Coordination Processes in International Organisations: The EU at the International Labour Conference in 2005

TY - JOUR

T1 - Coordination Processes in International Organisations

T2 - The EU at the International Labour Conference in 2005

AU - Nedergaard, Peter

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - The EU is not a member of the International Labour Organisation (ILO), but relatively elaborate EU coordination takes place anyway. This paper addresses two research questions: 1) How is it possible to evaluate the coordination of the EU in its specific observable configuration in the ILO?, and 2) To what outcome does this coordination lead and why? Based on an analysis of EU coordination before and during the International Labour Conference in 2005, and on a comparison with coordination processes of the IMEC group, it is found that the Commission and the Presidency act as twin-agents vis-à-vis their principals, the Member States. The Commission is the leading agent in the phase leading up to the Conference; the Presidency then takes over. On the one hand, due to the Treaty obligations and their interpretations by the Court of Justice, both the Presidency and the Commission are kept within tight limits by the principals. On the other hand, both before and during the Conference, the Member States accept the so-called discursive coordination of the Commission, which seems to be of great (but often neglected) importance. Owing to the organisational set-up in which coordination takes place, the EU is able to coordinate relatively elaborate agreements due to the strength of its coordination as far as professional or technical and political activities (excepting the ILO budget) are concerned. In other more clear-cut or 'simple' policy areas such as the ILO budget, the EU coordination is weak: this contrast with the strong coordination of the IMEC.

AB - The EU is not a member of the International Labour Organisation (ILO), but relatively elaborate EU coordination takes place anyway. This paper addresses two research questions: 1) How is it possible to evaluate the coordination of the EU in its specific observable configuration in the ILO?, and 2) To what outcome does this coordination lead and why? Based on an analysis of EU coordination before and during the International Labour Conference in 2005, and on a comparison with coordination processes of the IMEC group, it is found that the Commission and the Presidency act as twin-agents vis-à-vis their principals, the Member States. The Commission is the leading agent in the phase leading up to the Conference; the Presidency then takes over. On the one hand, due to the Treaty obligations and their interpretations by the Court of Justice, both the Presidency and the Commission are kept within tight limits by the principals. On the other hand, both before and during the Conference, the Member States accept the so-called discursive coordination of the Commission, which seems to be of great (but often neglected) importance. Owing to the organisational set-up in which coordination takes place, the EU is able to coordinate relatively elaborate agreements due to the strength of its coordination as far as professional or technical and political activities (excepting the ILO budget) are concerned. In other more clear-cut or 'simple' policy areas such as the ILO budget, the EU coordination is weak: this contrast with the strong coordination of the IMEC.

KW - Faculty of Social Sciences

KW - policy coordination

KW - international relations

KW - political science

KW - ILO

KW - working conditions

KW - social dialogue

KW - social policy

KW - Council of Ministers

KW - European Commission

M3 - Journal article

SN - 1027-5193

VL - 12

JO - EIOP European Integration Online Papers

JF - EIOP European Integration Online Papers

IS - 3

ER -