Chapter

European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2016

Volume 7 of the series European Yearbook of International Economic Law pp 527-541

Date:

Investment Protection in TTIP: Three Feasible Proposals

  • Jan KleinheisterkampAffiliated withLaw Department, London School of Economics Email author 
  • , Lauge N. Skovgaard PoulsenAffiliated withSchool of Public Policy, University College London

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access

Abstract

Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) through international arbitration has become a major stumbling block in negotiations of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).

Despite a number of efforts to fix shortcomings of the existing system especially by the European Commission, many stakeholders still are unconvinced that these incremental adaptations are sufficient to safeguard policy space in Europe. Right or wrong, there is little political appetite to include similar provisions into TTIP. At the time of writing, Washington also showed little appetite for a transatlantic or even multilateral investment court.

In order to avoid losing support for the agreement as a whole, the parties now need to think about alternatives. This brief article proposes three solutions, which could be politically acceptable while at the same time offering meaningful investment protections. Our proposals are intended as a concise but constructive input to the increasingly divisive political debates, which are detracting attention from the broader economic and geopolitical benefits of a transatlantic trade agreement.