Welcome to Francis Academic Press

International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology, 2022, 4(12); doi: 10.25236/IJFS.2022.041213.

Analyses of Sustainable Investment Framework of UNCTAD: From the Perspective of Two Asian Countries

Author(s)

Jing Yan

Corresponding Author:
Jing Yan
Affiliation(s)

China University of Political Science and Law, College of Comparative Law, No.25 of Xitucheng Road, Hidian District, Beijing, 100088, China

Abstract

The international market is constantly changing under the rapid development of the economy, and the interest relationship between trade participants is intricate and complex. Under this mechanism, although profit as the investment goal is understandable, it is too single to meet the needs of recent advance. In addition to the financial indicators, social responsibility also needs to be paid attention to. On this basis, the concept of sustainable investment was put forward. Among which, the Investment Policy Framework for Sustainable Development (IPFSD) proposed by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has played a significant role in facilitating countries to formulate policies and laws to promote sustainable investment. Under the leadership of developed countries, traditional investment emphasizes the protection and preference of foreign capital and foreign investors. However, the sustainable investment framework challenges traditional concepts and policies of international investment. Some developing countries cannot digest the related policies and laws well to make them play a real positive role in the field of investment, which requires countries to clarify their attitudes and positions, adjust the international investment order and introduce policies, legal norms and other countermeasures in relevant areas.

Keywords

International Investment, Sustainable Development, IPFSD

Cite This Paper

Jing Yan. Analyses of Sustainable Investment Framework of UNCTAD: From the Perspective of Two Asian Countries. International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology (2022), Vol. 4, Issue 12: 72-80. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJFS.2022.041213.

References

[1] Robert W Mitchell, Ben Wooliscroft and James Higham, ‘Sustainable Market Orientation: A New Approach to Managing Marketing Strategy’ (2010) 30(2) Journal of Macromarketing 160, 161.

[2] Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger, Andrew Paul Newcombe and Markus W Gehring, Sustainable development in world investment law (Place of publication not identified Kluwer Law International, 2011) 3.

[3] Georgeta Ilie, ‘New Approaches in Investment Policies after the Recent Economic Crisis’ (2013) 5(3) Knowledge Horizons-Economics 160, 160.

[4] Faraz Rojid and Maria Del Carmen Vasquez, ‘Investment Law and Poverty: Continuing the Debate through UNCTAD’s Investment Policy Framework for Sustainable Development’ (2014) 15(5-6) The Journal of World Investment & Trade 889, 890.

[5] Faraz Rojid and Maria Del Carmen Vasquez, ‘Investment Law and Poverty: Continuing the Debate through UNCTAD’s Investment Policy Framework for Sustainable Development’ (2014) 15(5-6) The Journal of World Investment & Trade 889, 891.

[6] UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2012: Towards a New Generation of Investment Policies (Report, 2012) 161.

[7] UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2012: Towards a New Generation of Investment Policies (Report, 2012) 111.

[8] UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2012: Towards a New Generation of Investment Policies (Report, 2012) 143-159.

[9] UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2012: Towards a New Generation of Investment Policies (Report, 2012) 159.

[10] Agreement between the People's Republic of China and the Federal Republic of Germany on the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investments, China-Germany, signed 1 December 2003, 2362 UNTS 253 (entered into force 11 November 2005) art 5.

[11] Agreement between the People's Republic of China and the Federal Republic of Germany on the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investments, China-Germany, signed 1 December 2003, 2362 UNTS 253 (entered into force 11 November 2005) art 9.

[12] Measures on the Administration of Enterprises with Overseas Investment] (People’s Republic of China) The National Development and Reform Commission, Order No 11, 26 December 2017.

[13] Li Xing, Mapping China’s ‘One Belt One Road’ Initiative (Springer International Publishing, 2019) 6.

[14] Michael J Enright, Developing China: The Remarkable Impact of Foreign Direct Investment (London: Taylor and Francis, 1st ed, 2016) 1.

[15] Foreign Investment Law of the People’s Republic of China] (People’s Republic of China) National People’s Congress, Order No 26, 15 March 2019, art 4.

[16] Foreign Investment Law of the People’s Republic of China] (People’s Republic of China) National People’s Congress, Order No 26, 15 March 2019, art 20.

[17] Foreign Investment Law of the People’s Republic of China] (People’s Republic of China) National People’s Congress, Order No 26, 15 March 2019, art 22.

[18] Foreign Investment Law of the People’s Republic of China] (People’s Republic of China) National People’s Congress, Order No 26, 15 March 2019, art 24.

[19] Foreign Investment Law of the People’s Republic of China] (People’s Republic of China) National People’s Congress, Order No 26, 15 March 2019, art 37.

[20] Foreign Investment Law of the People’s Republic of China] (People’s Republic of China) National People’s Congress, Order No 26, 15 March 2019, art 38.

[21] Zeng HuaQun, ‘Investment Policy Framework for Sustainable Development and China’s Countermeasures’ (2013) 6 Journal of Xiamen University(Arts & Social Sciences) 59, 65.

[22] Zeng HuaQun, ‘Research on the Practice of China’s Sustainable Development Oriented Bilateral Investment Treaty’ (2015) 1 Journal of Xiamen University 80, 88.

[23] Julien Chaisse (ed), China’s International Investment Strategy (Oxford University Press, 1st ed, 2019) 48.

[24] Julien Chaisse (ed), China’s International Investment Strategy (Oxford University Press, 1st ed, 2019) 47.

[25] Sai Ramani Garimella and Poomintr Sooksripaisarnkit, China’s One Belt One Road initiative and private international law (London: Taylor and Francis, 2018) 255.

[26] Sasidaran Gopalan and Ramkishen Rajan, ‘Understanding foreign direct investment in Indonesia’ (2016) 15(1) Journal of International Trade Law & Policy 28, 29.

[27] Michael Carney and Marleen Dieleman, ‘Indonesia’s missing multinationals: business groups and outward direct investment’ (2011) 47(1) Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 105, 107.

[28] Hamzah, ‘Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) in Indonesia: A Paradigm Shift, Issues and Challenges’ (2018) 21(1) Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues 1, 2.

[29] Sasidaran Gopalan and Ramkishen Rajan, ‘Understanding foreign direct investment in Indonesia’ (2016) 15(1) Journal of International Trade Law & Policy 28, 30.

[30] Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 25 Tahun 2007 Tentang Penanaman Modal [Law No 25 of 2007 Concerning Investments] (Indonesia).

[31] Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 25 Tahun 2007 Tentang Penanaman Modal [Law No 25 of 2007 Concerning Investments] (Indonesia) art 3(1)(g).

[32] Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 25 Tahun 2007 Tentang Penanaman Modal [Law No 25 of 2007 Concerning Investments] (Indonesia) art 3(2)(c).

[33] Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 25 Tahun 2007 Tentang Penanaman Modal [Law No 25 of 2007 Concerning Investments] (Indonesia) art 4(2)(a).

[34] Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 25 Tahun 2007 Tentang Penanaman Modal [Law No 25 of 2007 Concerning Investments] (Indonesia) art 14, art 18.

[35] Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 25 Tahun 2007 Tentang Penanaman Modal [Law No 25 of 2007 Concerning Investments] (Indonesia) art 15(e), art 16 (a).

[36] Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 25 Tahun 2007 Tentang Penanaman Modal [Law No 25 of 2007 Concerning Investments] (Indonesia) art 32.

[37] Hamzah, ‘Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) in Indonesia: A Paradigm Shift, Issues and Challenges’ (2018) 21(1) Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues 1, 2.

[38] According to UNCTAD statistics, in 2014, 40% of ISDS cases were directed against developed countries. By the end of 2014, Canada was charged in 26 ISDS cases, ranking 6th in the world’s most common respondents, and the United States acted as respondents in 15 ISDS cases, ranking 10th with Poland.