Flexible institutionalization: a critical examination of the Chinese perspectives on dispute settlement for the Belt and Road

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Jiangyu Wang
{"title":"Flexible institutionalization: a critical examination of the Chinese perspectives on dispute settlement for the Belt and Road","authors":"Jiangyu Wang","doi":"10.1080/10192557.2021.2013659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper critically introduces a few Chinese perspectives on dispute settlement for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as presented in the articles included in this special issue. It starts with proposing the theory of ‘flexible institutionalisation’ as an analytical framework to capture the nature and intention behind China’s effort in developing BRI dispute resolution mechanism, followed by an examination of the legal characteristics of – and the legal changes facing – dispute settlement in the BRI, which has not been thoroughly addressed and analysed in the existing literature. It then offers an overview of the Chinese effort to establish a China-led dispute settlement system for the BRI. With this background, the paper presents the main argument and perspective in each article in this special issue. It concludes with reflections on the shortcomings of the special issue to the literature on BRI dispute settlement, as well as, the concerns China has to take into consideration in its ambition to construct China-led mechanisms for dispute settlement for the Belt and Road.","PeriodicalId":42799,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Law Review","volume":"29 1","pages":"70 - 85"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia Pacific Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10192557.2021.2013659","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper critically introduces a few Chinese perspectives on dispute settlement for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as presented in the articles included in this special issue. It starts with proposing the theory of ‘flexible institutionalisation’ as an analytical framework to capture the nature and intention behind China’s effort in developing BRI dispute resolution mechanism, followed by an examination of the legal characteristics of – and the legal changes facing – dispute settlement in the BRI, which has not been thoroughly addressed and analysed in the existing literature. It then offers an overview of the Chinese effort to establish a China-led dispute settlement system for the BRI. With this background, the paper presents the main argument and perspective in each article in this special issue. It concludes with reflections on the shortcomings of the special issue to the literature on BRI dispute settlement, as well as, the concerns China has to take into consideration in its ambition to construct China-led mechanisms for dispute settlement for the Belt and Road.
灵活的制度化:对中国“一带一路”争端解决视角的批判性考察
本文批判性地介绍了本期特刊文章中关于“一带一路”倡议(BRI)争端解决的一些中国观点。本文首先提出了“灵活制度化”理论,作为一个分析框架,以捕捉中国在发展“一带一路”争端解决机制方面所做努力背后的性质和意图,其次是对“一带一路”争端解决的法律特征和面临的法律变化的研究,这在现有文献中尚未得到彻底的解决和分析。然后,它概述了中国为“一带一路”建立中国主导的争端解决体系所做的努力。在此背景下,本文提出了本期特刊每篇文章的主要论点和观点。文章最后反思了专刊对“一带一路”争端解决文献的不足之处,以及中国在构建中国主导的“一带一路”争端解决机制的雄心中必须考虑的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信