This vlog will explore the relationship between international investment law, specifically bilateral investment treaties, and climate policy. Bilateral investment treaties (BITs) are agreements between states and companies that state the particular terms and conditions for investments. The unique thing about these treaties is that when terms are being violated, the investor can take the state to a separate court rather than domestic courts. These courts have been criticized by NGOs focused on corporate power such as the Transnational Institute and SOMO for lacking transparency and hampering social and environmental policies. How does this relate to climate policy and is there a way to circumvent BITs or even use them to the advantage of environmental rights? We talked to international law master student Theo Albert to find out.
Case study: Vattenfall v. Germany I. (n.d.). Retrieved May 13, 2019, from https://isds.bilaterals.org/?case-study-vattenfall-v-germany-i&lang=en
Firger, M. and Gerrard, M. Reconciling International Investment Law and Climate Change Policy. (2011). Climate Change and Law Collection. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1733985
Miles, K. (2008). International Investment Law and Climate Change: Issues in the Transition to a Low Carbon World. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.1154588
TransCanada initiates NAFTA arbitration against the United States over rejection of Keystone XL pipeline. (n.d.). Retrieved May 14, 2019, from https://www.iisd.org/itn/2016/02/29/transcanada-initiates-nafta-arbitration-against-the-united-states-over-rejection-of-keystone-xl-pipeline/
Vinuales, J. E. (2010). Foreign Investment and the Environment in International Law: An Ambiguous Relationship. British Yearbook of International Law,80(1), 244-332. doi:10.1093/bybil/80.1.244