Expropriation in the 21st Century – New Challenge for Political Risk Analysis
https://doi.org/10.31249/kgt/2022.01.15
Abstract
The article treats expropriation as the main political risk for international business, which was scientifically conceptualized following the decolonization period and marked by the shift in development strategies of the third world countries. With the end of the third wave of democratization, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the active liberalization of new markets, research interest in political risks, including threats of expropriation of foreign capital, weakened, giving way to mainly economic indicators of the investment climate. In recent years, however, with the increasing geopolitical turbulence and escalating trade and diplomatic conflicts, political factors are being brought into the foreground of country risk profiles.
In line with the expert discussions on the return of political risk, this article addresses the issue of the relevance of expropriation threats and reveals their modern nature. It focuses on the development of implicit mechanisms of state dispossessions and their current geographical distribution, which is no longer limited by the emerging markets. Based on the analysis of international arbitration cases, the article proves the modern relevancy and importance of both direct and creeping expropriations. It also stresses the necessity of the adaptation of political risk analysis methodology in accordance with the recent evolution of government takings, marked by the modification of its sources and fundamental political motivations. At the same time, the conducted analysis of scientific research in Russia reveals a noticeable gap in this direction and emphasizes this urgent need for reconsideration of political risk theory in order to bring it in line with current nature of direct and indirect forms of expropriation.
About the Author
A. N. Bordovskikh
School of Public Administration of the Moscow University Lomonosov
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anastasia N. Bordovskikh, PhD in Politics, Senior Researcher
119991, Lomonossovsky prospect 27/4 Moscow
References
1. Azzimonti M., Sarte P-D.G. (2007). Barriers to Foreign Direct Investment Under Political Instability. Economic Quarterly, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 287–315. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/6993656.pdf, accessed 18.05.2021.
2. Bekefi T., Epstein M.J. (2006). Integrating Social and Political Risk Into DecisioMaking. Toronto: CMA Canada, 47 pp.
3. Danino R. (2005). Making the most of the International Investment Agreements: A Common Agenda. Opening remarks to ICSID, OECD and UNCTAD Symposium, Paris: OECD. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/internationalinvestmentagreements/36053800.pdf, accessed 18.05.2021.
4. Dolzer R., Stevens M. (1995). Bilateral Investment Treaties. Boston: M. Nijhoff, 326 pp.
5. Erkan M. (2011). International Energy Investment Law. Stability through Contractual Clauses. Alfen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 440 pp.
6. Hajzler C. (2010). Expropriation of Foreign Direct Investments: Sectoral Patterns from 1993 to 2006 // Economic Discussion Papers, University of Otago. DOI: 10.1007/s10290-011-0103-0
7. ICSID (2021). The ICSID Caseload. Statistics, issue 1. Available at: https://icsid.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/publications/The%20ICSID%20Caseload%20Statistics%20%282021-1%20Edition%29%20ENG.pdf, accessed 08.02.2021.
8. Kobrak Ch., Hansen P.H., Kopper Ch. (2004). Business Political Risk and Historians. Kobrak Ch., Hansen P.H. (eds). European Business, Dictatorship, and Political Risk, 1920–1945. New York: Berghahn Books, pp. 1–21.
9. Kobrin S. (1984). Expropriation as an Attempt to Control Foreign Firms in LDC: Trends from 1960-1979. International Studies Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 329–348.
10. Kobrin S.J. (1976). Nationalism as a Determinant of the Political Risk of Foreign Investment. Working Paper, Sloan School of Management, no. 876, 27 pp. Available at: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/48566, accessed 18.05.2020.
11. Kobrin, S.J. (1980). Foreign enterprise and forced divestment in LDCs. International Organization, vol. 34, issue 1, pp. 65–88.
12. MIGA (2013). World Invesment and Political Risk Report. New York: The World Bank, 88 pp. Available at: https://www.miga.org/sites/default/files/archive/Documents/WIPR13.pdf, accessed 18.05.2021.
13. Minor M.S. (1994). The Demise of Expropriation as an Instrument of LDC Policy, 1980–1992. Journal of International Business Studies, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 177– 188.
14. Nikiè ma S.H. (2012). Best Practices. Indirect Expropriation. Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development, 23 pp. Available at https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/best_practice_indirect_expropriation.pdf , accessed 18.05.2021.
15. O’Sullivan R. (2005). Learning from OPIC’s Experience with Claims and Arbitration. T. Moran, G. West (eds.). International Political Risk Management. Looking to the Future. Washington, DC: The World Bank, pp. 30–74.
16. OECD (2004). “Indirect Expropriation” and the “Right to Regulate” in International Investment Law. OECD Working Papers on International Investment, N 04. DOI: 10.1787/780155872321.
17. Rethinking Bilateral Investment Treaties. Critical Issues and Policy Choice (2016). Singh K. and Ilge B. (eds.). Amsterdam: Both Ends / New Dehli: Madhyam, xvii + 276 pp.
18. Root F. (1968). US Business Abroad and Political Risk. MSU Business Topics, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 73–80.
19. Simon J.D. (1984). A Theoretical Perspective on Political Risk. Journal of International Business Studies, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 123–143.
20. Stiglitz J. (2003). In the shadow of globalization. International Journal of Management Theory and Practice, no. 2, pp. 17– 20 (in Russian).
21. Torre, de la J., Neckar D.H. (1986). Forecasting Political Risk for International Operations, Fontainebleau: INSEAD, 51 pp. Available at: https://flora.insead.edu/fichiersti_wp/Inseadwp1986/86-08.pdf, accessed 18.05.2021.
22. UNCTAD (2006). World Investment Report 2006. FDI from Developing and Transition Economies: Implications for Development, New York; Geneva: United Nations, xxxii + 340 pp. Available at: https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/wir2006_en.pdf, accessed 18.05.2021.
23. UNCTAD (2018). Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Review of Developments in 2017. IIA Issues Note, issue 2, 39 pp. Available at: https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/diaepcbinf2018d2_en.pdf, accessed 18.05.2021.
24. Vandevelde K.J. (2010). Bilateral Investment Treaties: History, Policy and Interpretation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 562 pp.
Review
For citations:
Bordovskikh A.N. Expropriation in the 21st Century – New Challenge for Political Risk Analysis. Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law. 2022;15(1):298-313. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31249/kgt/2022.01.15
Views:
488
Email this article 