Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

UNCTAD’s Role in Addressing International Investment Trends and Challenges

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2013

Part of the book series: European Yearbook of International Economic Law ((volume 4))

Abstract

On the occasion of the thirteenth session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), held in Doha, Qatar, from 21 to 26 April 2012, this contribution is dedicated to UNCTAD, the United Nations (UN) focal point for the integrated treatment of trade, investment and development. It first offers a brief overview of UNCTAD’s historical evolution and its organisational structure. It then presents UNCTAD’s contribution to one area of international economic relations: international investment and, more specifically, international investment agreements (IIAs). In so doing, this contribution shows how UNCTAD has, over time, adapted to a changing context for development policy-making and implemented a comprehensive approach that integrates three pillars of activities: research and analysis, capacity-building, and intergovernmental consensus-building.

The views expressed in this chapter are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the UNCTAD secretariat or its Member States.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    UN Economic and Social Council, Resolution 917 (XXXIV), 1962.

  2. 2.

    UN General Assembly, Resolution 1785 (XVII), 1962.

  3. 3.

    Despite the initial opposition of developed countries, eventually, all UN Member States were “determined to do their utmost to lay the foundations of a better world economic order,” UN General Assembly, Resolution 1785 (XVII), 1962, para. 5, and collectively established UNCTAD as a development body to contribute to this objective, see UNCTAD, Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Vol. 1, Final Act and Report, 1964, pp. 4 and 6 (Final Act, paras. 9 and 19–20).

  4. 4.

    The former are listed in UNCTAD, Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Vol. 1, Final Act and Report, 1964, p. 103 (Report of the Conference, para. 15). For a listing of the latter, see http://www.un.org/en/members/growth.shtml#text.

  5. 5.

    UNCTAD, Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Vol. 1, Final Act and Report, 1964, p. 3 (Final Act, para. 1).

  6. 6.

    UN General Assembly, Resolution 1995 (XIX), 1964, para. 3.

  7. 7.

    UNCTAD, Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Vol. 1, Final Act and Report, 1964, p. 9 (Final Act, paras. 52 and 53).

  8. 8.

    UNCTAD, Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Vol. 1, Final Act and Report, 1964, p. 4 (Final Act, para. 6).

  9. 9.

    UN General Assembly, Resolution 1995 (XIX), 1964, para. 3.

  10. 10.

    UN General Assembly, United Nations Millennium Declaration, 2000, available at: http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.pdf.

  11. 11.

    UNCTAD, Annual Report, 2011, available at: http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/dom2012d1_en.pdf.

  12. 12.

    The secretariat is composed of about 500 staff members with an annual regular budget of approximately 68 million US dollars and 44 million US dollars of extra-budgetary technical assistance funds.

  13. 13.

    See organisational chart, available at: http://archive.unctad.org/sections/about/docs/Secretariat_organi.pdf.

  14. 14.

    UNCTAD’s flagship publications include, amongst others, the reports on World Investment, Trade and Development, Economic Development in Africa and Least Developed Countries.

  15. 15.

    In terms of delivery in 2011, UNCTAD implemented some 240 projects in more than 75 countries, with annual expenditures of 39 million dollars, see UNCTAD, Annual Report 2011, available at: http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/dom2012d1_en.pdf.

  16. 16.

    UNCTAD, UNCTAD XII: Accra Accord and the Accra Declaration, 2008, p. 12 (Accra Accord, para. 9).

  17. 17.

    UNCTAD, The Doha Mandate, 2012, p. 3, para. 18.

  18. 18.

    UN, Report of the Panel of Eminent Persons: Enhancing the Development Role and Impact of UNCTAD, 2006, para. 24(e).

  19. 19.

    ECOSOC Resolution E/RES/1913(LVII) created the Commission on Transnational Corporations, while ECOSOC Resolution E/RES/1908(LVII) established the UNCTC. See also Sagafi-Nejad, The UN and Transnational Corporations: From Code of Conduct to Global Compact, 2008, p. 89.

  20. 20.

    Fredriksson/Zimny, Foreign Direct Investment and Transnational Corporations, in: UNCTAD (ed.), Beyond Conventional Wisdom in Development Policy: An Intellectual History of UNCTAD 1964–2004, 2004, p. 127 (130).

  21. 21.

    For the text of the draft United Nations Code of Conduct on Transnational Corporations (1983 version), see UNCTAD, International Investment Instruments: Compendium, Vol. 1, 1996, p. 161, available at: http://www.unctad.org/templates/Download.asp?docid=1838&lang=1&intItemID=2323.

  22. 22.

    Fredriksson, Forty years of UNCTAD research on FDI, Transnational Corporations 12 (2003) 3, p. 1 (5); Smith/Taylor, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), 2007, p. 26.

  23. 23.

    See UNCTAD, Midrand Declaration and a Partnership for Growth and Development, Adopted by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development at its ninth session, 1996, paras. 88 et seq.; see also UN Economic and Social Council, Resolution 1994/1, 1994, available at: http://www.un.org/documents/ecosoc/res/1994/eres1994-1.htm; for a discussion of the Midrand Mandate, see Smith/Taylor, The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), 2007, p. 26.

  24. 24.

    WIR has a diverse audience ranging from policy-makers to academics, civil society to business. The complete WIR series is available at: http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DIAE/World%20Investment%20Report/WIR-Series.aspx; Fredriksson, Forty years of UNCTAD research on FDI, Transnational Corporations 12 (2003) 3, p. 1 (10).

  25. 25.

    UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2011: Non-Equity Modes of International Production and Development, 2011. For quarterly FDI data, see UNCTAD’s Global Investment Trends Monitors, available at: http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=5801&lang=1.

  26. 26.

    Whereas FDI (i.e. the establishment of local operations directly owned and controlled by a parent company) is a “purely” intra-firm phenomenon and trade is “purely” inter-firm, NEMs partake of both. NEMs represent long-term contractual arrangements between TNCs and local partners; the latter are formally independent (there is no equity involved), but are tied closely to the former both by virtue of being a part of their global value chain/network and because of their dependence on key resources. See further UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2011: Non-Equity Modes of International Production and Development, 2011, available at: http://www.unctad-docs.org/files/UNCTAD-WIR2011-Full-en.pdf.

  27. 27.

    UNCTAD, UNCTAD XII: Accra Accord and the Accra Declaration, 2008, p. 60 (Accra Accord, para. 151).

  28. 28.

    Today, the IIA system offers protection to two thirds of global FDI stock. Yet, despite its continuous growth, it covers only one fifth of all bilateral investment relationships. A full coverage would require a further 14,100 bilateral treaties, see UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2011: Non-Equity Modes of International Production and Development, 2011, p. 100.

  29. 29.

    UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2011: Non-Equity Modes of International Production and Development, 2011, p. 93.

  30. 30.

    UNCTAD, The Role of International Investment Agreements in Attracting Foreign Direct Investment to Developing Countries, 2009.

  31. 31.

    UNCTAD has discussed this fundamental trade-off in several publications. For example see UNCTAD, International Investment Agreements: Flexibility for Development, 2000.

  32. 32.

    See UNCTAD, Report of the Multi-year Expert Meeting on Investment for Development on its fourth session, 2011, pp. 5–7, available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/ciimem3d12_en.pdf. See also UNCTAD, World Investment Forum—International Investment Agreements Annual Conference, UNCTAD XIII Summary prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat, 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/td472_en.pdf.

  33. 33.

    See UNCTAD, The Doha Manar, p. 3, para. 13: “Development is a universal concern today, and development-centred globalization is our common cause.”

  34. 34.

    See UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2010: Investing in a low-carbon economy, 2010, pp. 83 et seq.

  35. 35.

    For example, South Africa started a review of their IIAs and in 2009 the United States initiated the revision of the 2004 model BIT, see http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=103768 and http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2009/july/public-meeting-regarding-us-model-bilateral-investmen.

  36. 36.

    For example, this trend partly reflects policy-makers’ response to arbitral awards that had revealed difficulties arising from the rather broad language of older IIAs. See UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2010: Investing in a low-carbon economy, 2010, pp. 83 et seq.

  37. 37.

    In its research and policy analysis work, the IIA programme monitors trends, identifies and analyses emerging issues in international investment rulemaking from a sustainable development perspective, and provides up-to-date and comprehensive information on the IIA system. The main publications are the series on Issues in IIAs (known as the Pink Series), which offer an in-depth analysis of clauses, the series on International Investment Policies for Development (known as the Yellow Series), and the joint UNCTAD-OECD Reports on G20 Investment Measures, together with seminal studies on broader issues. Facilitating informed investment policy making, UNCTAD also publishes its Investment Policy Monitor (IPM), a quarterly publication giving country-specific information on national and international policy developments. As regards their international dimension, IPMs feature the number of new IIAs (i.e. BITs, DTTs and “other IIAs”), the number of countries involved and, to the extent it is available, information about the agreements’ content. IPMs also report on other notable developments in the field of international investment policies (e.g. the adoption of policy statements) and complement UNCTAD’s Global Investment Trends Monitor. All issues of the IPM are available at: http://unctad.org/en/pages/publications/Investment-Policy-Monitor.aspx. The latter is available at: http://unctad.org/en/pages/publications/Global-Investment-Trends-Monitor-(Series).aspx. UNCTAD also maintains a series of online databases on IIA related issues, including (i) the online database of bilateral investment treaties, which contains a country-by-country listing of more than 2,820 BITs and a compilation of more than 2,310 BIT texts; (ii) the online database of double-taxation treaties, which contains a country-by-country listing of more than 2,990 DTTs; and (iii) the online compendium of international investment instruments. The latter contains texts of around 300 instruments dealing with investment at the bilateral, regional and multilateral levels, as well as country model texts of BITs.

  38. 38.

    Based on its research, UNCTAD further provides ad hoc technical assistance on the request of Member States and regional organisations on all matters related to the negotiation and implementation of IIAs, including the management of ISDS cases. This support ranges from advisory work on specific IIA negotiations, the development of model BITs, the drafting of investment laws in follow-up to recommendations of UNCTAD’s Investment Policy Reviews (IPRs), seminars on FDI and IIAs for government officials from different ministries and other stakeholders.

  39. 39.

    For example, ICSID, ARB(AF)/97/1, Metalclad Corp. vs. United Mexican States, Award; NAFTA, Ethyl Corp. vs. Government of Canada, Award on jurisdiction; NAFTA, SD Myers, Inc. vs. Government of Canada, Partial Award.

  40. 40.

    ICSID ARB/09/6, Vattenfall AB, Vattenfall Europe AG, Vattenfall Europe Generation AG vs. Federal Republic of Germany; see further Bernasconi, IISD Background paper on Background paper on Vattenfall vs. Germany arbitration, 2009, available at: http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2009/background_vattenfall_vs_germany.pdf.

  41. 41.

    ICSID, ARB(AF)/07/1, Piero Foresti, Laura de Carli and others vs. Republic of South Africa.

  42. 42.

    ICSID, ARB/05/22, Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Ltd vs. United Republic Of Tanzania.

  43. 43.

    ICSID, ARB/07/5, Giovanna a Beccara and Others vs. Argentine Republic (also known as Abaclat, et al. vs. Argentina).

  44. 44.

    The issue has been discussed in several recent publications: See UNCTAD, Sovereign Debt Restructuring and International Investment Agreements, IIA Issues Note No. 2, July 2011, available at: http://unctad.org/en/docs/webdiaepcb2011d3_en.pdf. See also Gallagher, The New Vulture Culture: Sovereign debt restructuring and trade and investment treaties, IDEAs Working Paper No. 02/2011, IDEAs. See also UNCTAD, Latest Developments in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, IIA Issues Note No. 1, April 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/webdiaeia2012d10_en.pdf.

  45. 45.

    ICSID ARB/10/7, FTR Holding S.A. (Switzerland), Philip Morris Products S.A. (Switzerland) and Abal Hermanos S.A. (Uruguay) vs. Oriental Republic of Uruguay, and UNCITRAL, Philip Morris vs. Australia. Invoking provisions from the Switzerland-Uruguay and the Australia-Hong Kong BIT respectively, Philip Morris alleges indirect expropriation with regard to the effects of tobacco marketing regulations. However, the FCTC makes it mandatory for all State members—including Uruguay and Australia—to implement the obligation to control and reduce tobacco consumption that includes binding labelling and packaging requirements for tobacco products under Art. 11. For a discussion of the issue, see Voon/Mitchell, Time to quit? Assessing International Investment Claims against Plain Tobacco Packaging in Australia, Journal of International Economic Law 14 (2011) 3, p. 515 (529). See also Peterson, “Philip Morris files first-known investment treaty claim against tobacco regulations,” IA reporter, 3 March 2010, available at: http://www.iareporter.com/articles/20100303. See further, Weiler, Philip Morris vs. Uruguay. An Analysis of Tobacco Control Measures in the Context of International Investment Law, Report #1 for Physicians for a Smoke Free Canada, July 2010, available at: http://italaw.com/documents/WeilerOpinion-PMI-Uruguay.pdf. For a general introduction to public health and IIAs, see Vadi, Reconciling Public Health and Investor Rights: The Case of Tobacco, in: Dupuy/Francioni/Petersmann (eds.), Human Rights in International Investment Law and Arbitration, 2010, p. 452.

  46. 46.

    ICSID ARB/12/12, Vattenfall AB, Vattenfall Europe AG, Vattenfall Europe Nuclear Energy GmbH, Kernkraftwerk Brunsbüttel GmbH und Co. oHG, Kernkraftwerk Krümmel GmbH und Co. oHG vs. Federal Republic of Germany, see also UNCTAD, Latest Developments in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, IIA Issues Note No. 1, April 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/webdiaeia2012d10_en.pdf.

  47. 47.

    For IIAs and human rights, see UNCTAD, Selected Recent Developments in IIA Arbitration and Human Rights, IIA Monitor No. 2 (2009), available at http://unctad.org/en/docs/webdiaeia20097_en.pdf.

  48. 48.

    See UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2010: Investing in a low-carbon economy, 2010. See also UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2011: Non-Equity Modes of International Production and Development, 2011.

  49. 49.

    The Plurinational State of Bolivia’s notification of its withdrawal from the ICSID Convention was received by ICSID on 2 May 2007 and took effect on 3 November 2007. Ecuador’s denunciation notification was received on 6 July 2009 and took effect on 7 January 2010. In 2008, Ecuador terminated nine BITs. Other denounced BITs include those between El Salvador and Nicaragua, and the Netherlands and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. In 2010, Ecuador’s Constitutional Court declared arbitration provisions of six BITs to be inconsistent with the country’s Constitution. It is possible that Ecuador will take action to terminate these (and possibly other) BITs. However, the termination of BITs is complicated by so-called “survival clauses”, included in many agreements, which make IIA provision to retain their force for another ten, or sometimes even twenty years, after a termination of a treaty has been notified. See UNCTAD, Denunciation of the ICSID Convention and BITs: Impact on Investor-State Claims, IIA Issues Note, No. 2, 2010.

  50. 50.

    Venezuela’s official announcement of 24 January 2012 is available at: http://www.mre.gov.ve/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=18939:mppre&catid=3:comunicados&Itemid=108.

  51. 51.

    See Republic of South Africa, Department of Trade and Industry, Bilateral Investment Treaty Framework Review, Executive Summary of Government Position Paper, June 2009, available at: http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=103768.

  52. 52.

    See Australian Government, Gillard Government Trade Policy Statement: Trading our way to more jobs and prosperity, April 2011, p. 14, available at: http://www.dfat.gov.au/publications/trade/trading-our-way-to-more-jobs-and-prosperity.pdf: “In the past, Australian Governments have sought the inclusion of investor-state dispute resolution procedures in trade agreements with developing countries at the behest of Australian businesses. The Gillard Government will discontinue this practice.”

  53. 53.

    See official press release, Office of the United States Trade Representative, July 2009, available at: http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2009/july/public-meeting-regarding-us-model-bilateral-investmen.

  54. 54.

    See official press release, Office of the United States Trade Representative, April 2012, available at: http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2012/april/united-states-concludes-review-model-bilateral-inves. The new US model BIT is available at: http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/BIT%20text%20for%20ACIEP%20Meeting.pdf.

  55. 55.

    Available at: http://archive.unctad.org/iia-dbcases.

  56. 56.

    UNCTAD, Latest Developments in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, IIA Issues Note No. 1, April 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/webdiaeia2012d10_en.pdf.

  57. 57.

    This number does not include cases that are exclusively based on investment contracts (State contracts) and cases where a party has so far only signaled its intention to submit a claim to arbitration, but has not yet commenced the arbitration (notice of intent).

  58. 58.

    UNCTAD’s database on investor-State dispute settlement cases, available at www.unctad.org/iia, is continuously updated. The annual IIA Issues Note on ISDS complements quantitative information on new cases with a discussion of the key findings in decisions rendered by investment treaty tribunals during the reporting period.

  59. 59.

    See UNCTAD, Interpretation of IIAs: What States Can Do, IIA Issues Note, No. 3, December 2011, available at: http://unctad.org/en/docs/webdiaeia2011d10_en.pdf. For an in-depth analysis of the states’ role in the process, see Roberts, Power and Persuasion in Investment Treaty Interpretation: The Dual Role of States, American Journal of International Law 104 (2010) 1, p. 179 (201–202). For an academic treatment of treaty interpretation, see Schreuer, Diversity and Harmonization of Treaty Interpretation in Investment Arbitration, in: Elias/Fitzmaurice/Merkouris (eds.), Treaty Interpretation and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: 30 Years On, 2010, p. 129. For inconsistent decisions in ISDS proceedings and legitimacy considerations, see for example Franck, The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions, Fordham Law Review 73 (2005) 4, p. 1521.

  60. 60.

    The Pink Series has been designed to address key concepts and issues relevant to international investment agreements. All issues are available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/Pages/DIAE/International%20Investment%20Agreements%20(IIA)/UNCTAD-Series-on-issues-on-international-investment-agreements.aspx.

  61. 61.

    This involves discussions on third parties’ access to ISDS proceedings, amicus curiae submissions and the publication of awards. See Magraw/Amerasinghe, Transparency and Public Participation in Investor-State Arbitration, ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law 15 (2009) 2, p. 337. VanDuzer, Enhancing the Procedural Legitimacy of Investor-State Arbitration Through Transparency and Amicus Curiae Participation, McGill Law Journal 52 (2007) 4, p. 681. For a general discussion of transparency and IIAs, see Bjorklund, Emerging Civilization of Investment Arbitration, Penn State Law Review 113 (2009) 4, p. 1269. See also Knahr/Reinisch, Transparency versus Confidentiality in International Investment Arbitration—The Biwater Gauff Compromise, Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 6 (2007) 1, p. 97.

  62. 62.

    The updated Sequels on Expropriation, Transparency, Scope and Definition, Most-favoured Nation Treatment and Fair and Equitable Treatment are available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/Pages/DIAE/International%20Investment%20Agreements%20(IIA)/Issues-in-International-Investment-Agreements-II.aspx.

  63. 63.

    The workshop took place on 22–24 June 2011 in Manila, the Philippines. 63 officials from 14 APEC members participated in this training including China, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Russian Federation, Singapore, Taiwan Province of China, Thailand and Vietnam.

  64. 64.

    This workshop took place on 22–25 March 2011 in Casablanca, Morocco and was financed by the IDB’s Investment Promotion Technical Assistance Program (ITAP). 29 participants from 26 countries attended it, including 16 LDCs (Afghanistan, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Comoros, Djibouti, The Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Indonesia, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, Mauritania, Morocco, Mozambique, Niger, Senegal, Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Tunisia and Uganda).

  65. 65.

    UNCTAD, Latest Developments in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, IIA Monitor, No. 1 (2009), available at: http://unctad.org/en/Docs/webdiaeia20096_en.pdf. This had also been discussed at an expert meeting in 2009. See UNCTAD, Report of the Multi-year Expert Meeting on Investment for Development on its first session, 2009, available at http://archive.unctad.org/en/docs/ciimem3d3_en.pdf. A meeting on a possible advisory facility on international investment law and ISDS for Latin American countries with the members of the advisory group took place on 13 January 2011 in Washington, United States. For academic discussions on the issue, see for example, Gottwald, Leveling the Playing Field: Is It Time for a Legal Assistance Center for Developing Nations in Investment Treaty Arbitration?, American University International Law Review 22 (2007) 2, p. 237.

  66. 66.

    UNCTAD, Investor-State Disputes: Prevention and Alternatives to Arbitration, 2010, also available online at: http://archive.unctad.org/en/docs/diaeia200911_en.pdf. Documenting the proceedings of the Washington and Lee University and UNCTAD Joint Symposium on International Investment and Alternative Dispute Resolution, held on 29 March 2010 in Lexington, Virginia, United States of America, see UNCTAD, Investor-State Disputes: Prevention and Alternatives to Arbitration II, 2011, available at: http://archive.unctad.org/en/docs/webdiaeia20108_en.pdf.

  67. 67.

    For a discussion of the role of arbitrators, see Bottini, Should Arbitrator Live on Mars—Challenge of Arbitrators in Investment Arbitration, Suffolk Transnational Law Review 32 (2009) 2, p. 341; see also Malintoppi, Remarks on Arbitrators’ Independence, Impartiality and Duty to Disclose in Investment Arbitration, The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 7 (2008) 3, p. 351; Franck, Role of International Arbitrators, ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law 12 (2006) 2, p. 499.

  68. 68.

    UNCTAD’s biennial WIF establishes a global platform at the highest policy-making level and a forum for discussion on international investment trends among all investment stakeholders. The WIF 2012, held in Qatar, attracted more than 1400 investment stakeholders from 145 countries participated, including Heads of State and Government, ministerial-level officials, senior business executives, leading academic experts. It addressed the diverse challenges the investment community faced and paved the way for a new era of international investment policy-making. The programme and background documents on all events are available at: http://www.unctad-worldinvestmentforum.org. The WIF 2012 was convened back to back with the UNCTAD XIII Conference in Doha and aimed at defining investment policies and strategies for globalisation in the post crisis era that created the need for sustainable and inclusive development paths. The WIF thus addressed the investment challenges and opportunities arising from the changing global economic governance, with a view to boosting investment in the real economy so as to restart the engine of growth and generate employment in the wake of the crisis.

  69. 69.

    Participants also discussed their countries’ general approach to IIAs and specific strategic IIA related decisions (e.g. review of model BITs), development in the Arab region and the way forward for the IIA regime. For the outcome of the IIA conference, see UNCTAD, World Investment Forum—International Investment Agreements Annual Conference, UNCTAD XIII Summary prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat, 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/td472_en.pdf. IIAs were also referred to by ministers in the Ministerial Round Table 2 in the context of WIF/UNCTAD XIII. See UNCTAD, Round Table 2 Promoting investment, trade, entrepreneurship and related development policies to foster sustained economic growth for sustainable and inclusive development, UNCTAD XIII Summary prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat, 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/tdL421_en.pdf. See also UNCTAD, UNCTAD XIII Round Table II—Addressing the policy challenges for sustainable investment and enterprise development, Issues note prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat, 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/td457_en.pdf.

  70. 70.

    See also UNCTAD, Round Table 2 Promoting investment, trade, entrepreneurship and related development policies to foster sustained economic growth for sustainable and inclusive development, UNCTAD XIII Summary prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat, 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/tdL421_en.pdf; UNCTAD, UNCTAD XIII Round Table II—Addressing the policy challenges for sustainable investment and enterprise development, Issues note prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat, 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/td457_en.pdf.

  71. 71.

    UNCTAD, Investment Policy Framework for Sustainable Development, 2102, available at: http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/webdiaepcb2012d6_en.pdf. See also UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2012: Towards a New Generation of Investment Policies, 2012.

  72. 72.

    For the IPFSD-related discussion of the IIA conference, see UNCTAD, World Investment Forum—International Investment Agreements Annual Conference, UNCTAD XIII Summary prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat, 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/td472_en.pdf. See also UNCTAD, Round Table 2 Promoting investment, trade, entrepreneurship and related development policies to foster sustained economic growth for sustainable and inclusive development, UNCTAD XIII Summary prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat, 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/tdL421_en.pdf; UNCTAD, UNCTAD XIII Round Table II—Addressing the policy challenges for sustainable investment and enterprise development, Issues note prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat, 2012, available at: http://www.unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/td457_en.pdf.

  73. 73.

    Fredriksson/Zimny, Foreign Direct Investment and Transnational Corporations, in: UNCTAD (ed.), Beyond Conventional Wisdom in Development Policy: An Intellectual History of UNCTAD 1964–2004, 2004, p. 127.

  74. 74.

    UNCTAD, Report of the Secretary-General of UNCTAD to UNCTAD XIII. Development-led globalization: Towards sustainable and inclusive development paths, 2011, p. 9, available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/tdxiii_report_en.pdf.

  75. 75.

    UNCTAD, The Doha Mandate, 2012, p. 15 (para. 65(k)).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UNCTAD, International Investment Agreements Section, Division on Investment and Enterprise, Palais des Nations, 8-14 Av. de la Paix, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland

    Elisabeth Tuerk & Diana Rosert

Authors
  1. Elisabeth Tuerk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Diana Rosert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elisabeth Tuerk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. European Law, European and, University of Passau Chair for Constitutional and Administrat, Passau, Germany

    Christoph Herrmann

  2. Chair for Public Law, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany

    Markus Krajewski

  3. Chair for Public Law, European and, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

    Jörg Philipp Terhechte

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tuerk, E., Rosert, D. (2013). UNCTAD’s Role in Addressing International Investment Trends and Challenges. In: Herrmann, C., Krajewski, M., Terhechte, J. (eds) European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2013. European Yearbook of International Economic Law, vol 4. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33917-2_20

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation