Query Result Set
Skip Navigation Links
   ActiveUsers:1443Hits:19406756Skip Navigation Links
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
HelpExpand Help
Advanced search
  Hide Options
Sort Order Items / Page
INVESTOR - STATE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT (2) answer(s).
 
SrlItem
1
ID:   140725


Australia's embrace of investor state dispute settlement: a challenge to the social contract ideal? / Faunce, Thomas   Article
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.
        Export Export
2
ID:   140720


Australia's flawed approach to trade negotiations: and where do we sign? / Capling, Ann; Ravenhill, John   Article
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.
        Export Export