Lake, Hierarchy in International Relations, APSA 2004
5
Second, authority is a form of power. Following Robert Dahl’s (1957, 202)
famous definition, power is the ability of A to get B to do something he would otherwise
not do. In the case of authority, B’s behavior is driven by obligation, not force, but the
operative condition is the same: B does something he or she would otherwise not do
because of A’s will. The commonly asserted opposition between power and authority is,
thus, ill-founded. Authority is a member of the larger set of power relationships. Many
analysts, especially in international relations, equate power with the ability to coerce, a
second form of power. Purely coercive relationships – as when a mugger demands “your
money or your life” – are characterized by power, but are not authoritative. Although it
may be wise to comply in the face of superior force, there is no obligation to do so. It is
the obligation to comply with A’s commands – or, alternatively, the legitimacy of those
commands – that renders authority and coercion analytically distinct.
2
Modern conceptions of authority, including those in international relations, are
given fullest expression in the work of Max Weber who, in characterizing the modern
bureaucratic state, developed an ideal type of formal-legal authority.
3
For Weber, and
nearly everyone else since, A’s ability to command the Bs, and the willingness of the Bs
to comply, follows from the lawful position or office that A holds. In this conception, A
possesses the right to issue laws and rules due to the office that A occupies, and not to
2
This distinction between authority and coercion is nicely captured in Waltz’s first and third dimensions of
political structure (Waltz 1979). The first dimension is the ordering principle, or the way in which the units
stand in relationship to one another. The third dimension is the distribution of capabilities, often mistaken
for the distribution of power. Capabilities matter for Waltz (1979, 118) because they create opportunities
for coercion: more capable states can impose their will on others, up to and including eliminating states as
independent entities. Waltz remains true to his realism in emphasizing power; but in a way that is not
widely appreciated, the dimensions of his political structure are defined by different forms of power.
3
Weber referred to this as rational or legal authority (1978, 215-26).
Convention