| ID | 171830 |
| Title Proper | Chilling Effect of International Investment Disputes |
| Other Title Information | Limited Challenges to State Sovereignty |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Carolina Moehlecke ; Moehlecke, Carolina |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Despite suggestions that international investment disputes impose a chilling effect on governments’ autonomy to set regulatory policies, we lack empirical confirmation of the phenomenon and what explains its heterogeneity across countries. Using a novel dataset of nine anti-smoking regulations in ninety-two countries from 1973 to 2016, I confirm the presence of the chilling effect, but also its boundaries. I show that countries have been significantly slower in implementing two anti-smoking policies formally challenged under investment law, while the adoption of seven undisputed regulations in this issue area continued unimpeded. Qualitative evidence from respondent and third-party governments confirm the policy-specificity of the chilling effect and show that both developed and developing countries were affected by the chill, albeit differently. By providing the first empirical confirmation of a regulatory chill and by defining its limited scope in one of the most high-profiled international investment disputes to date, my findings indicate that, even though multinational corporations can constrain state sovereignty, their effects are not necessarily expansive or indefinite. |
| `In' analytical Note | International Studies Quarterly Vol. 64, No.1; Mar 2020: p.1–12 |
| Journal Source | International Studies Quarterly Vol: 64 No 1 |
| Key Words | State Sovereignty ; International Investment Disputes |