-10 ,pp. :
Access to resources
Recommend
The Supreme Court and Policy-Making
Review of Politics, Vol. 21, Iss. 2, 1959-04 ,pp. :
The Pluralist Case Not Proven: Hewitt on Britain
British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 5, Iss. 3, 1975-07 ,pp. :
Introduction: Policy-making, Learning and Devolution
By Keating Michael Cairney Paul
Regional and Federal Studies, Vol. 22, Iss. 3, 2012-07 ,pp. :