Is It Time to Say Farewell to the ISDS System?; Comment on “The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Is It Everything We Feared for Health?”

Document Type : Commentary


School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada


Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) continues to plague health-oriented government regulation. This is particularly reflected in recent challenges to tobacco control measures through bilateral investment agreements. There are numerous reform proposals circulating within the public health community. However, I suggest that perhaps it is time for the community to explore a stronger position on ISDS. I draw from mounting evidence on the problematic uses of the ISDS to explore the proposition that ISDS is no longer justified. I tackle the normative question of shouldthe ISDS system persist and point out that the ISDS system is not justifiable from a development perspective and because of its nefarious use, is of no added value to a system that could rely on domestic courts.


Main Subjects

  1. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). World Investment Report 2016: Investor nationality, policy challenges. Geneva: UNCTAD; 2016.
  2. Labonté R, Schram A, Ruckert A. The Trans-Pacific Partnership: is it everything we feared for health? Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;5(8):487-496. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2016.41
  3. Yackee JW. Bilateral investment treaties, credible commitment, and the rule of (international) law: Do BITs promote foreign direct investment? Law Soc Rev. 2008;42(4):805-832. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5893.2008.00359.x
  4. Neumayer E, Spess L. Do bilateral investment treaties increase foreign direct investment to developing countries? World Dev. 2005;33(10):1567-1585. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.07.001
  5. Asiedu E. Foreign direct investment in Africa: the role of natural resources, market size, government policy, institutions and political instability. World Econ. 2006;29(1):63-77. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9701.2006.00758.x
  6. Rose-Ackerman S, Tobin J. Foreign direct investment and the business environment in developing countries: the impact of bilateral investment treaties. Accessed September 4, 2016. Published May 2, 2005.
  7. Asiedu E, Jin Y, Nandwa B. Does foreign aid mitigate the adverse effect of expropriation risk on foreign direct investment? J Int Econ. 2009 Jul;78(2):268-275. doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2009.03.004
  8. Lee H. Does armed conflict reduce foreign direct investment in the petroleum sector? Foreign Policy Anal. 2016. doi:10.1111/fpa.12079
  9. Hallward-Driemeier M. Do Bilateral Investment Treaties Attract Foreign Direct Investment? Only a Bit and They Could Bite. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3121 Accessed October 19, 2012. Published 2004.
  10. Pelc K. Does the International Investment Regime Induce Frivolous Litigation? Accessed July 25, 2016. Published May 10, 2016.
  11. Friel S, Gleeson D, Thow AM, et al. A new generation of trade policy: potential risks to diet-related health from the trans pacific partnership agreement. Glob Health. 2013;9:46. doi:10.1186/1744-8603-9-46
  12. Thow AM, McGrady B, Thow AM, McGrady B. Protecting policy space for public health nutrition in an era of international investment agreements. Bull World Health Organ. 2014;92(2):139-145. doi:10.2471/blt.13.120543
  13. Lencucha R, Labonte R, Drope J. Tobacco plain packaging: too hot for regulatory chill. Lancet. 2015;385(9979):1723. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60883-2
  14. Printz C. Gates, Bloomberg establish fund to fight tobacco industry worldwide: Effort aims to assist low-income countries. Cancer. 2015;121(14):2291-2292. doi:10.1002/cncr.28998
  15. European Commission (EC). Investor-to-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): Some Facts and Figures. EC; 2015.
  16. Pendas M, Mathison E. TPP and investor-state dispute settlement: an intertwined spectrum of options for investors? Glob Trade Cust J. 2016;11(4):157-164.
  17. UN experts voice concern over adverse impact of free trade and investment agreements on human rights. United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner; 2015.
  • Receive Date: 09 August 2016
  • Revise Date: 05 September 2016
  • Accept Date: 06 September 2016
  • First Publish Date: 01 May 2017