Reforming investor-state dispute settlement: A comparative study of India and Brazil
By: Bainsla, Shivani
.
Material type: 
BookPublisher: Bihar Journal of Public Administration Description: 21(2s), Jul-Dec, 2024: p.582-598.Subject(s): sovereignty, investment, organizations, mechanismsSummary: Imagine a world where international investment disputes are resolved through a
framework that balances investor rights with host state sovereignty. This research
paper explores the evolving landscape of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)
reforms, focusing on India’s revised Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) approach
and Brazil’s unique Cooperation and Facilitation Investment Agreement (CFIA)
model. Through detailed analysis, it examines how both countries seek to reduce
ISDS claims and protect policy space without deterring foreign investment.
The paper delves into key criticisms of traditional ISDS, such as biases toward
corporations, high costs, and limitations on state policy-making, underscoring
the need for reform. It further analyzes recent ISDS initiatives by organizations
like UNCITRAL and ICSID, providing a comparative view of India’s and Brazil’s
reform strategies in light of global trends. Drawing from case studies and current
data, the study highlights the challenges, successes, and broader implications
of these reforms on international investment law. This research ultimately
underscores a growing shift towards more equitable, transparent, and sovereignfriendly dispute mechanisms that could shape the future of international
investment treaties. - Reproduced
http://www.iipabiharbranch.org/upload/BJPA%20Vol.%20XXI%20No%202(S).pdf
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Indian Institute of Public Administration | Available | AR136449 |
Imagine a world where international investment disputes are resolved through a
framework that balances investor rights with host state sovereignty. This research
paper explores the evolving landscape of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)
reforms, focusing on India’s revised Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) approach
and Brazil’s unique Cooperation and Facilitation Investment Agreement (CFIA)
model. Through detailed analysis, it examines how both countries seek to reduce
ISDS claims and protect policy space without deterring foreign investment.
The paper delves into key criticisms of traditional ISDS, such as biases toward
corporations, high costs, and limitations on state policy-making, underscoring
the need for reform. It further analyzes recent ISDS initiatives by organizations
like UNCITRAL and ICSID, providing a comparative view of India’s and Brazil’s
reform strategies in light of global trends. Drawing from case studies and current
data, the study highlights the challenges, successes, and broader implications
of these reforms on international investment law. This research ultimately
underscores a growing shift towards more equitable, transparent, and sovereignfriendly dispute mechanisms that could shape the future of international
investment treaties. - Reproduced
http://www.iipabiharbranch.org/upload/BJPA%20Vol.%20XXI%20No%202(S).pdf
There are no comments for this item.