Some questions about the concept of power

Abstract

Four questions are raised concerning previous conceptions of power. Dahl has suggested that a positive action on the part of the power holder and a demonstrable connection between him and the influenced actor are among the necessary conditions of a power relation. The present paper contends that Dahl's conditions screen out influence exerted through anticipated reactions and through the manipulation of information. It is proposed that Harsanyi's extension of Dahl's concept of power be modified to allow directly for those forms of influence. Dahl's definition also requires that, in order to have power, an actor must affect the behavior of the other party. Cartwright, among others, has offered a definition of power that does not require any behavioral effects. Harsanyi's concepts are applied to reveal the relation between Dahl's and Cartwright's definitions. A final section emphasizes ways in which the weaker party influences the behavior of the stronger and points out pitfalls in Harsanyi's formulation of the costs of power. The analysis is relevant to Dahl's empirical power study Who Governs? and to criticisms that have been made of it.