The question of how effectively business interests are represented in public decision-making is becoming increasingly important in contemporary economic governance. This issue was at the centre of the presentation “Representativeness of Chambers of Commerce in B2A Dialogue in Moldova and Romania”, delivered during the International Scientific Conference “Competitiveness and Innovation in the Knowledge Economy”, held on 25–26 September 2026 at the Academy of Economic Studies of Moldova (ASEM) in Chisinau. It formed part of a wider research programme conducted in 2025–2026, examining the institutional mechanisms through which business communities participate in dialogue with public authorities in both countries, with particular attention to the role of chambers of commerce.
Chambers of commerce as intermediaries between business and administration
Business-to-Administration (B2A) dialogue constitutes an important component of contemporary economic governance. It provides an institutio framework through which enterprises and their representative organisations can communicate with public authorities concerning legislation, economic policy, administrative procedures and the broader conditions for doing business. Within this framework, chambers of commerce occupy a distinctive position. They may serve not only as service providers for enterprises but also as institutional intermediaries between the business community and public administration. Their potential contribution to policymaking, however, depends substantially on the extent to which they can legitimately claim to represent the interests of the business community.
This raises a fundamental research question: To what extent can chambers of commerce in Moldova and Romania be considered representative actors in B2A dialogue? The issue of representativeness is particularly relevant where chambers participate in consultations, provide opinions on draft legislation, contribute to economic-policy discussions or maintain formal and informal channels of communication with public institutions.
A comparative perspective: Moldova and Romania
The research adopts a comparative perspective, examining the institutional position and practical role of chambers of commerce in Moldova and Romania. Analized countries have different institutional and legal trajectories but both economies have undergone significant institutional transformation and Europeanisation. Their business communities interact with public authorities through a variety of formal and informal consultation mechanisms. The comparative approach makes it possible to examine several dimensions of representativeness, including:
- the legal and institutional status of chambers of commerce;
- formal and actual membership data;
- the membership structure of chambers and the breadth of business interests covered;
- mechanisms for collecting and articulating the views of businesses;
- the distinction between representing members and representing the wider business community;
- and the extent to which chamber positions are reflected in public decision-making.
These dimensions are important because institutional recognition alone does not necessarily establish substantive representativeness. An organisation may have a formal role in consultation while still representing only a particular segment of the business community.
Formal representation versus substantive representation
One of the central analytical distinctions emerging from the research concerns the difference between formal and substantive representation. Formal representation may result from legislation, institutional arrangements or official recognition by public authorities. Substantive representation, by contrast, concerns the extent to which an organisation actually reflects the interests, preferences and concerns of the businesses it claims to represent. This distinction is particularly significant for B2A dialogue. Public authorities may find it efficient to consult established intermediary organisations. At the same time, policymakers need to understand whether the positions communicated by such organisations encompass a sufficiently broad range of business interests.
The representativeness of a chamber therefore cannot be assessed solely by asking whether it has access to government institutions. It also requires consideration of who participates in the organisation, whose interests are articulated, how those interests are aggregated, and how the organisation derives legitimacy for its positions. The problem of the quality of the B2A dialogue has implications extending beyond institutional design. Effective B2A dialogue can contribute to a better understanding of the practical consequences of regulation, reduce information asymmetries between public authorities and enterprises, and support the development of policies that take account of business conditions. For economies seeking to strengthen competitiveness and innovation, the quality of this interaction is particularly important. Small and medium-sized enterprises, larger companies, sector-specific businesses and enterprises operating in different regions may experience regulatory and administrative measures differently. A representative intermediary can potentially help public authorities identify these differences and incorporate relevant business perspectives into policymaking.
Conversely, weaknesses in representation may create a risk that dialogue primarily reflects the interests of organisations or sectors with greater institutional access, organisational capacity or resources.
Moldova and Romania in the broader European context
Both countries share historical roots and various business and social relations. They are natural partners in ongoing EU integration process of Moldova. This makes the countries and their business environment organizations natural partners.
The research background
The research was done in 2025/2026 by:
Piotr MARCINIAK – Assistant Professor, Institute of Law Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland
in cooperation with
Larisa MISTREAN – Associate Professor, Academy of Economic Studies of Moldova, Moldova.
The cooperation brings together perspectives from legal and economic scholarship and enables the research to examine both the institutional/legal foundations of representation and its economic and governance implications.
Looking ahead
For Moldova and Romania, examining the role of chambers of commerce provides an opportunity to understand not only existing institutional arrangements but also the conditions under which business–government dialogue can become more inclusive and effective. The research therefore approaches representativeness as a multidimensional concept rather than a purely formal characteristic. The key issue is whether institutional mechanisms allow the diverse interests of the business community to be effectively identified, aggregated and communicated to public authorities.
The presentation at the International Scientific Conference “Competitiveness and Innovation in the Knowledge Economy” in Chisinau represents one stage in this broader research effort. The continuing comparative analysis of Moldova and Romania is intended to contribute to the academic discussion on business representation, B2A governance and the institutional foundations of competitive and innovation-oriented economies.
Detailed research results are published in Romanian and Moldovan journals, respectively. If you are interested – follow our updates or contact us.
