投资者与国家争端解决
仲裁
国际投资
投资(军事)
国家(计算机科学)
争议机制
争议解决
政治学
国际法
法律与经济学
可持续发展
结算(财务)
调解
业务
外商直接投资
替代性争议解决
经济
国际贸易
法学
财务
政治
计算机科学
算法
付款
标识
DOI:10.1093/icsidreview/siab036
摘要
Abstract This lecture surveys the criticisms directed at international investment agreements (IIAs) and their reliance on investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS), as well as the leading reform venues that have been addressing such criticisms: UNCTAD, ICSID, and UNCITRAL. It argues that despite these ambitious efforts, the international investment regime’s reliance on investor-State arbitration will not be wholly displaced by any of the alternatives under active discussion – from national courts to mediation to a Multilateral Investment Court. In the long run, current reform efforts are likely to produce an ever more complex regime, governed by more diverse substantive rules interpreted by more complex options for dispute resolution. The focus on reforming the ways investor-State disputes are resolved fails to respond to doubts about the need for IIAs, undermines aspirations to harmonize international investment law, and ignores dire needs for stimulating (and protecting) foreign capital flows to achieve the goals of the Sustainable Development Goals – from mitigating climate change to preventing the next pandemic.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI