Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) has proliferated, yet average claims contain less information than before. This study examines 812 disputes from 1987 to present.
Historical Context: Fewer ISDS cases succeeded in the past compared to recent years.
Current Trends: More claims now involve indirect expropriation or fair and equitable treatment allegations, but have lower success rates due to reduced information content.
Methodology & Findings: Analyzing firms' risk perceptions across two datasets reveals mixed effects on FDI. Direct expropriation cases still impact investment slightly, but less than historically.
Implications for Reputation Theory: The findings suggest reputational harm from ISDS claims has diminished over time, challenging conventional wisdom about these disputes.
| Do Investor-State Disputes (Still) Harm FDI? was authored by Andrew Kerner and Krzysztof Pelc. It was published by Cambridge in BJPS in 2022. |
