| 来源类型 | Working Paper |
| 规范类型 | 报告 |
| DOI | 10.3386/w27012 |
| 来源ID | Working Paper 27012 |
| Disputes in International Investment and Trade | |
| Ralph Ossa; Robert W. Staiger; Alan O. Sykes | |
| 发表日期 | 2020-04-20 |
| 出版年 | 2020 |
| 语种 | 英语 |
| 摘要 | International investment agreements employ dispute settlement procedures that differ markedly from their counterparts in trade agreements along three key dimensions: standing (i.e., the right to file grievances), the nature of the remedy, and the remedial period. In the state-to-state dispute settlement procedures of a typical trade agreement, only governments have standing, while private investors also have standing in the investor-state dispute settlement procedures employed by investment agreements. Trade agreements typically employ tariff retaliation as the remedy for violation of the agreement, while the award of cash damages is the norm in investment disputes. And trade agreements typically provide for only prospective remedies covering harm done subsequent to a ruling, while the damages awarded in investment disputes routinely cover past as well as future harms. We develop parallel models of trade agreements and investment agreements and employ them to study these differences. We argue that the differences can be understood as arising from the fundamentally different problems that trade and investment agreements are designed to solve. |
| 主题 | International Economics ; Trade ; International Factor Mobility |
| URL | https://www.nber.org/papers/w27012 |
| 来源智库 | National Bureau of Economic Research (United States) |
| 引用统计 | |
| 资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
| 条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/584684 |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Ralph Ossa,Robert W. Staiger,Alan O. Sykes. Disputes in International Investment and Trade. 2020. |
| 条目包含的文件 | ||||||
| 文件名称/大小 | 资源类型 | 版本类型 | 开放类型 | 使用许可 | ||
| w27012.pdf（579KB） | 智库出版物 | 限制开放 | CC BY-NC-SA | 浏览 | ||
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
