ICSID Arbitration and the Importance of Public Accountability of a Private Judicature – A Roman Law Perspective

Sourgens, Frédéric Gilles

doi:10.1163/187197407x192923

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 1 publication

(13 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the Multilateral Agreement on Investment was never finally adopted (Werksman and Santoro 1999), approximately 3000 bilateral investment treaties and multilateral investment treaties (e.g., ICSID 1965, NAFTA Secretariat 1992) govern international water-related contracts. These agreements do not always further the interests of developing countries (Sornarajah 2006) or the environment and may lack accountability (Sourgens 2007). The question is whether these trends are a positive development in line with the shift from government to governance, or whether this calls on us to revisit the question of if a more centralized water governance system is needed, especially given the lack of legitimacy and accountability of many of these processes.…”

Section: The Politics Of Gwgmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Water Governance in the Context of Global and Multilevel Governance: Its Need, Form, and Challenges

Gupta¹,

Pahl‐Wostl²

2013

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. To complement this Special Feature on global water governance, we focused on a generic challenge at the global level, namely, the degree to which water issues need to be dealt with in a centralized, concentrated, and hierarchical manner. We examined water ecosystem services and their impact on human well-being, the role of policies, indirect and direct drivers in influencing these services, and the administrative level(s) at which the provision of services and potential trade-offs can be dealt with. We applied a politics of scale perspective to understand motivations for defining a problem at the global or local level and show that the multilevel approach to water governance is evolving and inevitable. We argue that a centralized overarching governance system for water is unlikely and possibly undesirable; however, there is a need for a high-level think tank and leadership to develop a cosmopolitan perspective to promote sustainable water development.

show abstract

Section: The Politics Of Gwgmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Water Governance in the Context of Global and Multilevel Governance: Its Need, Form, and Challenges

Gupta¹,

Pahl‐Wostl²

2013

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the international level, the term 'global governance' is often used to describe processes of modern world politics, although also here no consensus on the appropriate definition has been reached (Young 1999;Commission on Global Governance 1995;Rosenau 1995;Kanie and Haas 2004;Biermann and Pattberg 2008). The concept of governance is mirrored in legal science, where scholars observe an evolution from an international law based on explicit state consent to an administrative law system with merely implicit state consent (e.g., Kingsbury et al 2005;Krisch 2006;Brunnée 2002) and from single to pluralist sites and actors of governance (Krisch 2006) and to multilevel systems of governance and complex hybrid public-private international law systems (Sornarajah 2006;Sourgens 2007). Importantly, from the local to international levels, the concept of governance is not confined to states and governments as sole actors, but is marked by participation of myriad public and private non-state actors at all levels of decision-making, ranging from networks of experts, environmentalists and multinational corporations to new agencies set up by governments, such as intergovernmental bureaucracies.…”

Section: Conceptualizing Earth System Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Earth system governance: a research framework

Biermann

Betsill

Gupta

et al. 2010

Int Environ Agreements

277

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Earth System Science Partnership, which unites all major global change research programmes, declared in 2001 an urgent need to develop ''strategies for Earth System management''. Yet what such strategies might be, how they could be developed, and how effective, efficient and equitable such strategies would be, remains unspecified. It is apparent that the institutions, organizations and mechanisms by which humans currently govern their relationship with the natural environment and global biochemical systems are not only insufficient-they are also poorly understood. This article presents the science programme of the Earth System Governance Project, a new 10-year global research effort 123Int Environ Agreements (2010) 10:277-298 DOI 10.1007 endorsed by the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP). It outlines the concept of earth system governance as a challenge for the social sciences, and it elaborates on the interlinked analytical problems and research questions of earth system governance as an object of study. These analytical problems concern the overall architecture of earth system governance, agency beyond the state and of the state, the adaptiveness of governance mechanisms and processes as well as their accountability and legitimacy, and modes of allocation and access in earth system governance. The article also outlines four crosscutting research themes that are crucial for the study of each analytical problem as well as for the integrated understanding of earth system governance: the role of power, knowledge, norms and scale.

show abstract

“…61 Northern experts critique the lack of public accountability of private adjudication. 62 While in the past mining was seen as primarily a private activity, the environmental consequences of such activities have made it very much a public issue. While water has always been seen as an important State responsibility, and while theorists have argued that such responsibility could easily be shifted to the private sector, this works only when social and environmental aspects of water management can be safeguarded by the State.…”

Section: Inferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Privatizing Environmental Resources: The Need for Supervision of Clean Development Mechanism Contracts?

Klijn¹,

Gupta

Nijboer³

2009

Review of European Community & International Environmental

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues that a current trend in global sustainable development governance is actively to engage the private sector in participating in the process of implementing global and national policy goals. This trend is based on the notion that the private sector has the ideas, technologies and resources at its disposal that can be channelled to addressing global environmental challenges. This new trend does not, however, take into account the past and present implications of private sector investment in fields such as mining and forestry. Nor does it closely examine how private sector rules will subsequently infiltrate and govern environmental management. On the basis of an examination of current policy developments and contracts in the area of environmental management and their implications for developing countries, this article argues in favour of establishing an authority that oversees the legitimacy and legality of these new contracts, especially in, but not limited to, the area of climate change.

show abstract

ICSID Arbitration and the Importance of Public Accountability of a Private Judicature – A Roman Law Perspective

Cited by 4 publications

References 1 publication

Global Water Governance in the Context of Global and Multilevel Governance: Its Need, Form, and Challenges

Global Water Governance in the Context of Global and Multilevel Governance: Its Need, Form, and Challenges

Earth system governance: a research framework

Privatizing Environmental Resources: The Need for Supervision of Clean Development Mechanism Contracts?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About