Once BITten, twice shy? The uncertain future of 'shared sovereignty' in investment treaty arbitration

Kyla Tienhaara

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Over the past half-century, but particularly in the last two decades, states have signed a considerable number of bilateral investment treaties (BITs), as well as a smaller number of bilateral and regional free trade agreements containing provisions on investment protection. These agreements are primarily enforced through an arbitration process known as investor-state dispute settlement. As a result, in nearly every country in the world some sovereign authority has been transferred from the national/public sphere (local courts) to the international/private sphere (investment treaty arbitration). In this article it is argued that although states agreed to 'share' some of their sovereignty with arbitrators, they did not intend to cede the degree of authority that these private actors would eventually claim to possess. Many states are now taking efforts to rein in arbitrators, with states that have been 'BITten' in arbitration leading the charge.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)185-196
    JournalPolicy & Society: journal of public, foreign and global policy
    Volume30
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2011

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Once BITten, twice shy? The uncertain future of 'shared sovereignty' in investment treaty arbitration'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this