Download Full Text (840 KB)
International investment and international investment agreements have experienced a particular level of growth in the past few decades. With that growth and the granting of affirmative dispute resolution rights to foreign investors, international investment conflict has become increasingly highlighted; and one particular methodology - namely investment treaty arbitration - has become particularly visible. Reliance on this single option for resolving conflict has a unique set of systemic implications. This chapter therefore takes a more systemic look at investment treaty conflict and, in an effort to provide an appropriate historical and doctrinal framework, approaches to dispute resolution broadly. It asks for a reconsideration of Appropriate Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods for resolving investment treaty conflict and highlights the costs and benefits of particularized dispute resolution methods, including preventative, negotiated, facilitated, fact-finding, advisory and imposed ADR mechanisms. The chapter ultimately argues that, while arbitration has utility, the challenge for the future will be to move beyond investment treaty arbitration to a more holistic approach to conflict management that considers other opportunities, particularly the collaborative design of sustainable dispute resolution systems.
Oxford University Press
International Investment Agreement, IIA, BIT, foreign investment, ADR, conflict management, conflict theory, dispute management, dispute systems design, investor-state dispute resolution, ICSID, mediation, negotiation, ombuds, fact-finding
Antitrust and Trade Regulation | Banking and Finance Law | Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | International Law | International Trade Law | Law
Franck, Susan, "Challenges Facing Investment Disputes: Reconsidering Dispute Resolution in International Investment Agreements in Appeals Mechanism in International Investment Disputes" (2008). Contributions to Books. 152.