The community power debate concluded with each side believing they had
won. Political theorists have generalized power, making empirical inv
estigation very difficult; urban scholars have turned their attention
to more manageable empirical problems. Rational choice advances the de
bate, exposing the errors of all sides and facilitating a new approach
which transcends structural versus individualist methods. By separati
ng various aspects of power in urban contexts, complementary technique
s such as network analysis in a bargaining framework, semi-structured
interviewing and the use of text databases permits a comprehensive inv
estigation of agenda-setting and the mobilization of bias. The paper d
emonstrates the utility of this approach by comparing it to 'regime th
eory', the latest paradigm of urban research.