Empirical Perspectives on Investment Arbitration: What Do We Know? Does It Matter?

In: The Journal of World Investment & Trade
View More View Less
  • 1 Queen Mary University of London School of Law, London, United Kingdom
  • | 2 PluriCourts, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
  • | 3 PluriCourts, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution


Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):



Due to the problem-centric nature of its mandate, empirical research has been relatively central in the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) investment arbitration reform process. In this article, the authors seek to provide a state-of-the-art summary and assessment of empirical studies on the six identified concerns of states: legal cost, duration of proceedings, consistency, correctness, diversity and independence. The article asks: (1) What do we know? and (2) Does it matter? The survey of evidence reveals an emerging base of quantitative, qualitative and computational evidence for justifying some but not all concerns and understanding their causes. However, there are challenges in accessing all relevant data, modelling outcomes and evaluating whether there was normatively a problem. The article concludes by indicating that some concerns are clearly justified, others not, and others fall within an unknown category.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 996 334 24
Full Text Views 715 89 9
PDF Views & Downloads 813 306 22