Query Result Set
SLIM21 Home
Advanced Search
My Info
Browse
Arrivals
Expected
Reference Items
Journal List
Proposals
Media List
Rules
ActiveUsers:5541
Hits:24604327
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
Help
Topics
Tutorial
Advanced search
Hide Options
Sort Order
Natural
Author / Creator, Title
Title
Item Type, Author / Creator, Title
Item Type, Title
Subject, Item Type, Author / Creator, Title
Item Type, Subject, Author / Creator, Title
Publication Date, Title
Items / Page
5
10
15
20
Modern View
INVESTOR - STATE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT
(2)
answer(s).
Srl
Item
1
ID:
140725
Australia's embrace of investor state dispute settlement: a challenge to the social contract ideal?
/ Faunce, Thomas
Faunce, Thomas
Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
Summary/Abstract
This paper explores the origins of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) treaties and their implications for the Australian social contract. This analysis includes how and why ISDS emerged in NAFTA, was rebuffed with the failure of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), and became incorporated into most subsequent bilateral US trade and investment agreements. The paper considers Australia's exposure to ISDS—first through using it in bilateral investment agreements in nations with inadequate governance mechanisms to support the rule of law, then turning against it when a multinational tobacco company tried to use the mechanism to overturn scientifically endorsed, democratically approved and constitutionally validated tobacco plain packaging measures. The paper concludes by exploring the hypothesis that an alternative governance vision can be achieved in which the system of investment arbitration and trade law is made coherent with presumptively more democratically legitimate normative systems such as constitutional and international law.
Key Words
Free Trade Agreement
;
ISDS
;
Investor - State Dispute Settlement
;
Multilateral Agreement on Investment
Links
'Full Text'
In Basket
Export
2
ID:
140720
Australia's flawed approach to trade negotiations: and where do we sign?
/ Capling, Ann; Ravenhill, John
Ravenhill, John
Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
Summary/Abstract
Economists have warned for many years that preferential trade agreements (PTAs) will not necessarily increase economic welfare in Australia given the relatively small size of the economy and the country’s lack of negotiating coin. The Productivity Commission cautioned in its major report on PTAs that there seemed to be a mindset of ‘agreements for agreement’s sake’, in part because of fears of missing out on a bandwagon that has attracted Australia’s major trading partners. Political and security considerations have played an important role in shaping Australia’s approach to PTAs. When politics trumps economics in negotiations of PTAs there is a risk of a rush to premature agreement that produces sub-optimal outcomes, that undermines broader plurilateral and global negotiations, and that introduces new and undesirable distortions in trade and public policies. Various theoretical approaches to trade policymaking provide insights into why Australian governments have been willing to conclude these sub-optimal deals.
Key Words
Intellectual Property Rights
;
Preferential Trade Agreements
;
Australian Trade Policy
;
AUSFTA
;
Investor - State Dispute Settlement
Links
'Full Text'
In Basket
Export