Abstract
The American Journal of International Law’s recent articles on the reform of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) make important contributions to ongoing debates. The article by Sergio Puig and Gregory Shaffer elaborates on the methods of investment dispute resolution—the various institutional innovations that states might pursue to improve the system. The essay by Anthea Roberts in turn explores the subjects of investment dispute resolution—states and their varying positions on reform. In our essay, we supply a third perspective by discussing the objects of ISDS—that is, the disputes themselves, which vary considerably from one case to another. We believe that considering methods, subjects, and objects together—what we refer to as a “trinity analytical framework”—could assist states as they formulate their positions in the reform process going forward. At the same time, we do not think that all reform options are equally meritorious, and we critique Puig and Shaffer's proposal for complementarity between municipal courts and international mechanisms as at best premature.
Highlights
The Matrix Analytical FrameworkIt is beyond doubt that every investment dispute involves certain economic interests and has an economic dimension
The American Journal of International Law’s recent articles on the reform of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) make important contributions to ongoing debates
We believe that considering methods, subjects, and objects together—what we refer to as a “trinity analytical framework”— could assist states as they formulate their positions in the reform process going forward
Summary
It is beyond doubt that every investment dispute involves certain economic interests and has an economic dimension. Unlike ordinary commercial disputes, investment disputes often involve interests that go beyond the economic sphere and implicate political and social issues as well. This is because, as mentioned above, investment disputes tend to involve both public and private bodies and interests. The involvement of public interests often implies that the disputes carry certain political implications. The Philip Morris case, in which the tobacco company accused Australia of breaching investment treaty obligations by
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
