A GJ Advances article.

Abstract

Committees – i.e. transgovernmental and transnational bodies, composed of national officials, independent experts and/or interest representatives – are an important mechanism for accelerating negotiations in the European decision-making process. Substantial agreements are reached in specialized administrative colleges, which enjoy a heightened decision-making capacity. The European committees are thus essential tools for conflict prevention: they play a fundamental role in reconciling potentially conflicting national and supranational interests. Can the same be said of global committees? Are they similarly efficient in generating consensual decisions and reconciling the interests of the member States? The answer advanced in the paper is grounded on a comparison of structural and functional elements. The organizational models characteristic of the global committees largely correspond to those of the European system. Still, the relevant structural difference lies in their composition: while in the European Union the (transgovernmental) committees are all plenary, being composed of delegations of all Member States, in the universal organizations, by contrast, plenary committees are the exception. This organizational difference is reflected on the functional dimension: both European and global committees perform an essentially decisional activity, but global committees' efficiency (or productivity) and effectiveness (measurable in terms of member States' compliance) are relatively compromised by their (mainly) non-plenary composition. This is probably one of the reasons why effective problem-solving is greater in the European Union than in other international organizations.

Originally published in Global Jurist Advances.

Recommended Citation

Savino, Mario (2006) "The Role of Transnational Committees in the European and Global Orders," Global Jurist Advances: Vol. 6 : Iss. 3, Article 5.
Available at: http://www.bepress.com/gj/advances/vol6/iss3/art5