Abstract
This chapter explores the way performance requirements have been restricted in international investment law, commencing with a discussion of the investment-oriented aspects of WTO law (the most important of which is the TRIMs Agreement) and continuing with an examination of the prohibition on performance requirements contained in international investment agreements (IIAs). It notes that the established understanding of performance requirements as conditions placed on foreign investors to structure their behavior in a manner that serves the interest of the host state but which is often discriminatory and harmful to a firm’s competitiveness may need to be expanded as the types of conditions imposed on foreign firms have changed. In particular this chapter draws attention to rules prohibiting forced technology transfer and, even more innovatively, data localization requirements in relation to digital trade. It suggests that the developmental potential of performance requirements must not be ignored as new disciplines governing their use are developed in line with changes to the modern global economy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
- 1.
For example, Collins D (2016) Performance requirements and investment incentives under international economic law. Edward Elgar.
- 2.
Trebilcock M (2011) Understanding trade law, Ch. 16. Edward Elgar.
- 3.
United States – Certain Measures Related to Renewable Energy, Request for Consultations by China, WT/DS563/1, G/L/1258 G/TRIMS/D/43, G/SCM/D120/1 (14 August 2018).
- 4.
Roeder R (2016) Foreign investment mining law. Springer, pp 95–107.
- 5.
See Collins, above n 1.
- 6.
TRIMs Agreement Art 2 (1) and (2).
- 7.
Trebilcock, above n 2 Ch 11.
- 8.
Mosoti V (2005–2006) Bilateral investment treaties and the possibility of a multilateral framework on investment at the WTO. Northwest J Int Law Bus 26:95 at 201.
- 9.
Indonesia – Certain Measures Affecting the Automobile Industry, Panel Report, WT/DS54/R, (23 July 1998).
- 10.
India – Measures Affecting the Automotive Sector, Panel Report, WT/DS146/R, (5 April 2002).
- 11.
Canada – Certain Measures Affecting the Renewable Energy Generation Sector, Canada – Measures Relating to the Feed-in-Tariff Program, Panel Report-WT/DS426/R (19 Dec 2012).
- 12.
Brazil – Certain Measures Concerning Taxation and Charges, Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Japan, WT/DS497/3 (18 September 2015).
- 13.
Brazil – Certain Measures Concerning Taxation and Charges, Report of the Panel, WT/DS497/3 (4 October 2017).
- 14.
Brazil – Certain Measures Concerning Taxation and Charges, Reports of the Appellate Body, WT/DS497/3/AB/R (13 December 2018).
- 15.
United States – Certain Measures Related to Renewable Energy, Request for Consultations by China, WT/DS563/1 (16 August 2018).
- 16.
Turkey – Certain Measures Concerning the Production, Importation and Marketing of Pharmaceutical Products, WT/DS583/1 (10 April 2019).
- 17.
Art 27.
- 18.
Art IV (2).
- 19.
Collins D (2018) Government procurement with strings attached? The uneven control of offsets by the World Trade Organization and regional trade agreements. Asian J Int Law 8(2):301–321.
- 20.
Art 15.4 (6).
- 21.
Art V.3 (b).
- 22.
Geraets D (2018) Accession to the World Trade Organization. Edward Elgar.
- 23.
Lim CL, Ho J, Paparinskis M (2018) International investment law and commentary, Chapter 3. Cambridge University Press.
- 24.
For example, New Zealand – China FTA Art 140 (7 April 2008).
- 25.
Art 7(2).
- 26.
For example, Richardson M (1991) The effects of a content requirement on a foreign duopsonist. J Int Econ 31(1–2):143.
- 27.
For example, Korea- Australia FTA Art 11.9 (17 February 2014).
- 28.
13 January 2002.
- 29.
Art 1106.
- 30.
For example, Charles H, Oman P, Charlton A (2003) Incentives-based competition for foreign direct investment: the case of Brazil’ OECD working papers on international investment 2003/01.
- 31.
Art 14.10 (f).
- 32.
Art 7 (vi).
- 33.
Sanders AK (2018) Incentives and obstacles for innovation. In: Prévost D, Alexovicova I, Pohl JH (eds) Restoring trust in trade. Hart.
- 34.
Peled H, Harpaz MD (2019) Innovation as a catalyst in the China-Israel investment relationship: the China-Israel BIT (2009) and the prospective FTA. In: Chaisse J (ed) China’s international investment strategy: bilateral, regional and global law and policy. Oxford University Press, at 144.
- 35.
Art 66.2.
- 36.
ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/07/4 (20 February 2015).
- 37.
Corn Products International, Inc. (Claimant) v United Mexican States (Respondent) ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/04/1 – Decision on Responsibility (15 January 2008).
- 38.
Cargill, Incorporated (Claimant) v United Mexican States (Respondent) ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/05/2 (Award) (18 September 2009).
- 39.
ADF Group Inc. (Claimant) v United States of America (Respondent) ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/00/1 (Award) (9 January 2003).
- 40.
ICSID Case No. ARB/06/18 (28 March 2011).
- 41.
CMS Gas Transmission Co v Argentina (ICSID Case No ARB/01/8), Award, (12 May 2005) and Gemplus SA, SLP SA and Gemplus Industrial SA de CV v United Mexican States (ICSID Case Nos ARB(AF)/04/3 and ARB(AF)/04/4)), Award, (16 June 2010)
- 42.
Collins D, Park TJ (2017) Interaction of tax incentives and performance requirements in bilateral investment treaties: its role in implementing right institutions in developing countries. Fordham Int Law J 41(1):207–226.
- 43.
Wamser G (2011) Foreign (In)Direct investment and corporate taxation. Can J Econ/Revue Canadienne d’économique 44:1497.
- 44.
15 March 2019.
- 45.
Art 22.
- 46.
“Digital Trade and Market Openness,” OECD, (9 August 2018) at 33.
- 47.
Porges A, Enders A (2016) Data moving across borders: the future of digital trade policy. E15 Initiative, at 4.
- 48.
Abe Y, Collins D (2018) The CPTPP and digital trade: embracing E-Commerce opportunities for SMEs in Japan and Canada. Transnatl Dispute Manage.
- 49.
Sen N (2018) Understanding the role of the WTO in international data flows: taking the liberalization or the regulatory autonomy path? J Int Econ Law 21(2):323.
- 50.
Ibid.
- 51.
Ibid.
- 52.
General Council, Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Non-Paper from the USA, JOB/GC/94, (4 July 2016).
- 53.
General Council, Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Reinvigorating Discussions on Electronic Commerce. Circulated at the request of Japan, JOB/GC/96/Rev 1, (14 July 2016).
- 54.
General Council, Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, Trade Policy, the WTO, and the Digital Economy, JOB/GC/97, (14 July 2016).
- 55.
Kelsey J (2018) How a TPP-style E-commerce outcome in the WTO would endanger the development dimension of the GATS acquis (and potentially the WTO). J Int Econ Law 21(2):273.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Collins, D. (2019). Performance Requirement Prohibitions in International Investment Law. In: Chaisse, J., Choukroune, L., Jusoh, S. (eds) Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5744-2_3-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5744-2_3-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-5744-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-5744-2
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Law and CriminologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences