Suchergebnisse

Recent trends suggest that international economic law may be witnessing a renaissance of convergence - both parallel and intersectional. The adjudicative process also reveals signs of convergence. These diverse claims of convergence are of legal, empirical and normative interest. Yet, convergence discourse also warrants scepticism. This volume contributes to both the general debate on the fragmentation of international law and the narrower discourse concerning the interplay between international trade and investment, focusing on dispute settlement. It moves beyond broad observations or singular case studies to provide an informed and wide-reaching assessment by investigating multiple standards, processes, mechanisms and behaviours. Methodologically, a normative stance is largely eschewed in favour of a range of 'doctrinal,' quantitative and qualitative methods that are used to address the research questions. Furthermore, in determining the extent of convergence or divergence, it is important to recognize that there is no bright line or clear yardstick for determining its nature or degree.

Recent trends suggest that international economic law may be witnessing a renaissance of convergence - both parallel and intersectional. The adjudicative process also reveals signs of convergence. These diverse claims of convergence are of legal, empirical and normative interest. Yet, convergence discourse also warrants scepticism. This volume contributes to both the general debate on the fragmentation of international law and the narrower discourse concerning the interplay between international trade and investment, focusing on dispute settlement. It moves beyond broad observations or singular case studies to provide an informed and wide-reaching assessment by investigating multiple standards, processes, mechanisms and behaviours. Methodologically, a normative stance is largely eschewed in favour of a range of 'doctrinal,' quantitative and qualitative methods that are used to address the research questions. Furthermore, in determining the extent of convergence or divergence, it is important to recognize that there is no bright line or clear yardstick for determining its nature or degree.

Abstract
It is often claimed that international investment arbitration is marked by a revolving door: individuals act sequentially and even simultaneously as arbitrator, legal counsel, expert witness, or tribunal secretary. If this claim is correct, it has implications for our understanding of which individuals possess power and influence within this community; and ethical debates over conflicts of interests and transparency concerning 'double hatting'—when individuals simultaneously perform different roles across cases. In this article, we offer the first comprehensive empirical analysis of the individuals that make up the entire investment arbitration community. Drawing on our database of 1039 investment arbitration cases (including ICSID annulments) and the relationships between the 3910 known individuals that form this community, we offer the first use of social network analysis to describe the full investment arbitration community and address key sociological and normative questions in the literature. Our results partly contradict recent empirical scholarship as we identify a different configuration of central 'power brokers'. Moreover, the normative concerns with double hatting are partly substantiated. A select but significant group of individuals score highly and continually on our double hatting index.