To send 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 sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
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 sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent 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.
This book shows how the current reform in investment regulation is part of a broader attempt to transform the international economic order. Countries in the North and South are currently rethinking how economic order should be constituted in order to advance their national interests and preferred economic orientation. While some countries in the North seek to create alternative institutional spaces in order to promote neoliberal policies more effectively, some countries in the South are increasingly skeptical of this version of economic order and are experimenting with alternative versions of legal ordering that do not always sit well with mainstream versions promoted by the North. While we recognize that there are differences in approaches to the investment regimes proposed by countries in the South, we identify commonalities that could function as the founding pillars of an alternative economic order.
Brazil is widely touted as one of the most successful users of the dispute settlement system of the World Trade Organization (WTO) among all countries, developing and developed, in terms of both the quantity of cases brought and the cases' systemic implications. Brazil has been the fourth most frequent complainant in the WTO dispute settlement system after the United States (US), European Union (EU), and Canada. It has won strategically important cases against the WTO's leading powers, and in particular in its agricultural subsidy cases against the US and EU. Its success before the WTO dispute settlement system has received national and international attention and has further motivated the government and private sector to engage actively in the Doha Round of WTO negotiations. The political payoffs for Brazil have been significant, helping it become a leader of developing countries in trade negotiations (the so-called G-20) and a member of a G-4 for trade negotiations in the Doha Round, consisting of the US, EU, Brazil, and India. As David Deese writes with respect to Brazilian and Indian leadership in the Doha Round, ‘[F]or the first time there was also a precedent set for shared structural leadership beyond the United States and the EU at the very heart of the international trade negotiating process’. For these reasons, Brazil is cited as a model for other developing countries, one with normative implications for our assessment of the WTO legal order.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.