Abstract
This book is motivated by the rapid evolution of the international investment regime in the Asia-Pacific region that has occurred over the last few years. The objective of this book is to provide perspectives to help predict the future regulatory framework for foreign investment in the region, and how the regional trends affect the development of global rules for foreign investment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For the present purposes, ‘Asia’ includes those countries grouped as Eastern Asia, Southern Asia and South-Eastern Asia, as defined by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
- 2.
UNCTAD (2016, p. 7). It should be noted that their FDI outflows declined in 2015 reflecting the global and regional economic slowdown (ibid 50).
- 3.
For the purposes of this proposal, the term ‘IIAs’ includes bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and investment chapters in preferential trade agreements (PTAs).
- 4.
For the ‘convergence factors’ between investment and trade law, see Kurtz (2016, pp. 10–20).
- 5.
Following the terminology used by the UNCTAD, for the purpose of this research ISDS will be use to refer to international arbitration in treaty-based claims, given its predominance as an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism; UNCTAD (2015, p. 106).
- 6.
Chaisse (2013, p. 188).
- 7.
For a good summary of the history of the FDI regime, the arguments in favour and against it, and proposed paths for its reform, see UNCTAD (2015).
- 8.
Henckels (2015, p. 1).
- 9.
International investment entails not only the legal aspects, but also the economic, political and cultural factors that shape and affect the regime. The complexity of the international investment regime allows for several approaches, each of which might permit a closer look at its different aspects. For an analysis of which types of political risk lead to ISDS in oil and gas, see Dupont et al. (2015, p. 337); for an analysis on the role of development in arbitration outcomes, see Franck (2009).
References
Chaisse, J. 2013. Assessing the exposure of Asian states to investment claims. Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal 6: 188.
Dupont, Chaisse, et al. 2015. Types of political risk leading to investment arbitrations in the oil and gas sector. The Journal of World Energy Law & Business 8: 337.
Franck, Susan D. 2009. Development and outcomes of investment treaty arbitration. Harvard International Law Journal 50.
Henckels, Caroline. 2015. Proportionality and deference in investor-state arbitration: Balancing investment protection and regulatory autonomy, 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kurtz, Jürgen. 2016. The WTO and international investment law: Converging systems, 10–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
UNCTAD. 2015. World investment report 2015. Reforming International Investment Governance.
UNCTAD. 2016. World investment report 2016, 7. http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2016_en.pdf. Accessed 5 Sept 2016.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chaisse, J., Ishikawa, T., Jusoh, S. (2017). Introduction. In: Chaisse, J., Ishikawa, T., Jusoh, S. (eds) Asia's Changing International Investment Regime. International Law and the Global South. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5882-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5882-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-5881-3
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-5882-0
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)