To many political scientists the stuff of the discipline is supposed to be the delineation and comparison of power and influence relationships. Yet I doubt that we have really progressed very far in our empirical analysis of such phenomena; and indeed empirical studies, especially those conducted in the field, or in the “real” world, which have actually demonstrated influence relationships or tested formulations, seem to have lagged far behind the conceptual part of the enterprise. As one leading formulation puts it, one actor has influence over another actor in so far as he can change his behaviour (opinions, etc.) or get him to do something he would not otherwise do. Even to demonstrate that in any given setting certain actors have more influence and others less, let alone to explain the finding convincingly or to attempt comparisons with other settings, requires careful measurement of the motives, skills, and resources of both influencers and influencees. The requirements are very demanding, of course, and it is no wonder that empirical research has not been able to portray and explain the full reciprocal nature of influence relationships. The concession made to the conceptual and empirical difficulties of the problem seems to have been to examine only one of the actors, or half of the relationship; and in practice this seems to have worked out to be a concentration more on the influential than on the influenced. At times it seems that we have been enthralled simply by the thought of having discovered the influence-wielder, and that we have forgotten that there must also be others who are influence-recipients. As a hopeful correction to this one-sided treatment of influence relationships, and also simply to present some evidence on a topic that needs more documentation, my intention in this paper is to examine those influenced in local politics.
Temperature, humidity, and wind speed are associated with lower Covid-19 incidence
