논문 상세보기
Why Are There So Few Investor-State Arbitrations in China? A Comparison with Other East Asian Economies KCI 등재 SCOPUS
It is not easy to detect East Asia’s presence in the field of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), despite its large economy. In addition to having less active foreign direct investment (FDI) relative to GDP and fewer investment treaties, East Asian economies and societies seem to possess certain characteristics that have contributed collectively to the dearth of ISDS cases in East Asia. Examples are the short history of international arbitration, the avoidance of litigation, the high proportion of state-owned enterprises in outward FDI from China, and the concentration of FDI in industries in which investor-state disputes are less likely to occur. This trend, however, is likely to change gradually with the ongoing socioeconomic changes in the region, including the increase in both outward and inward FDI, the increasing number of investment treaties, the growing familiarity with international (investment) arbitration among legal experts, the diversification of FDI, and the decreasing fear of administrative litigation.
II. Factors Applicable to Few ISDS Cases inBoth Outward and Inward FDI
A. Less Active FDI
B. Relatively Few Investment Treaties,14 Except in China and Korea
III. Factors Applicable to Few ISDS Cases inOutward FDI: Characteristics of Chineseand Other East Asian Investors
A. Characteristics of East Asian Economies as the Home States ofClaimants
IV. Factors Applicable to Few ISDS Cases inInward FDI: Who Invests in East Asia, andWhere Do They Invest?
A. Investments from East Asia
B. Investments from Outside of East Asia
V. S igns of Change: Why We Are Likely to SeeMore Investor-State Arbitrations in EastAsia in the Future?
VI. Conclusion
References
