000			01918nam a22001457a 4500
999			_c530657 _d530657
008			250630b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aBainsla, Shivani _954877
245			_aReforming investor-state dispute settlement: A comparative study of India and Brazil
260			_aBihar Journal of Public Administration
300			_a21(2s), Jul-Dec, 2024: p.582-598
520			_aImagine 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
650			_a sovereignty, investment, organizations, mechanisms _954878
773			_0Bihar Journal of Public Administration
942			_cAR