Possible Reforms of ISDS: Some Considerations on the ICS in CETA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investor-State Dispute Settlement (‘ISDS’) is a system in international law whereby foreign investors can initiate arbitration proceedings against host states. ISDS mechanisms have become ubiquitous in international investment and trade agreements, in particular bilateral investment treaties.<br/><br/>The reform of ISDS has been subject to extensive discussion in the EU since 2015, when the European Commission responded to the outcome of the public consultation for the inclusion of ISDS in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (‘TTIP’) by proposing its replacement with a court-like system, the Investment Court System (‘ICS’). This system is now included in the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (‘CETA’) with Canada, amongst others. The new EU investor-state dispute settlement mechanism offers some possible solutions to the problems traditionally connected to ISDS.<br/><br/>This post will first provide an overview of the CETA’s ICS. It then analyses some benefits and disadvantages of this new form of ISDS compared to traditional arbitration mechanisms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".