This book identifies a paradigm shift in international investment law and enquires into how states reassert control over investment treaties.

This book identifies a paradigm shift in international investment law and enquires into how states reassert control over investment treaties.

Investment treaties are some of the most controversial but least understood instruments of global economic governance. Public interest in international investment arbitration is growing and some developed and developing countries are beginning to revisit their investment treaty policies. The Political Economy of the Investment Treaty Regime synthesises and advances the growing literature on this subject by integrating legal, economic, and political perspectives. Based on an analysis of the substantive and procedural rights conferred by investment treaties, it asks four basic questions. What are the costs and benefits of investment treaties for investors, states, and other stakeholders? Why did developed and developing countries sign the treaties? Why should private arbitrators be allowed to review public regulations passed by states? And what is the relationship between the investment treaty regime and the broader regime complex that governs international investment? Through a concise, but comprehensive, analysis, this book fills in some of the many "blind spots" of academics from different disciplines, and is the first port of call for lawyers, investors, policy-makers, and stakeholders trying to make sense of these critical instruments governing investor-state relations.

As the proverbial workhorse of international economic law, investment arbitration is heavily relied upon around the globe. It has to cope with the demands of increasingly complex proceedings. At the same time, investment arbitration has come under close public scrutiny in the midst of heated political debate. Both of these factors have led to the field of investment protection being subject to continuous changes. Therefore, it presents an abundance of challenges in its interpretation and application. While these challenges are often deeply rooted in the doctrinal foundations of international law, they similarly surface during live arbitral proceedings. International Challenges in Investment Arbitration serves not only as a collection of recently debated issues in investment law; it also deals with the underlying fundamental questions at the intersection of investment arbitration and international law. The book is the product of the 1st Bucerius Law Journal Conference on International Investment Law & Arbitration. It combines the current state of knowledge, new perspectives on the topic as well as practical issues and will be of interest to researchers, academics and practitioners in the fields of international investment law, international economic law, regulation and comparative law.

This book examines the role of home states to investment disputes and questions whether it represents a return to diplomatic protection.

This book provides a comprehensive account of the CETA Investment Chapter’s ability to overcome the legitimacy crisis facing investment arbitration. To do so, it first examines the root causes behind the legitimacy crisis, ultimately arguing that it reflects a fundamental rule of law crisis within investment arbitration. In particular, it asserts that the normative standpoints of the legitimacy crisis form part of the rule of law, the uniting legal principle from which the legitimacy concerns stem. The book contends that the rule of law is not only the principal normative and causal assumption on which the legitimacy concerns are based, but that it could also be utilized as a platform to evaluate the investment arbitration mechanism in CETA's Investment Chapter. Based on this, the book evaluates CETA's Investment Chapter through the rule of law framework in order to provide a convincing account of the latter's ability to overcome the legitimacy crisis facing investment arbitration. It concludes that CETA's Investment Chapter is unlikely to completely solve the legitimacy crisis simply because it is just a patchwork of reforms rather than a comprehensive reinvention of the substantive and procedural law of investment arbitration. Lastly, the book offers meaningful insights into the way the challenges presented by investment arbitration should be addressed. The book is intended for academics researching international investment law and arbitration as well as for policy-makers focusing on reforming investor-state dispute settlement.

The book explores the effects of armed conflict and international humanitarian law on the interpretation and application of investment treaties.

This book develops a conceptual framework that captures not only the tensions between constitutional values that are common to liberal democracies – human rights, democracy, and the rule of law – and the investment treaty regime, but also the potential for co-existence and complementarity.

Traditionally, international investment law was conceptualised as a set of norms aiming to ensure good governance for foreign investors, in exchange for their capital and know-how. However, the more recent narratives postulate that investment treaties and investor–state arbitration can lead to better governance not just for foreign investors but also for host state communities. Investment treaty law can arguably foster good governance by holding host governments liable for a failure to ensure transparency, stability, predictability and consistency in their dealings with foreign investors. The recent proliferation of such narratives in investment treaty practice, arbitral awards and academic literature raises questions as to their juridical, conceptual and empirical underpinnings. What has propelled good governance from a set of normative ideals to enforceable treaty standards? Does international investment law possess the necessary characteristics to inspire changes at the national level? How do host states respond to investment treaty law? The overarching objective of this monograph is to unpack existing assumptions concerning the effects of international investment law on host states. By combining doctrinal, empirical, comparative analysis and unveiling the emerging 'nationally felt' responses to international investment norms, the book aims to facilitate a more informed understanding of the present contours and the nature of the interplay between international investment norms and national realities.

As a consequence of being sued by more than 20 foreign investors, India terminated close to 60 investment treaties and adopted a new Model Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) purportedly to balance investment protection with the host State’s right to regulate. This book is a critical study of India’s approach towards BITs and traces their origin, evolution, and the current state of play. It does so by locating them in India’s economic policy in general and policy towards foreign investment in particular. India’s approach towards BITs and policy towards foreign investment were consistent with each other in the periods of economic nationalism (1947–1990) and economic liberalism (1991–2010). However, post 2010, India’s approach to BITs has become protectionist while India’s foreign investment policy continues to be liberal. To balance investment protection with the State’s right to regulate, India needs to evolve its BIT practice based on the twin framework of international rule of law and embedded liberalism.