What are the key criteria used by the Nobel Committee to evaluate Nobel Peace Prize nominees?
Executive summary
The Nobel Committee evaluates Peace Prize candidates primarily against the terms of Alfred Nobel’s will — who “has done the most or the best” work for fraternity between nations, reduction/abolition of standing armies, or promotion of peace congresses — and through a formal nomination, vetting and selection process run by the Norwegian Nobel Committee that includes outside experts, advisers and a final majority vote [1] [2] [3]. Nominations must be submitted by eligible nominators by January 31, confidentiality is enforced for 50 years, and the Committee narrows and assesses nominees before choosing a laureate in October [4] [2] [3].
1. The legal yardstick: Alfred Nobel’s will — the committee’s baseline
The Committee anchors every decision explicitly to the 1895 will of Alfred Nobel: the prize should go to whoever “has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses.” That phrasing remains the formal legal and moral benchmark the Norwegian Nobel Committee invokes when explaining choices [1] [5].
2. Who may be nominated and the deadline that matters
Eligibility is broad — living persons and active organizations can be candidates — but nominations are only valid if submitted by people or institutions listed in the Foundation’s statutes (members of national assemblies, certain professors, past laureates, court members, etc.). Nominations must arrive by January 31 to be considered for that year’s prize [4] [6].
3. Intake, secrecy and the numerical picture
The Norwegian Nobel Institute records hundreds of valid nominations each year; for 2025 it registered 338 candidates (244 individuals and 94 organisations). The Committee maintains strict confidentiality: full nomination lists are sealed for 50 years, even though nominators sometimes publicize their own submissions [7] [4] [3].
4. Shortlisting and expert assessment — advisers and external reviews
After nominations close the Committee prepares a shortlist and commissions assessments. Permanent advisers and external experts are used to evaluate candidates’ records and the relevance of their work to Nobel’s criteria. This administrative evaluation shapes the Committee’s deliberations before members vote [3] [2].
5. Deliberation dynamics: monthly meetings, consensus, and majority vote
The five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee (appointed by Norway’s parliament) meets repeatedly during the year, seeking consensus but ultimately deciding by majority vote at the start of October. The Committee’s decision is final and not subject to appeal [2] [3].
6. Interpretation is subjective — controversies follow
Because Nobel’s will is concise and framed in 19th‑century terms, the Committee’s interpretation has authority but also provokes debate. Critics say the prize has become political or awarded for aspirations rather than concrete achievements; others defend broad readings that adapt Nobel’s words to modern peace work. Observers such as PRIO note the unavoidable political impact and the contested nature of “peace” as a concept [8] [6].
7. How the Committee justifies individual awards — example from 2025
When announcing the 2025 award the Committee explicitly tied its choice to Nobel’s will: it stated the laureate “meets all three criteria” and highlighted concrete acts — uniting opposition and resisting militarisation — as the grounds for selection. That statement illustrates how the Committee maps contemporary accomplishments onto Nobel’s three pillars when explaining winners [5] [9].
8. Limits of public scrutiny and institutional opacity
Although the Committee publishes press releases and summaries explaining its reasoning, the internal nomination files and the detailed deliberations remain sealed for decades. This institutional secrecy limits outside verification of how the Committee weighed competing evidence or dissenting views during its internal process [4] [3].
9. Competing perspectives on “what counts” as peace work
Scholars and commentators disagree about what should count: some emphasise diplomacy, disarmament, and international law; others point to human-rights struggles, democratic resistance, or accountability mechanisms as central to lasting peace. Institutions like PRIO publish alternative assessments and lists precisely because interpretation of Nobel’s mandate changes over time [6] [10].
10. Bottom line for potential nominators and observers
To influence the process, nominators must be eligible and meet the January 31 deadline; they should document concrete, public achievements that can reasonably be read against Nobel’s three criteria. Final selection rests on the Committee’s confidential assessment and majority vote, applying legal text, expert evaluations and political judgment within a process that invites both praise and controversy [4] [3] [2].