IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v4y1974i02p187-216_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy-making in Postwar Britain: A Nation-level Test of Elitist and Pluralist Hypotheses

Author

Listed:
  • Hewitt, Christopher

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

Suggested Citation

  • Hewitt, Christopher, 1974. "Policy-making in Postwar Britain: A Nation-level Test of Elitist and Pluralist Hypotheses," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 187-216, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:4:y:1974:i:02:p:187-216_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123400009467/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Contandriopoulos, Damien & Brousselle, Astrid & Larouche, Catherine & Breton, Mylaine & Rivard, Michèle & Beaulieu, Marie-Dominique & Haggerty, Jeannie & Champagne, Geneviève & Perroux, Mélanie, 2018. "Healthcare reforms, inertia polarization and group influence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(9), pages 1018-1027.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:4:y:1974:i:02:p:187-216_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.