Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Disputes in international investment and trade


Ossa, Ralph; Staiger, Robert W; Sykes, Alan O (2020). Disputes in international investment and trade. Working Paper Series 27012, National Bureau of Economic Research.

Abstract

International investment agreements employ dispute settlement procedures that differ markedly from their counterparts in trade agreements along three key dimensions: standing (i.e., the right to file grievances), the nature of the remedy, and the remedial period. In the state-to-state dispute settlement procedures of a typical trade agreement, only governments have standing, while private investors also have standing in the investor-state dispute settlement procedures employed by investment agreements. Trade agreements typically employ tariff retaliation as the remedy for violation of the agreement, while the award of cash damages is the norm in investment disputes. And trade agreements typically provide for only prospective remedies covering harm done subsequent to a ruling, while the damages awarded in investment disputes routinely cover past as well as future harms. We develop parallel models of trade agreements and investment agreements and employ them to study these differences. We argue that the differences can be understood as arising from the fundamentally different problems that trade and investment agreements are designed to solve.

Abstract

International investment agreements employ dispute settlement procedures that differ markedly from their counterparts in trade agreements along three key dimensions: standing (i.e., the right to file grievances), the nature of the remedy, and the remedial period. In the state-to-state dispute settlement procedures of a typical trade agreement, only governments have standing, while private investors also have standing in the investor-state dispute settlement procedures employed by investment agreements. Trade agreements typically employ tariff retaliation as the remedy for violation of the agreement, while the award of cash damages is the norm in investment disputes. And trade agreements typically provide for only prospective remedies covering harm done subsequent to a ruling, while the damages awarded in investment disputes routinely cover past as well as future harms. We develop parallel models of trade agreements and investment agreements and employ them to study these differences. We argue that the differences can be understood as arising from the fundamentally different problems that trade and investment agreements are designed to solve.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics

Altmetrics

Downloads

0 downloads since deposited on 15 Feb 2021
0 downloads since 12 months

Additional indexing

Item Type:Working Paper
Communities & Collections:03 Faculty of Economics > Department of Economics
Dewey Decimal Classification:330 Economics
JEL Classification:F02, F1, F23
Language:English
Date:April 2020
Deposited On:15 Feb 2021 15:50
Last Modified:15 Feb 2021 15:50
Series Name:Working Paper Series
Number of Pages:69
OA Status:Closed
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.3386/w27012
Official URL:https://www.nber.org/papers/w27012

Download

Closed Access: Download allowed only for UZH members

Content: Published Version
Language: English
Filetype: PDF - Registered users only
Size: 593kB
View at publisher