作为互动立法的国际裁决:在投资条约中纳入公正和公平待遇要素

IF 2.6 1区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Chen Yu
{"title":"作为互动立法的国际裁决:在投资条约中纳入公正和公平待遇要素","authors":"Chen Yu","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgae022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article collects data on fair and equitable treatment (FET) ‘elements’ from ISDS awards and investment treaties, respectively, and examines the extent to which States incorporate ISDS tribunals’ interpretation of FET into their subsequent design of treaty clauses. According to the empirical findings, States do incorporate tribunals’ interpretations in treaty design; nevertheless, the practices of incorporation vary according to the types of elements and the economy classification of treaty parties, and are subject to constraints such as bounded rationality and institutional capacity. The findings also reveal the substantive divergence between treaties and the ISDS jurisprudence in the enumeration of FET elements, which, I caution, may exacerbate legitimacy challenges against ISDS.","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"International adjudication as interactional law-making: the incorporation of fair and equitable treatment elements in investment treaties\",\"authors\":\"Chen Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jiel/jgae022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article collects data on fair and equitable treatment (FET) ‘elements’ from ISDS awards and investment treaties, respectively, and examines the extent to which States incorporate ISDS tribunals’ interpretation of FET into their subsequent design of treaty clauses. According to the empirical findings, States do incorporate tribunals’ interpretations in treaty design; nevertheless, the practices of incorporation vary according to the types of elements and the economy classification of treaty parties, and are subject to constraints such as bounded rationality and institutional capacity. The findings also reveal the substantive divergence between treaties and the ISDS jurisprudence in the enumeration of FET elements, which, I caution, may exacerbate legitimacy challenges against ISDS.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46864,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Economic Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Economic Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgae022\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Economic Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgae022","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文分别从国际投资争端解决法庭的裁决和投资条约中收集了有关公正和公平待遇(FET)"要素 "的数据,并研究了各国在多大程度上将国际投资争端解决法庭对公正和公平待遇的解释纳入其随后的条约条款设计中。根据实证研究结果,各国确实在条约设计中纳入了法庭的解释;然而,纳入的做法因要素类型和条约缔约方的经济分类而异,并受到有限理性和机构能力等因素的制约。研究结果还揭示了条约与 ISDS 判例在列举外国经济贸易要素方面的实质性分歧,我提醒说,这可能会加剧对 ISDS 合法性的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
International adjudication as interactional law-making: the incorporation of fair and equitable treatment elements in investment treaties
This article collects data on fair and equitable treatment (FET) ‘elements’ from ISDS awards and investment treaties, respectively, and examines the extent to which States incorporate ISDS tribunals’ interpretation of FET into their subsequent design of treaty clauses. According to the empirical findings, States do incorporate tribunals’ interpretations in treaty design; nevertheless, the practices of incorporation vary according to the types of elements and the economy classification of treaty parties, and are subject to constraints such as bounded rationality and institutional capacity. The findings also reveal the substantive divergence between treaties and the ISDS jurisprudence in the enumeration of FET elements, which, I caution, may exacerbate legitimacy challenges against ISDS.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
9.70%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The Journal of International Economic Law is dedicated to encouraging thoughtful and scholarly attention to a very broad range of subjects that concern the relation of law to international economic activity, by providing the major English language medium for publication of high-quality manuscripts relevant to the endeavours of scholars, government officials, legal professionals, and others. The journal"s emphasis is on fundamental, long-term, systemic problems and possible solutions, in the light of empirical observations and experience, as well as theoretical and multi-disciplinary approaches.
×
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