Crafting a Framework on Investment Facilitation

Transcription

1 POLICY BRIEF JUNE 2018 Crafting a Framework on Investment Facilitation WTO: PATHS FORWARD ICTSD.ORG A coalition of over 70 World Trade Organization members endorsed a Joint Ministerial Statement on Investment Facilitation for Development (WT/MIN(17)/59) during the global trade club s Eleventh Ministerial Conference (MC11) in December The statement outlined the group s interest in exploring more structured discussions on the issue, with the objective of crafting a multilateral framework on investment facilitation. Given this development, this policy brief aims to provide context to the investment facilitation discussion, both inside the WTO and externally, along with mapping issues and options for interested members to consider going forward. 1. Introduction The rise of foreign direct investment (FDI), especially through globalised supply chains, in the 21st century has changed how trade, investment, and services function in relation to each other. These changes have been so significant that policymakers have been weighing whether to treat investment facilitation as a trade-related issue in its own right. The 16 years that have transpired since the launch of the Doha Round of trade negotiations have seen a significant number of changes in the global economic landscape. Governance of this landscape has been characterised by the proliferation of international investment agreements (IIAs), bilateral investment treaties (BITs), and regional trade agreements (RTAs) creating an intricate web of formal economic arrangements. Further, elaborate patterns of production through global value chains (GVCs) have provided new opportunities for countries to engage in commerce. While this complexity has made it costlier for developing and least developed countries (LDCs) to navigate and to participate in different regulatory pathways, developed countries have engaged in deeper and more comprehensive trade and investment deals across a multitude of policy areas. The fast-paced transformations of the trade and investment scene call for a similarly rapid response from the international community and World Trade Organization (WTO) members. World Bank research has found that deeper trade and investment agreements can lead to higher investment flows through GVCs, cutting trade costs and directing investments to finance domestic infrastructure and transportation. Foreign direct investment can also be a means towards more inclusive GVCs, conferring technical know-how, managerial and organisational skills, as well as access to research and innovation.

2 According to the World Bank (2018), in 2016 more than 40 per cent of the nearly US$ 1.75 trillion of global FDI flows was directed to developing countries, providing much-needed private capital to promote development. In addition, emerging markets have become key capital-exporters and important stakeholders in global production chains. For many developing countries, inward FDI has become a central source of external finance, surpassing official development assistance, remittances, and portfolio investment flows. Figure 1. FDI inflows, global and by development group US$ (millions) Developed economies Developing economies World Source: Statistics and World Investment Report 2017, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). 2. Investment Facilitation Debate Gains Momentum at the WTO The idea of launching an investment facilitation agreement at the WTO was put forward in 2015 under the E15 Initiative, a knowledge generation and engagement process jointly implemented by ICTSD and the World Economic Forum focused on strengthening the international trade and investment system to better respond to the needs of the 21st century economy and the achievement of sustainable development objectives. 1 According to Sauvant and Hamdani (2015): It would be unrealistic to expect that in today s world economy trade facilitation alone would achieve the benefits that are being sought without investment facilitation. If anything, the intertwining of trade and investment calls for a close alignment of investment and trade policies. Analogous to the WTO efforts (and in support of them), a sustainable investment support programme would be entirely technical in nature, focussing on a range of practical actions to encourage (assuming economic FDI determinants are favourable) the flow of sustainable investment to developing countries, in particular the least developed among them, with a view to contributing to their economic growth and development. In 2016, China took on the issue. Under its presidency of the G20, a new Working Group on Trade and Investment and non-binding guiding principles for investment facilitation negotiations were established, endorsed by all G20 leaders at the Hangzhou Summit in September Whilst the investment facilitation proposal was not included in the final communiqué (G ), it sparked increasing awareness that enhancing the transparency and efficiency of international investment policymaking would increase both investment and trade flows. In the G20 s subsequent discussions Crafting a Framework on Investment Facilitation June 2018

3 in 2017, under the German presidency, the focus was on investment facilitation but did not result in Guiding Principles for Global Investment Facilitation (Sauvant 2017). Parallel to that, and throughout 2017, the Friends of Investment Facilitation for Development (FIFD) and the MIKTA group began holding informal discussions and workshops on the subject at the WTO. 2 The FIFD also co-hosted a High-Level Trade and Investment Facilitation Forum for Development in Abuja, Nigeria, in November 2017 in association with the Economic Community for West African States (ECOWAS) and the Nigerian government. In addition, a number of proposals on investment facilitation were submitted by members and country groups in the build-up to Eleventh Ministerial Conference (ICTSD 2017). The issue gained enough momentum to be discussed at the ministerial conference in Buenos Aires in December 2017, leading to the Joint Ministerial Statement on Investment Facilitation for Development. 3 The Statement calls on members to begin structured discussions toward the development of a multilateral framework on investment facilitation for development Figure 2. Timeline of action on investment facilitation at the international level E15 Initiative experts Karl P. Sauvant and Khalil Hamdani publish think piece proposing An International Support Programme for Sustainable Investment Facilitation at the WTO UNCTAD releases Global Action Menu for Investment Facilitation G20 Trade and Investment Working Group, under China's presidency, discuss investment facilitation policy package, not included in final communiqué 70 signatories approve the WTO MC11 Joint Statement on Investment Facilitation for Development E15 Initiative Task Force on Investment Policy recommendations published: The Evolving International Investment Law and Policy Regime: Ways Forward. Task force members call for the alignment of investment and trade support policies through an international investment support programme for sustainable development At the WTO: MIKTA group organises first workshop on investment facilitation; Russian Federation submits draft proposal on investment facilitation; MIKTA group, FIFD, China, Argentina/Brazil submit proposals; FIFD high-level forum on investment facilitation for development held in Abuja, Nigeria with ECOWAS 3. Mapping of Issues and Options to Operationalise the Joint Statement As a contribution to spur structured discussions among interested parties, this brief proposes the following issues and sets of options to consider for the operationalisation of the joint statement. 3.1 Strengthen the sustainable development dimension The international community has resolved through the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development to address the most important economic, social, and environmental challenges of our time. Achieving these goals requires closing a US$2.5 trillion funding gap on an annual basis, an amount which cannot be delivered through traditional official development assistance alone. As argued by Sauvant and Mann (2017), at a time when the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have become the lodestar for policymaking, national and international efforts are needed to encourage the flow of investment to developing countries, especially commercially viable investment that makes a maximum contribution to the economic, social, and environmental development of host countries and takes place in the framework of fair governance mechanisms ( sustainable FDI ). 2 FIFD consists of 11 WTO members: Argentina; Brazil; Chile; China; Colombia; Hong Kong, China; Kazakhstan; Korea; Mexico; Nigeria; and Pakistan. MIKTA is an informal partnership between Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey, and Australia. 3 Joint Ministerial Statement on Investment Facilitation for Development, WT/MIN(17)/59. Eleventh Ministerial Conference, World Trade Organization. 13 December

4 The E15 Task Force report (Sauvant 2016) therefore stressed that when implementing an international support programme on investment facilitation, it should focus not only on the facilitation of FDI flows, but rather on the facilitation of sustainable investment for sustainable development, especially for the benefit of developing countries, and in particular the least developed among them. To contribute to these efforts, the following options could be considered. Clarify expected sustainable development outcomes Members could pay special attention to clarifying the sustainable development outcomes they expect from investment facilitation provisions. At present, the most direct references to sustainable development is in the 2018 Brazilian proposal, in the preamble, and in Section VII on the scope of the corporate social responsibility (CSR) provision. Investors and their investments shall strive to achieve the highest possible level of contribution to the sustainable development of the host Member and the local community, through the adoption of a high degree of socially responsible practices, based on the voluntary principles and standards set out in this Article and internal policies, such as statements of principle. 4 Sponsors of an investment facilitation framework could gain additional buy-in from non-signatories and, especially, other stakeholders, by clarifying explicitly the expected development outcomes from each investment facilitation provision, all the while ensuring that the resulting framework is synergised towards the delivery of the SDGs. 5 Crafting provisions using a sustainable development lens would have implications for the scope, expected outcomes, and the resources needed. A main recommendation that has been put forward through the various investment facilitation proposals at the WTO has been to establish a national focal point. Using a sustainability lens, this would result in an alignment whereby the national focal point engage in a broader range of services beyond facilitating new investment flows to providing support services over the life cycle of an investment, assisting the diversification of established investments, policy advocacy, and dispute mediation. The use of FDI sustainability characteristics Most developing countries are not in a position to choose better quality investments by turning away inward foreign capital, even when such investments do not create sufficient positive spillovers or linkages within host economies. In light of this constraint, home states could play a greater role in incentivising and facilitating sustainable investment flows. Home country governments could link the facilitation support measures they are increasingly providing to outgoing investors to ventures that contribute to sustainable development and meet certain characteristics, as some have done. Sauvant and Mann (2017) have identified an indicative list of FDI sustainability characteristics that could be linked to such measures. 3.2 Develop a broader set of elements to include in the investment facilitation framework A summary of the elements that have been recommended to date through investment facilitation proposals submitted at the WTO can be found in Table 1. Most of the elements included in these proposals focus on measures specific to host states. 4 Structured Discussions on Investment Facilitation, Communication from Brazil, JOB/GC/169. World Trade Organization. 31 January Presentation by Collette Van der Ven, at ICTSD Roundtable on WTO: Paths Forward. Towards a Shared Vision on Investment Facilitation. Geneva, 5 March Crafting a Framework on Investment Facilitation June 2018

5 Table 1. Summary of elements in investment facilitation proposals submitted at the WTO (March 2018) Outside the scope of investment facilitation Principles Transparency Administrative Procedures International Cooperation and Implementation Investment protection rules Market access and right to establish Investor-state dispute settlement Most favoured nation treatment Right to regulate Publish: - laws and regulations of general investment application affecting investments; - texts or abstract of public policies affecting investments - fees and charges / and information on procedures / relevant contacts / time-frames Allow prior comments during notification period Establish National Focal Point to: - provide information relevant to investment - assist investors with reasonable enquiries, and to mediate complaints - recommend to relevant authorities policies to improve enabling environment for investment - to operate and maintain Single Electronic Window Digitise documents and procedures: - allow electronic documents and electronic signatures to have same legal effect as paper documents - endeavour to reach highest possible level of digitisation of procedures - establish single electronic window mechanism- to manage investment application process, for one stop approval, and to publish relevant investment policy information Notify to investment facilitation committee: the web address of the Single Electronic Window, and contact information of national focal point Reserve right to non-disclosure of sensitive information Establish transparent and objective criteria for investment applications: - decision by national agency not subject to DSU Streamline and create predictable investment application procedures / provide decisions in set timeframes Ensure application fees are transparent and reasonable Inform reasons for decision, allow possibility to resubmit with completed information, and to appeal Enhance coordination among domestic regulatory institutions Facilitate entry and sojourn of personnel relating to investment Enhance investor access to basic public infrastructure Safeguard Special & Differential Treatment Use Trade Facilitation Agreement type categories to schedule and sequence implementation by (L)DCs Provide technical assistance and capacity building to implement obligations by (L)DCs Encourage corporate social responsibility Facilitate cooperation of national focal points Establish WTO committee on investment facilitation Establish open-ended working groups to discuss more specific issues Allow members to self-assess ability to implement rules Create basis to discuss future market access and treatment disciplines Improve screening efficiency and policy support of outward investments to (L)DCs Note: Grey italic = provision included in select older proposals Source: Compiled by ICTSD. 5

6 If one of the purposes of the framework is to enhance information flow among all relevant stakeholders to optimise the mutual benefits from investment decision-making, then commitments related to transparency, procedures, and information-sharing should not be made exclusively by the host state. The E15 policy options paper (Sauvant 2016) therefore advocates for a more active role by other stakeholders, including multinational enterprises (MNEs) and home states. The following options are examples of transparency-related measures that could be considered. Investor transparency With the exception of referring to voluntary compliance to CSR, there are no investor transparency provisions in any of the proposals tabled at the WTO so far. Given that host states are not only eager to attract investment but also seek to the maximise benefits from this capital, access to information that could help determine the characteristics of incoming investment and the prospective impact within the economy would be of interest to most countries. Transparency provisions therefore should not only be applied to make host state level information easily available, but equally importantly to allow access to information on the nature of the investment. For example, through a focal point, MNEs could make available comprehensive information on CSR programmes and the observance of international investment instruments such as the International Labour Organization (ILO) Tripartite Declaration, 6 the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) MNE Guidelines, 7 and the United Nations Global Compact. Home state measures The E15 Task Force on Investment Policy has emphasised that investors would find transparency important not only as far as host countries are concerned, but also regarding the policies and measures of home countries. Designated national focal points could be established in important home countries to make comprehensive information available on the measures that support or restrict outgoing investments. Sauvant et al. (2014) offer a list of the types of facilitation-related support services that are provided to outward investors by home countries. Establish commentary group to flesh out additional elements Additional provisions could be identified based on the experiences of countries implementing reforms at the domestic level, and through the integration of facilitation provisions in international treaties such as BITs, RTAs, IIAs, as well as voluntary measures included in alternative arrangements such as the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. Identifying and reviewing these provisions would enable WTO members to undertake an informed discussion on the elements to be included or removed from the investment facilitation framework, and also help ensure the selection of provisions that have proved effective in improving the enabling conditions needed to attract sustainable and mutually beneficial investment. To operationalise this effort, Sauvant (2018) recommends the establishment of a commentary group that would consist primarily of downstream actors investment promotion agencies and investors to provide ground-level feedback into discussions at the WTO. 3.3 Consider the level of ambition when creating the framework When discussing the range of provisions that could be included in a multilateral framework, members will have to determine the level of ambition they expect from such an agreement. One option is to pursue a low-hanging fruit approach, agree on provisions that are easier to implement, and could garner broad support at an early stage. Such a framework would be the lowest common denominator. Another option put forward in the Brazilian investment facilitation proposal proposes a baseline framework that includes a flexible process to generate and integrate more ambitious provisions at a later stage (ICTSD 2018). The text recommends that an investment facilitation committee be established 6 ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy. 7 OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. 6 Crafting a Framework on Investment Facilitation June 2018

7 with, inter alia, the responsibility to establish open-ended working groups to discuss specific issues pertinent to the implementation of this Agreement. 8 The process could enable countries to form smaller coalitions committing to more ambitious disciplines, and facilitate the dissemination of lessons and experiences to the wider membership through the committee. Alternatively, members could strive for a high ambition agreement. This would most likely entail considerable weight being placed on capacity building and technical assistance which would need to be funded. 3.4 Options to operationalise the joint statement While the joint statement calls on members to begin structured discussions toward the development of a multilateral framework on investment facilitation, it does not pre-determine that this framework should necessarily be negotiated and enforced at the WTO. 9 In order to determine the appropriate venue to negotiate investment facilitation provisions, members must first assess the value of implementing investment facilitation provisions on a best endeavours basis or as binding disciplines (Figure 3). Figure 3. Options for implementation of an investment facilitation framework Binding Disciplines Best Endeavor Multilateral Plurilateral Multilateral Plurilateral Amend WTO Agreements- TFA/GATS WTO PTAs WTO Negotiate Separate Sustainable Investment Facilitation Critical Mass Agreement Plurilateral Agreement Investment cooperation structure Investment cooperation structure among coalition of the willing If members determine that the measures should be implemented as best endeavours, then intergovernmental organisations other than the WTO could be better adapted to the initiative. Brauch (2017) argues that UNCTAD is best placed to develop an international cooperation structure on investment facilitation. Having published an action menu on investment facilitation (UNCTAD 2016), the agency has the experience as well the mandate of its 194 members to develop and implement such a framework. Proponents who argue that investment facilitation measures should be negotiated and enforced as binding disciplines, underline the important role that international obligations can play towards catalysing and locking institutional reforms at the domestic level. The WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) is presented as an example of the important role binding disciplines can play in instigating more effective and standardised reform efforts. 8 Structured Discussions on Investment Facilitation, Communication from Brazil, JOB/GC/169. World Trade Organization. 31 January Joint Ministerial Statement on Investment Facilitation for Development, WT/MIN(17)/59. Eleventh Ministerial Conference, World Trade Organization. 13 December

8 Multilateral avenue If members determine that binding investment facilitation disciplines are desirable and that they should be pursued at the multilateral level, then the WTO is at present the venue through which to negotiate and enforce such an agreement. The international investment regime, due to its fragmented nature with over 3,300 bilateral investment treaties, provides no equivalent platform. The E15 Task Force on Investment Policy report (Sauvant 2016) has outlined a set of options available for implementing investment facilitation provisions at the multilateral level. First, members could consider amending existing WTO agreements. The TFA could be expanded to cover investment so as to become an Investment and Trade Facilitation Agreement. This could perhaps be done through an interpretation of the agreement, or by amending an investment module onto the TFA. To further explore this option, a subsidiary body of the Committee on Trade Facilitation could be established to consult on how to operate the investment module as part of the TFA. The commercial presence provisions (mode 3) of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) could also be considered for amendment. It is estimated that two-thirds of global FDI stock is regulated through these provisions. Deepening mode 3 commitments would thus have an important effect. The second option seen by the E15 Task Force as the preferable option would be to create a separate sustainable investment facilitation agreement modelled on and as a complement to the TFA. It would focus on practical ways to encourage the flow of sustainable FDI to developing countries. To complement these approaches, the E15 Task Force put forward a third option which would consist in expanding the Aid for Trade initiative to include investment facilitation. This would enable better coordination of donor funding towards providing technical assistance and capacity building for the implementation of obligations, especially for least developed countries. Plurilateral avenue in the WTO Should WTO members be unable to unanimously agree to launch negotiations at the multilateral level, then a plurilateral route may have to be considered. There are two potential options when pursuing a plurilateral approach at the WTO. Critical Mass Agreement (CMA): A subset of countries could launch negotiations without the unanimous consensus of all WTO members. The commitments would apply only to the subset, whereas the benefits would have to extend to all WTO members on a most favoured nation (MFN) basis. There is, however, a lack of clarity on whether the legal authority exists to deepen commitments on investment facilitation. At present, the CMA approach can only be clearly applied to deepen and extend commitments under the GATS, and are not applicable to other agreements. (Bollyky 2015). Plurilateral Agreement: The second option is a plurilateral agreement among a subset of members who negotiate disciplines on a non-mfn basis. This route could only be taken if the decision to launch such negotiations is unanimously agreed by all members. A risk with this approach is that many non-members may fear having to join the agreement at a later date, and could therefore seek to weaken the agreement s ambition in exchange for consensus (Bollyky 2015). Plurilateral trade agreement outside the WTO If the CMA and plurilateral agreement approaches are not feasible, then countries could explore the option of negotiating a plurilateral trade agreement outside the WTO, with an investment facilitation package as a central feature. Bollyky (2015) outlines the challenges of pursuing an agreement outside the WTO. While CMAs and plurilateral agreements can be issue specific, PTAs must cover substantially all trade in goods and sectoral coverage of services to qualify under the WTO exception for PTAs (GATT Article XXI). There is a lack of access to broader WTO mechanisms including committees and dispute and transparency mechanisms. Finally pursuing the approach outside the WTO could likely lead to more trade diversion given the lack of access to non-members. 8 Crafting a Framework on Investment Facilitation June 2018

9 4. Conclusion This policy brief has identified key insights from knowledge generated by ICTSD intended to help ensure that any future investment facilitation framework is effective and conducive to achieving sustainable development outcomes. More analysis and technical works remains to be done, and the WTO: Paths Forward initiative of which this paper is part aims to provide a platform for informed discussions that could lead to the establishment of a comprehensive investment facilitation framework that maximises the benefits for countries that need it most. Table 2. Summary of issues and options Issue Current Status and Gap How to Get there Strengthen the sustainable development dimension Identify and develop a broader set of elements to include in the investment facilitation framework International frameworks can no longer be developed in isolation from the broader SDGs committed by the international community. An international support framework on investment facilitation should therefore not only focus on the facilitation of investment flows, but more importantly on the facilitation of sustainable investment for sustainable development. Proposals, at present, focus on host state obligations. If the purpose of the framework is to facilitate mutually beneficial investments, then transparency in relation to all stakeholders participating in the transaction will need to be improved. Clarify sustainable development outcomes expected from each provision included in framework. Home states could play larger role supporting the facilitation of higher quality FDI. Could provide support services to the outward investors that meet certain characteristics of higher quality FDI. Include transparency provisions collecting information on MNE contribution toward SDGs. Focal point, for example, could collect information on how MNEs meet sustainability characteristics. Include transparency provisions required from a home country perspective. Focal point could make comprehensive information available on measures that support or restrict outgoing investments. Consider the level of ambition when creating framework When discussing the range of provisions which could be included, members will have to determine the level of ambition they expect from such an agreement. Establish commentary group convening principle downstream actors IPAs and investors to provide concrete, ground-level feedback on potential provisions to be included in framework. Consider baseline framework that may be easier to agree on and less expensive to implement. Could be regarded as lowest common denominator type agreement with limited effect. Consider baseline framework with flexible process to generate and integrate more ambitious provisions at later stage. Consider high-ambition agreement focused on maximising impact. Would countries come on board, would it be too expensive to implement such an agreement? 9

10 Table 3. Summary of options to operationalise an investment facilitation framework Level Binding Non-Binding Multilateral Amend/Expand TFA or GATS - Creates close alignment between trade and investment facilitation measures, a means to respond to the needs of today s world economy - Catalyses deep-rooted, standardised and longerlasting institutional and regulatory reforms - Mobilises and channels technical assistance and capacity building toward standardised reform efforts - Member states would presumably wish to gather some experience with the operation of the TFA before expanding it - Functions and types of institutions targeted differ when implementing trade and investment facilitation Negotiate separate Investment Facilitation Agreement at the WTO - Creates close alignment between trade and investment facilitation measures, is a means to respond to the needs of today s world economy - Catalyses deep-rooted, standardised and longerlasting institutional and regulatory reforms - Mobilises and channels technical assistance and capacity building toward standardised reform efforts Implement investment facilitation cooperation structure - An IGO such as UNCTAD, would have mandate, and expertise to implement an investment facilitation cooperation structure that would coordinate and monitor implementation of investment facilitation policies on best endeavour basis - Best endeavour reform efforts have been criticised for not instigating deep-rooted, effective and standardised reforms Plurilateral - Unanimous consensus needed to launch negotiations on new issue - Binding disciplines affecting behind-the-border institutions, could be regarded as over-reach and beyond mandate of the WTO WTO Critical Mass Agreement - No unanimous consensus needed for subset of members to launch negotiations - Investment facilitation provisions are well-suited to be granted on an MFN basis - Lack of clear legal authority on whether members can negotiate on investment facilitation measures G20 Adopt Guiding Principles for Global Investment Facilitation - Overall guidance, and the advancing of a coherent agenda at the international level 10 Crafting a Framework on Investment Facilitation June 2018

11 Table 3. Continued Level Binding Non-Binding Plurilateral WTO Plurilateral Agreement - Subset of countries could negotiate disciplines on a non-mfn basis - Clearer legal authority compared to CMA - Launch of negotiations requires unanimous agreement of all WTO members Plurilateral Trade Agreement - Unmitigated by WTO process requirements Implement investment facilitation cooperation structure among coalition of the willing - Reform efforts undertaken by coalition of the willing - Best endeavour reform efforts have been criticised for not instigating deep-rooted, effective and standardised reforms - Risk of countries being left behind Unilateral/ Bilateral (nonapplicable operationalisation of joint statement) - Cannot be issue specific - Lack of access to WTO mechanisms - Lack of access to non-members Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) - Increasingly challenging to cooperate and coordinate at the global level. This approach is therefore easier to implement - Due to the investment regime s fragmented nature, progress on investment facilitation would be uncoordinated, and achieved in a piecemeal manner - Unable to mobilise capacity building and technical assistance toward standardised and deep-rooted reforms - Risk of countries being left behind Unilateral national reforms / Best endeavour provisions in BITs - Increasingly challenging to cooperate and coordinate at the global level. This approach is therefore easier to implement - Unable to mobilise capacity building and technical assistance toward standardised and deeprooted reforms - Risk of countries being left behind References Bollyky, Thomas J A Role for the World Trade Organization on Regulatory Coherence. E15Initiative. Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and World Economic Forum. Brauch, Martin Dietrich A Risky Tango? Investment facilitation and the WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires. Commentary. International Institute for Sustainable Development. G G20 Leaders Communiqué Hangzhou Summit. 5 September. ICTSD Renewed Debate Emerges Over Global Trade and Investment Frameworks. Bridges Weekly 21(40). Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). ICTSD Brazil Circulates Proposal for WTO Investment Facilitation Deal. Bridges Weekly 22(4). Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). Sauvant, Karl P Towards an Investment Facilitation Framework: Why? What? When? Presentation to the ICTSD Roundtable on WTO: Paths Forward. Towards a Shared Vision on Investment Facilitation. Geneva, 5 March. 11

12 Sauvant, Karl P China Moves the G20 on International Investment. Columbia FDI Perspectives No Available at SSRN: Sauvant, Karl P The Evolving International Investment Law and Policy Regime: Ways Forward. E15 Task Force on Investment Policy Policy Options Paper. E15Initiative. Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and World Economic Forum. Sauvant, Karl P., Persephone Economou, Ksenia Gal, Shawn Lim, and Witold Wilinski Trends in FDI, Home Country Measures and Competitive Neutrality. Yearbook on International Investment Law and Policy New York: Oxford University Press. Sauvant, Karl P. and Khalil Hamdani An International Support Programme for Sustainable Investment Facilitation. E15Initiative. Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and World Economic Forum. Sauvant, Karl P., and Howard Mann Towards an Indicative List of FDI Sustainability Characteristics. E15Initiative. Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and World Economic Forum. World Bank Global Investment Competitiveness Report 2017/2018: Foreign Investor Perspectives and Policy Implications. Washington, DC: World Bank. doi: / License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) UNCTAD Global Action Menu for Investment Facilitation. Geneva: United Nations. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) World Investment Report Geneva: United Nations. Citation: ICTSD Crafting a Framework on Investment Facilitation. WTO: Paths Forward. Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). WTO: Paths Forward WTO: Paths Forward is an ICTSD initiative that builds on the outcomes of the Eleventh Ministerial Conference in December The cycle of publications and events will provide a platform for discussion and analysis on possible options for WTO-based processes going forward and into the Twelfth Ministerial Conference in The issues selected for the initial series of policy briefs are agriculture, development, disciplines on domestic regulations in services, e-commerce, fisheries subsidies, fossil fuel subsidies, and investment facilitation. Lead authors in the production of policy briefs under the WTO: Paths Forward initiative are Björn Dupong, Judith Fessehaie, Jonathan Hepburn, Rashmi Jose, Felipe Sandoval, and Alice Tipping. Editorial contributors are Christophe Bellmann, Andrew Crosby, Ingrid Sidenvall Jegou, and Ricardo Meléndez-Ortiz. Oleg Smerdov is responsible for layout and Colette Holden for proofing. Series Senior Editor and Production Manager is Fabrice Lehmann; overall Direction by Ricardo Meléndez-Ortiz. ICTSD welcomes comments and feedback on this policy brief. These can be sent to flehmann@ictsd.ch. About ICTSD The International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) is an independent think-and-do-tank, engaged in the provision of information, research and analysis, and policy and multistakeholder dialogue, as a notfor-profit organisation based in Geneva, Switzerland; with offices in Beijing and Brussels, and global operations. Established in 1996, ICTSD s mission is to ensure that trade and investment policy and frameworks advance sustainable development in the global economy. ICTSD is grateful for the support from its core donors including the UK Department for International Development (DFID); the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA); the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (Danida); and the Netherlands Directorate-General of Development Cooperation (DGIS). Copyright ICTSD, Readers are encouraged to quote and reproduce this material for educational and non-profit purposes, provided the source is acknowledged. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivates 4.0 International Licence. To view a copy of this licence, visit: creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ISSN Crafting a Framework on Investment Facilitation June 2018