Suchergebnisse

The post-Cold War era has seen an unprecedented move towards more legalization in international cooperation and a growth of third-party dispute settlement systems. WTO panels, the Appellate Body and investor-state dispute settlement cases have received increasing attention beyond the core trade and investment constituencies within governments. Scrutiny by business, civil society, academia, and trade and investment experts has been on the rise. This book asks whether we observe a transformation or a demise of existing institutions and mechanisms to adjudicate disputes over trade or investment. It makes a contribution to the question in which direction international economic dispute settlement is heading in times of change, uncertainty and increasing economic nationalism. In order to do so, it brings together chapters written by leading researchers and experts in law and political science to address the challenges of settling disputes in the global economy and to sketch possible scenarios ahead of us.

International law, political science and economics scholars are all concerned with analyzing the performance of the WTO as an organization. In this paper we focus on the objectives that these different disciplines attribute to the WTO and how performance is assessed against these objectives. The literature in all three fields is vibrant, but the focus of each discipline is often on very different dimensions of WTO performance. While this implies significant complementarity across disciplines it also suggests potential opportunity costs in foregone synergies. Even when similar phenomena are the focus of analysis, different concepts, connotations and labels makes cross-disciplinary debate less efficient or prohibits it altogether. Greater effort to promote cross-fertilization across disciplines would enrich and strengthen research on the performance of the WTO.

ABSTRACT
The investment chapter in the recently signed Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) has the potential to affect investment decisions in the Asia-Pacific region and beyond. Yet, we know relatively little about the pathways through which countries determine the content of investment law in preferential trade agreements (PTAs). In this article, we use quantitative text analysis to test theoretically informed conjectures about the negotiation process. We focus on which of the signatories' past agreements most influenced RCEP, and whether countries chose to draw more from treaty practice through their previous PTAs or bilateral investment treaties (BITs). Our analyses yield several noteworthy findings. First, we show that no single country dominated the negotiation process, instead RCEP represents an effort to reconcile overlapping agreements around a more common template. Second, contrary to the fears of some observers, we show that larger powers such as China and Japan did not overwhelmingly impact the agreement, instead portions were influenced by Association of Southeast Asian Nations agreements, the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership, and others. Finally, we show that, on average, countries drew more from PTAs than BITs, but that they switch strategically between them to reuse language that they deem important for the development of investment law.

Since 1990 the number of preferential trade agreements (PTAs) has increased very rapidly. This paper aims to contribute to this literature by presenting a new database on PTAs called Design of Trade Agreements (DESTA). We identified a total of 690 negotiated trade agreements between 1945 and 2009 of which we have coded 404 agreements for which treaty texts and appendices were available. We aim to have a database for about 550 agreements by 2012. We have coded agreements for a total of 10 broad sectors of cooperation, encompassing market access, services, investments, intellectual property rights, competition, public procurement, standards, trade remedies, non-trade issues, and dispute settlement. For each of these sectors, we have coded a significant number of items, meaning that we have about 100 data points for each agreement. The resulting DESTA database is to the best of our knowledge by far the most complete in terms of agreements and sectors covered. This dataset fills a crucial gap in the field by providing a fine-grain measurement of the design of PTAs. Among others, we think that DESTA will be of relevance for the literatures on the signing of PTAs; the legalization of international relations; the rational design of international institutions; the diffusion of policies; the political and economic effects of trade agreements; power relations between states; and forum shopping in international politics. This working paper describes the DESTA data set and provides selected descriptive statistics. The overview puts emphasis on variation in design over time and across regions.

Since 1990 the number of preferential trade agreements (PTAs) has increased very rapidly. This paper aims to contribute to this literature by presenting a new database on PTAs called Design of Trade Agreements (DESTA). We identified a total of 690 negotiated trade agreements between 1945 and 2009 of which we have coded 404 agreements for which treaty texts and appendices were available. We aim to have a database for about 550 agreements by 2012. We have coded agreements for a total of 10 broad sectors of cooperation, encompassing market access, services, investments, intellectual property rights, competition, public procurement, standards, trade remedies, non-trade issues, and dispute settlement. For each of these sectors, we have coded a significant number of items, meaning that we have about 100 data points for each agreement. The resulting DESTA database is – to the best of our knowledge – by far the most complete in terms of agreements and sectors covered. This dataset fills a crucial gap in the field by providing a fine-grain measurement of the design of PTAs. Among others, we think that DESTA will be of relevance for the literatures on the signing of PTAs; the legalization of international relations; the rational design of international institutions; the diffusion of policies; the political and economic effects of trade agreements; power relations between states; and forum shopping in international politics. This working paper describes the DESTA data set and provides selected descriptive statistics. The overview puts emphasis on variation in design over time and across regions.

Abstract
The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is one of the most important mega-regional trade agreements signed to date. Yet, it failed to include an Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism in its investment chapter. What explains this omission? To unpack this, we examine international negotiations as a two-step process. In the first stage, we theorize that initial preferences towards ISDS are based on countries' orientation toward foreign direct investment (FDI), experience with ISDS, and past treaty practice. Second, we theorize that during protracted negotiations, adverse regime developments and domestic politics can have a profound impact on treaty design. To test our framework, we examine the RCEP negotiations. Our analysis shows that mounting cases as well as the eroding norm of ISDS in other treaties lowered support for ISDS as the negotiations progressed. Then, a change of government in Malaysia shifted that country's position dramatically, which tipped the balance against ISDS in the final round of negotiations. Our findings have important implications for the international investment regime. They highlight the factors that determine countries' initial preferences while also demonstrating the importance of developments during the negotiations, which can lead to the abandonment of the institutional status quo.