Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T00:07:09.205Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

15 - The Regime Complex for Investment Governance

Overlapping Provisions in PTAs and BITs

from Part IV - Diffusion across Economic Treaties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2019

By
Soo Yeon Kim  and
Clara Lee
Edited by
Manfred Elsig ,
Michael Hahn  and
Gabriele Spilker
Manfred Elsig
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Michael Hahn
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Gabriele Spilker
Affiliation:
Universität Salzburg
Get access

Summary

This chapter investigates the overlapping nature of investment governance, in which BITs and PTAs encode common commitments toward the protection and liberalization of investment. It advances the scholarship on regime complexity, in which non-hierarchical and overlapping institutions regulate investment. The study examines common institutional design across PTAs and BITS, while recognizing that the broader investment regime complex includes legal precedents set through dispute settlement at the WTO and ICSID. Utilizing an original data set of investment provisions in PTAs and for BITS data provided by UNCTAD’s International Investment Agreements (IIA) project, the analysis examines how these two international agreements have co-evolved in terms of institutional design in guiding principles, scope, and enforcement. The hypothesis is that these two types of agreements are largely complementary, where PTAs emphasize liberalization of investment in tandem with other trade-related provisions, and BITs emphasize the protection of investments and investor rights. The results of principal component analysis of provisions in PTAs and BITs support the hypothesis of complementarity. Additional analyses also show that investment provisions in PTAs draw heavily from those of BITs, but BITs draw less from PTAs.

Keywords

preferential trade agreementsbilateral investment treatiesregime complexinvestmentgovernanceinstitutional design
Type
Chapter
Information
The Shifting Landscape of Global Trade Governance
World Trade Forum
 , pp. 359 - 387
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alter, K. J. and Meunier, S.. 2009. “The Politics of International Regime Complexity,” Perspectives on Politics 7(1):13–24.Google Scholar
Baccini, L. 2010. “Explaining Formation and Design of EU Trade Agreements: The Role of Transparency and Flexibility,” European Union Politics 11(2):195–217.Google Scholar
Bhagwati, J. 1995. “US Trade Policy: The Infatuation with Free Trade Agreements,” In: Bhagwati, J. and Krueger, A. (Eds.), The Dangerous Drift to Preferential Trade Agreements. Washington, DC: AEI Press.Google Scholar
Bonnitcha, J., Poulsen, L. N. S., and Waibel, M.. 2017. The Political Economy of the Investment Treaty Regime. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Busch, M. L. 2007. “Overlapping Institutions, Forum Shopping, and Dispute Settlement in International Trade,” International Organization 61(4):735–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carneiro, C. L. 2014. “Complexity and Compliance: How Do Complex International Regimes Perform?” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Davis, C. L. 2009. “Overlapping Institutions in Trade Policy,” Perspectives on Politics 7(1):25–31.Google Scholar
Drezner, D. W. 2009. “The Power and Peril of International Regime Complexity,” Perspectives on Politics 7(1):65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elkins, Z., Guzman, A. T., and Simmons, B. A.. 2006. “Competing for Capital: The Diffusion of Bilateral Investment Treaties, 1960–2000,” International Organization 60(4):811–46.Google Scholar
Estevadeordal, A., Suominen, K., and Teh, R.. 2009. Regional Rules in the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gehring, T. and Faude, B.. 2013. “The Dynamics of Regime Complexes: Microfoundations and Systemic Effects,” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 19(1):119–30.Google Scholar
Gómez-Mera, L. 2015. “International Regime Complexity and Regional Governance: Evidence from the Americas,” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 21(1):19–42.Google Scholar
Haftel, Y. 2019. “BRICS and the Global Investment Regime,” In: Kim, S. Y. (Ed.), BRICS in the Global Economy. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar
Helfer, L. R. 2004. “Regime Shifting: The TRIPS Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking,” Yale Journal of International Law 29:1–83.Google Scholar
Helfer, L. R. 2009. “Regime Shifting in the International Intellectual Property System,” Perspectives on Politics 7(1):39–44.Google Scholar
Hofmann, S. C. 2009. “Overlapping Institutions in the Realm of International Security: The Case of NATO and ESDP,” Perspectives on Politics 7(1):45–52.Google Scholar
Hofmann, S. C. 2011. “Why Institutional Overlap Matters: CSDP in the European Security Architecture,” Journal of Common Market Studies 49(1):101–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, S. C., Mérand, F., and Mérand, F.. 2012. “Regional Organizations á la Carte: The Effects of Institutional Elasticity,” In: Paul, T. V. (Ed.), International Relations Theory and Regional Transformation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 266–90.Google Scholar
Kelley, J. 2009. “The More the Merrier? The Effects of Having Multiple International Election Monitoring Organizations,” Perspectives on Politics 7(1):59–64.Google Scholar
Kim, C.-W. 2015. “Building Multilateralism on Bilateralism: Evidence from Networked Governance of FDIs in Asia,” Asian Perspective 39(2): 325–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, S. Y. and Manger, M. S.. 2017. “Hubs of Governance: Path Dependence and Higher- Order Effects of Preferential Trade Agreement Formation,” Political Science Research and Methods 5(3):467–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotschwar, B. 2009. “Mapping Investment Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements: Towards an International Investment Regime?” In Estevadeordal, A., Suominen, K., and Teh, R. (Eds.), Regional Rules in the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 365–417.Google Scholar
Kucik, J. 2012. “The Domestic Politics of Institutional Design: Producer Preferences over Trade Agreement Rules,” Economics & Politics 24(2):95–118.Google Scholar
Kucik, J. and Reinhardt, E.. 2008. “Does Flexibility Promote Cooperation? An Application to the Global Trade Regime,” International Organization 62(3): 477–505.Google Scholar
Meunier, S. and Morin, J.-F.. 2015. “No Agreement Is an Island: Negotiating TTIP in a Dense Regime Complex,” In: Morin, J.-F., Novotná, T., Ponjaert, F., and Telò, M. (Eds.), The Politics of Transatlantic Trade Negotiations: TTIP in a Globalized World. New York: Routledge, pp. 173–86.Google Scholar
Miroudot, S. 2011. “Investment,” In: Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., and Nelson, R. R. (Eds.), Preferential Trade Agreement Policies for Development. Washington, DC: World Bank, pp. 307–26.Google Scholar
Morse, J. C. and Keohane, R. O.. 2014. “Contested Multilateralism,” The Review of International Organizations 9(4):385–412.Google Scholar
Muzaka, V. 2011. “Linkages, Contests and Overlaps in the Global Intellectual Property Rights Regime,” European Journal of International Relations 17(4):755–76.Google Scholar
Muzaka, V. and Bishop, M. L.. 2015. “Doha Stalemate: The End of Trade Multilateralism?” Review of International Studies 41(2):383–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nolte, D. 2011. “Regional Powers and Regional Governance,” In: Godehardt, N. and Nabers, D. (Eds.), Regional Powers and Regional Orders. London: Routledge, pp. 65–83.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. 2014. “At the Edge of Chaos? Foreign Investment Law as a Complex Adaptive System, How It Emerged and How It Can Be Reformed,” ICSID Review 29(2): 372–418.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. 2015. “The Rule of Law without the Rule of Lawyers? Why Investment Arbitrators Are from Mars, Trade Adjudicators from Venus,” American Journal of International Law 109(4):761–805.Google Scholar
Poulsen, L. N. S. and Aisbett, E.. 2013. “When the Claim Hits: Bilateral Investment Treaties and Bounded Rational Learning,” World Politics 65(2): 273–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raustiala, K. and Victor, D. G.. 2004. “The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources,” International Organization 58(2):277–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schill, S. W. 2009. The Multilateralization of International Investment Law, Volume 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, B. A. 2014. “Bargaining over BITs, Arbitrating Awards: The Regime for Protection and Promotion of International Investment,” World Politics 66(1):12–46.Google Scholar
Smith, J. M. 2000. “The Politics of Dispute Settlement Design: Explaining Legalism in Regional Trade Pacts,” International Organization 54(1):137–80.Google Scholar
UNCTAD. 2017. World Investment Report 2017: Investment and the Digital Economy. Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.Google Scholar
Van de Graaf, T. 2013. “Fragmentation in Global Energy Governance: Explaining the Creation of IRENA,” Global Environmental Politics 13(3):14–33.Google Scholar
Weiffen, B., Wehner, L., and Nolte, D.. 2013. “Overlapping Regional Security Institutions in South America: The Case of OAS and UNASUR,” International Area Studies Review 16(4):370–89.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×