POWER ANALYSIS AND WORLD POLITICS: New Trendsversus Old Tendencies By DAVID A. BALDWIN* FROM Niccolo Machiavelli and David Hume to E. H. Carrand Hans Morgenthau, powerhas beenan important (somewould say tooimportant) variable in international political theorizing. Although somemayregard power analysis as old-fashioned and outdated, recent refinements in social science thinking about power suggest the pos- sibility of revitalizing this approachto understanding international relations. Exact turning points in intellectual history are difficult to identify, butmany wouldregard the publication ofPower and Society byHarold Lasswell and AbrahamKaplan as the watershed between the older, intuitive and ambiguous treatments of powerand theclarity and pre- cisionof morerecent discussions.1 Since then, Herbert Simon,James March, Robert Dahl, Jack Nagel, and others have developed theidea of poweras a type of causation.2 This causal conception of power, ac- cording to Nagel, has proved attractive forthree reasons: First, there are compelling similarities between intuitive notionsof power and * An earlier version of thispaperwas presented at the Fourth AnnualConference of theBritish International Studies Association, University of Durham, December I5-I7, I977. The author would like to express his appreciation for the helpful comments provided by Conference participants and by Jeffrey Hart, Robert 0. Keohane,and James P. Sewell. 1Harold D. Lasswelland Abraham Kaplan, Power and Society (New Haven: Yale University Press I950). In an early and influential article, Herbert A. Simondescribed his discussion as "a series of footnotes on theanalysis of influence and power by Lass- well and Kaplan." "Noteson the Observation and Measurement of Political Power," journal of Politics, xv (November I953), 501. See also Jack H. Nagel, "Some Ques- tions Aboutthe Concept of Power," Behavioral Science, xiii (March i968), I29. 2 Simon (fn. I), and Models of Man (New York: Wiley I957); James G. March, "An Introduction to the Theory and Measurement of Influence," American Political Science Review, XLIX (June I955), 43I-5I; Robert A. Dahl, "The Concept of Power," Behavioral Science, II (July I957), 20I-I5, and "Power," InternationalEncyclopedia of the Social Sciences, XII (New York: Free Press i968), 405-I5; Jack H. Nagel, The DescriptiveAnalysis of Power (New Haven: Yale University Press I975); and FelixE. Oppenheim, "Powerand Causation," in BrianBarry, ed., Power and Political Theory: Some European Perspectives (London: John Wiley I976), I03-i6. Excellent reviews of the literature on power, reflecting bothconsensus and healthy intellectual dispute, are the following: Dorwin Cartwright, "Influence, Leadership, Control," in James March, ed., Handbook of Organizations (Chicago: Rand McNally i965), I-47; Dahl, "Power";James T. Tedeschi and ThomasV. Bonoma, "Powerand Influence: An Introduction," in Tedeschi, ed., The Social InfluenceProcesses (Chicago: Aldine-Atherton I972), I-49; and Nagel, The Descriptive Analysis of Power. \?) I979 byPrinceton University Press World Politics 0043-887I/79/o2oI6i-34$oI.70/I For copying information, see contributor page