The purpose of this paper is to investigate the mediating role of economic openness (EO) on the relationship between, foreign direct investment (FDI) and economic growth (EG) in Sudan. The results of employing standard approach estimator shown that economic openness is partially mediate the relationship between FDI and economic growth during the period (1980-2014), FDI has no direct effect on output growth. Instead, the effect of FDI is depended on the degree of economic openness of Sudan. Therefore, Sudan government has to encourage economic policies, which eliminate foreign trade restrictions.
{"title":"The Mediating Role of Economic Openness on the Relationship between Foreign Direct Investment, and Economic Growth: A Case Study of Sudan (1980-2014)","authors":"Ibrahim Mohammed","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2714878","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2714878","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this paper is to investigate the mediating role of economic openness (EO) on the relationship between, foreign direct investment (FDI) and economic growth (EG) in Sudan. The results of employing standard approach estimator shown that economic openness is partially mediate the relationship between FDI and economic growth during the period (1980-2014), FDI has no direct effect on output growth. Instead, the effect of FDI is depended on the degree of economic openness of Sudan. Therefore, Sudan government has to encourage economic policies, which eliminate foreign trade restrictions.","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115508913","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We investigate the heterogeneity within the group of foreign direct investors and the relation between affiliates characteristics and parent productivity. Using data on Italian firms, we show that foreign direct investors differ in their productivity level according to their characteristics and their investment decisions. Larger parents by employment or sales tend to be more productive, to have more affiliates and to invest in a higher number of destinations. Focusing on manufacturing firms, we show econometrically that having more and larger affiliates in rich countries leads to higher ex-post productivity. In particular, investing in high income countries or both in high and low income countries is associated with a subsequent productivity premium textit{vis-`a-vis} low income countries investors, especially for larger parents. Low income countries investors are found to be relatively more productive when operating in low technology sectors, while the opposite applies to high income countries investors.
{"title":"The Heterogeneity of Foreign Direct Investors: Linking Affiliates to Parent Productivity","authors":"G. Giovannetti, E. Marvasi, G. Ricchiuti","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2710545","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2710545","url":null,"abstract":"We investigate the heterogeneity within the group of foreign direct investors and the relation between affiliates characteristics and parent productivity. Using data on Italian firms, we show that foreign direct investors differ in their productivity level according to their characteristics and their investment decisions. Larger parents by employment or sales tend to be more productive, to have more affiliates and to invest in a higher number of destinations. Focusing on manufacturing firms, we show econometrically that having more and larger affiliates in rich countries leads to higher ex-post productivity. In particular, investing in high income countries or both in high and low income countries is associated with a subsequent productivity premium textit{vis-`a-vis} low income countries investors, especially for larger parents. Low income countries investors are found to be relatively more productive when operating in low technology sectors, while the opposite applies to high income countries investors.","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129443525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Investment arbitrations should not happen too often, because they are costly processes for both parties. Yet they regularly happen. Why? We investigate the hypothesis that investment arbitrations are used as a means of last resort, after dissuasion has failed, and that dissuasion is most likely to fail in situations were significant political risk materializes. Investment arbitration should thus tend to target countries in which certain types of political risk has materialized. In order to test this hypothesis, we focus in this paper on two drivers of political risk: bad governance, and economic crises. We test various links between those two drivers of risk and arbitration claims. We use an original dataset that includes investment claims filed under the rules of all arbitration institutions as well as ad hoc arbitrations. We find that bad governance, understood as corruption and lack of rule of law (using the WGI Corruption and WGI Rule of Law indexes), has a statistically significant relation with investment arbitration claims, but economic crises do not.
{"title":"Political Risk and Investment Arbitration: An Empirical Study","authors":"C. Dupont, T. Schultz, Merih Angin","doi":"10.1093/JNLIDS/IDV032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JNLIDS/IDV032","url":null,"abstract":"Investment arbitrations should not happen too often, because they are costly processes for both parties. Yet they regularly happen. Why? We investigate the hypothesis that investment arbitrations are used as a means of last resort, after dissuasion has failed, and that dissuasion is most likely to fail in situations were significant political risk materializes. Investment arbitration should thus tend to target countries in which certain types of political risk has materialized. In order to test this hypothesis, we focus in this paper on two drivers of political risk: bad governance, and economic crises. We test various links between those two drivers of risk and arbitration claims. We use an original dataset that includes investment claims filed under the rules of all arbitration institutions as well as ad hoc arbitrations. We find that bad governance, understood as corruption and lack of rule of law (using the WGI Corruption and WGI Rule of Law indexes), has a statistically significant relation with investment arbitration claims, but economic crises do not.","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133348525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As China’s outward foreign direct investment (FDI) has grown, its approach to international investment agreements (IIAs) has changed. China is now one of the world’s most important outward investors, with Chinese FDI facing widespread criticism. The challenge for China is to adapt to this new configuration of interests stemming from these developments, both in terms of its national policies and the contents of its IIAs. In so doing, it is likely to influence, perhaps significantly, the further evolution of international investment law. This article deals briefly with the salient features of China’s outward FDI and the policies that support it (Section A); the perception and reception of China’s outward FDI in key host countries (Section B); and the changing nature of the country’s approach to international investment treaties (Section C). The article concludes (Section D) with a brief review and outlook.
{"title":"China's Outward Foreign Direct Investment and International Investment Law","authors":"K. Sauvant, M. D. Nolan","doi":"10.1093/JIEL/JGV045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JIEL/JGV045","url":null,"abstract":"As China’s outward foreign direct investment (FDI) has grown, its approach to international investment agreements (IIAs) has changed. China is now one of the world’s most important outward investors, with Chinese FDI facing widespread criticism. The challenge for China is to adapt to this new configuration of interests stemming from these developments, both in terms of its national policies and the contents of its IIAs. In so doing, it is likely to influence, perhaps significantly, the further evolution of international investment law. This article deals briefly with the salient features of China’s outward FDI and the policies that support it (Section A); the perception and reception of China’s outward FDI in key host countries (Section B); and the changing nature of the country’s approach to international investment treaties (Section C). The article concludes (Section D) with a brief review and outlook.","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132365414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent tectonic, global economic and political shifts have spurred the emergence of new organizational forms such as sovereign wealth funds (SWFs)—state-owned investment organizations without pension liabilities—primarily in emerging and frontier markets. Although scholars have begun to explore SWF macroeconomic trends, little is known about the challenges these institutional investors face or their strategic capabilities to address these concerns. Drawing on comparative and strategic corporate governance research, we develop an organizing framework to better understand the firm-level characteristics of SWFs and their consequences. Our analysis of these investment funds’ multidimensional strategic governance traits contributes to the literature on state capitalism and comparative corporate governance.
{"title":"Sovereign Wealth Funds: A Strategic Governance View","authors":"Ruth V. Aguilera, Javier Capapé, J. Santiso","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2612813","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2612813","url":null,"abstract":"Recent tectonic, global economic and political shifts have spurred the emergence of new organizational forms such as sovereign wealth funds (SWFs)—state-owned investment organizations without pension liabilities—primarily in emerging and frontier markets. Although scholars have begun to explore SWF macroeconomic trends, little is known about the challenges these institutional investors face or their strategic capabilities to address these concerns. Drawing on comparative and strategic corporate governance research, we develop an organizing framework to better understand the firm-level characteristics of SWFs and their consequences. Our analysis of these investment funds’ multidimensional strategic governance traits contributes to the literature on state capitalism and comparative corporate governance.","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114342369","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
International investment — more specifically, foreign direct investment (FDI) — has become the most important vehicle to bring goods and services to foreign markets. In addition, FDI integrates the national production systems of individual countries and is in the process of creating an integrated international production system, the productive core of the globalising world economy. Against the background of the salient features of FDI and the emerging integrated international production system, this paper seeks to do three things — one, to discuss the evolution of national FDI policies; two, to review challenges for the international investment law and policy regime; and, three, to identify options on how some of these challenges can be met. The discussion is broader than focusing on priority issues only; rather, it covers a range of issues that may eventually need to be addressed. The emphasis is on the international governance of international investment in the globalising world economy, which so far has taken place through a myriad of mostly bilateral investment treaties (BITs). The resulting regime — which increasingly sets the parameters for domestic policy-making on international investment — has developed rapidly, remains in flux, and needs to be improved to maintain its effectiveness and legitimacy.National (as well as international) policy-making regarding MNEs and their international investment takes place in the context of sets of tensions for governments seeking to attract FDI and benefit from it as much as possible, and minimise any negative effects. Hence, national policies regarding FDI, and the international regulatory framework within which national policies are formulated, are of key importance for host countries, and they can conflict with the goals of MNEs to maximise their international competitiveness and global profits. In the 1990s, countries began to establish investment promotion agencies with the specific brief to attract as much FDI as possible. Since the turn of this century, however, national approaches in both developed countries and emerging markets towards incoming FDI have become more nuanced. Achieving the right balance has become a key challenge for countries, and it is one that emerging markets, especially with regard to outward FDI by their firms, increasingly need to consider. A defining characteristic of the investment regime is that investors have a private right to action when seeking redress, under the investor-state dispute-settlement (ISDS) mechanism enshrined in the majority of IIAs. From the perspective of international investors, this is a strong and positive feature of the investment regime, but it entails considerable risks for host country governments. A topical and urgent question is whether appeals mechanisms for current ad-hoc tribunals, a world investment court as a standing first-instance tribunal making the decision in any dispute settlement case, or a combination of both should be establis
{"title":"The International Investment Law and Policy Regime: Challenges and Options","authors":"K. Sauvant","doi":"10.7916/D8ZS32B3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8ZS32B3","url":null,"abstract":"International investment — more specifically, foreign direct investment (FDI) — has become the most important vehicle to bring goods and services to foreign markets. In addition, FDI integrates the national production systems of individual countries and is in the process of creating an integrated international production system, the productive core of the globalising world economy. Against the background of the salient features of FDI and the emerging integrated international production system, this paper seeks to do three things — one, to discuss the evolution of national FDI policies; two, to review challenges for the international investment law and policy regime; and, three, to identify options on how some of these challenges can be met. The discussion is broader than focusing on priority issues only; rather, it covers a range of issues that may eventually need to be addressed. The emphasis is on the international governance of international investment in the globalising world economy, which so far has taken place through a myriad of mostly bilateral investment treaties (BITs). The resulting regime — which increasingly sets the parameters for domestic policy-making on international investment — has developed rapidly, remains in flux, and needs to be improved to maintain its effectiveness and legitimacy.National (as well as international) policy-making regarding MNEs and their international investment takes place in the context of sets of tensions for governments seeking to attract FDI and benefit from it as much as possible, and minimise any negative effects. Hence, national policies regarding FDI, and the international regulatory framework within which national policies are formulated, are of key importance for host countries, and they can conflict with the goals of MNEs to maximise their international competitiveness and global profits. In the 1990s, countries began to establish investment promotion agencies with the specific brief to attract as much FDI as possible. Since the turn of this century, however, national approaches in both developed countries and emerging markets towards incoming FDI have become more nuanced. Achieving the right balance has become a key challenge for countries, and it is one that emerging markets, especially with regard to outward FDI by their firms, increasingly need to consider. A defining characteristic of the investment regime is that investors have a private right to action when seeking redress, under the investor-state dispute-settlement (ISDS) mechanism enshrined in the majority of IIAs. From the perspective of international investors, this is a strong and positive feature of the investment regime, but it entails considerable risks for host country governments. A topical and urgent question is whether appeals mechanisms for current ad-hoc tribunals, a world investment court as a standing first-instance tribunal making the decision in any dispute settlement case, or a combination of both should be establis","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133373986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
To what extent do alleged violations of international commitments damage state reputation? This paper explores this question with specific reference to investor-state disputes arising under the protection of international investment agreements. Existing theory assumes that institutionalization of international commitments raises the ex post costs of defection, including reputational damage, thereby creating strong incentives for state compliance. We modify this expectation by arguing that the reputational consequences of treaty violations are contingent on institutional rules and information flows. Drawing on a replication of prior research linking investor-state disputes with reduced FDI as well as an original analysis of their impact on investment reputation, we show that the impact of investor-state disputes has been relatively marginal over the 1987-2011 time period, with reputational effects only beginning to materialize in recent years. This temporal variation reflects changes in the rules governing the transparency of international arbitral tribunals as well as expanded media coverage of investment disputes. The central implication of these findings for the broader body of literature on international institutions is that reputational mechanisms for effective treaty enforcement cannot be taken as given but are heavily contingent on institutional design and associated information costs.
{"title":"Contingent Institutions: The Reputational Impact of Investor-State Disputes","authors":"Shahryar Minhas, Karen L. Remmer","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2576568","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2576568","url":null,"abstract":"To what extent do alleged violations of international commitments damage state reputation? This paper explores this question with specific reference to investor-state disputes arising under the protection of international investment agreements. Existing theory assumes that institutionalization of international commitments raises the ex post costs of defection, including reputational damage, thereby creating strong incentives for state compliance. We modify this expectation by arguing that the reputational consequences of treaty violations are contingent on institutional rules and information flows. Drawing on a replication of prior research linking investor-state disputes with reduced FDI as well as an original analysis of their impact on investment reputation, we show that the impact of investor-state disputes has been relatively marginal over the 1987-2011 time period, with reputational effects only beginning to materialize in recent years. This temporal variation reflects changes in the rules governing the transparency of international arbitral tribunals as well as expanded media coverage of investment disputes. The central implication of these findings for the broader body of literature on international institutions is that reputational mechanisms for effective treaty enforcement cannot be taken as given but are heavily contingent on institutional design and associated information costs.","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115480114","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-11-15DOI: 10.5922/2079-8555-2015-1-2
A. Kuznetsov
The aim of this study is to examine the place of the Baltic States on the corporate world map, a contemporary, foreign-investment-driven alternative to the more familiar political map. To this end, the author studies the geographical place of the Baltics in the documentation of transnational corporations. The research database consists of financial reports and presentations of 60 leading European (including Russian) transnational corporations. Special attention is paid to companies from countries with significant FDI stock in the Baltic States. This study is a first step towards analyzing international investors’ interpretation of the new European borders. The connection between the neighborhood effect on FDI distribution and geographical segmentation in the corporate paperwork is established. Some companies use a multilevel division (e. g. Europe/Eastern Europe), where the Baltics is usually associated with “Europe” (with or without Russia and Turkey). However, in some cases the Baltic States are clustered under “home market” (as is the case with some Swedish companies), “former Soviet Union” (some Russian companies), “Northern Europe and Central Asia,” and even “Middle East and Eastern Europe.” Varying understanding of where exactly the borders of Europe lie could explain the plurality of attitudes of the European business establishment to the EU sanctions against Russia.
{"title":"The Baltics in the Geography of the Largest Transnational Corporations of Europe","authors":"A. Kuznetsov","doi":"10.5922/2079-8555-2015-1-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2015-1-2","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study is to examine the place of the Baltic States on the corporate world map, a contemporary, foreign-investment-driven alternative to the more familiar political map. To this end, the author studies the geographical place of the Baltics in the documentation of transnational corporations. The research database consists of financial reports and presentations of 60 leading European (including Russian) transnational corporations. Special attention is paid to companies from countries with significant FDI stock in the Baltic States. This study is a first step towards analyzing international investors’ interpretation of the new European borders. The connection between the neighborhood effect on FDI distribution and geographical segmentation in the corporate paperwork is established. Some companies use a multilevel division (e. g. Europe/Eastern Europe), where the Baltics is usually associated with “Europe” (with or without Russia and Turkey). However, in some cases the Baltic States are clustered under “home market” (as is the case with some Swedish companies), “former Soviet Union” (some Russian companies), “Northern Europe and Central Asia,” and even “Middle East and Eastern Europe.” Varying understanding of where exactly the borders of Europe lie could explain the plurality of attitudes of the European business establishment to the EU sanctions against Russia.","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131537329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-10-12DOI: 10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_429-1
Sohvi Heaton, D. Teece
{"title":"Market Failures and MNEs","authors":"Sohvi Heaton, D. Teece","doi":"10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_429-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_429-1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116674314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In Sub-Saharan African countries, inequalities and unbalanced distribution of land and natural resources are deeply rooted in the historical land conflicts and dispossessions in the region that have drastically altered the political and economic positions of major segments of Sub-Saharan African societies. This article attempts an answer to the question of whether a sub-regional investment agreement could help in addressing the problem of land-grabbing in Sub-Saharan Africa. The affirmative answer to this question is based on a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the three major approaches to the legal regulation of foreign direct investments (FDI) that have been utilized to date in Sub-Saharan Africa. The article provides a succinct historical survey that sheds light on the fact that both domestic regulations of foreign investments and Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) have almost exclusively dealt with the question of the promotion of FDI, and that a number of BITs in Sub-Saharan Africa tend to overemphasize the protection of foreign investors while doing very little to protect common concerns, i.e. values that do not coincide, or do not necessarily coincide, with the interests of the investor. The article then discusses the approach to the legal regulation of FDI through BITs as exemplified in the BITs concluded by the US with six sub-Saharan African partners, underscoring the unsuitability of such treaties to lay the foundations of an international investment regime more favourable to Sub-Saharan countries. Finally, the paper attempts to formulate a few recommendations to address the problem, suggesting a sub-regional investment agreement for Sub-Saharan Africa.
{"title":"Rethinking the Dualism of Regionalism vs. Universalism in the Light of the Sub-Saharan Experience with the Regulation of Foreign Investment","authors":"F. Seatzu, Paolo Vargiu","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2499556","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2499556","url":null,"abstract":"In Sub-Saharan African countries, inequalities and unbalanced distribution of land and natural resources are deeply rooted in the historical land conflicts and dispossessions in the region that have drastically altered the political and economic positions of major segments of Sub-Saharan African societies. This article attempts an answer to the question of whether a sub-regional investment agreement could help in addressing the problem of land-grabbing in Sub-Saharan Africa. The affirmative answer to this question is based on a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the three major approaches to the legal regulation of foreign direct investments (FDI) that have been utilized to date in Sub-Saharan Africa. The article provides a succinct historical survey that sheds light on the fact that both domestic regulations of foreign investments and Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) have almost exclusively dealt with the question of the promotion of FDI, and that a number of BITs in Sub-Saharan Africa tend to overemphasize the protection of foreign investors while doing very little to protect common concerns, i.e. values that do not coincide, or do not necessarily coincide, with the interests of the investor. The article then discusses the approach to the legal regulation of FDI through BITs as exemplified in the BITs concluded by the US with six sub-Saharan African partners, underscoring the unsuitability of such treaties to lay the foundations of an international investment regime more favourable to Sub-Saharan countries. Finally, the paper attempts to formulate a few recommendations to address the problem, suggesting a sub-regional investment agreement for Sub-Saharan Africa.","PeriodicalId":388027,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Foreign Direct Investment (International) (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131288725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：