Power, Pluralism, and Local Politics.

Scholars engaged in the study of community power have debated the merits of the so-called "reputational" and "pluralist" methods of inquiry at length. This paper suggests that differences in substantive results can be understood in terms of the assumptions made by each method concerning what is being studied, and, therefore, in terms of the investigative techniques that are appropriate. The "reputational" school, based principally on sociology, views the community as a system of action and examines the structure of political roles involved in setting community policies. The "pluralist" school, based principally on political science, views the community as a collection of individuals and attempts to measure in quantitative terms the amount of power held by each individual. Both systems of thought are examined, and questions are raised with regard to the adequacy of the currently popular "pluralist" method. Finally, some problems common to both methods are noted, and suggestions for further research are made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]