POLICY FRAMEWORK 2015_WEB_1

both positive and negative. Moreover, a lack of consideration in standard business school teachings of the challenges associated with operating in poor countries, and the resulting need for innovative problem solving, tend to leave managers ill-prepared for pro-poor investments. These factors contribute to a paradoxical situation where even the majority of students interested in social entrepreneurship end up starting projects in middleto high-income countries, and most impact investments – investments with objectives that explicitly include social or environmental returns – are located in mature markets. A curriculum for business schools that generates awareness of investment opportunities in poor countries and that instills in students the problem solving skills needed in developingcountry operating environments will have an important long-term impact.

UNCTAD, in partnership with business school networks, teachers, students as well as corporates, is currently running an initiative to develop an “impact curriculum” for MBAs and management schools, and a platform for knowledge sharing, exchange of teaching materials and pooling of “pro-poor” internship opportunities in LDCs. UNCTAD invites all stakeholders who can contribute to join the partnership. See business- schools-for-impact.org/.

c. The World Investment Forum: Investing in Sustainable Development

Established in 2008, the UNCTAD World Investment Forum is a high-level, biennial, multi-stakeholder gathering designed to facilitate dialogue and action on the world’s key and emerging investment-related challenges. It strives to fill a gap in the global economic governance architecture by establishing a global platform for engaging policymakers, the private sector, and other stakeholders at the highest level on investment issues and is recognized by governments and business leaders as the most important event for the international investment community.

The WIF has significant outcomes and impact:

•The Forum shapes the future agenda for policymaking in investment for development. For instance the Chairman’s summary of the 2014 World Investment Forum was formally sent to the United Nations General Assembly to feed into the Conference on Financing for Development, the Sustainable Development Goals Summit, and the future COP21 in Paris.

•The Forum serves as a launchpad for major international initiatives to address current and emerging challenges in the area of investment for development. For instance, the 2014 Forum served as a platform to mobilize the private sector and channel its contribution to the implementation of the SDGs, including by launching new initiatives such as the New partnership on investing in sustainable cities.

T H E W A Y F O R W A R D

151

•The Forum provides crucial answers on how investors in developed and developing countries can face emerging challenges and opportunities. For instance, the 2010 Forum was the occasion to launch a programme on “Green Foreign Direct Investment”.

•The Forum provides unique opportunities for global investors and policymakers to hold official bilateral meetings, network informally and exchange ideas which lead to new initiatives, partnerships and concrete investment projects. Over 50 bilateral meetings were formally organized in margin of the 2014 Forum.

•The Forum provides a unique international platform to showcase countries’ investment opportunities to the investors’ community and conclude major deals with global TNCs. For instance, the 2012 World Investment Forum was the occasion for Qatar to consolidate its links with the International Chamber of Commerce and prepare the ICC annual Conference in Doha, for Comoros and Nestlé to conclude a partnership for the production of Vanilla, and for Nestlé and Mc Kinsey to re-open operations in Tunisia.

•The Forum generates considerable media attention, including in the Business and Financial press. For instance the WIF2014 generated over 270 articles in global media.

The World Investment Forum brings together stakeholders from all angles of the investment-development community, including Heads of State and ministers, CEOs of global transnational corporations, market regulators, stock exchange executives, investment promotion agencies, investment treaty negotiators, investment lawyers, private and institutional investors, corporate executives, sovereign wealth fund managers, private equity funds managers, social entrepreneurs, mayors from mega cities and prominent parliamentarians, academics in the area of international business, economics and law, and international media.

	Number/Year		2010 (Xiamen)		2012 (Doha)
	Registered participants	1800		1400
	Heads of States , Government
		9		8
	and Speakers of the House
	Ministers
		79		42
	CEOs and global business
		60		30
	executives
	Represented countries
		120		145

2014 (Geneva)

3000

7

43

59

170

T H E W A Y F O R W A R D

152

The increasing attendance to the Forum reflects its relevance for a broader coalition of investment stakeholders eager to contribute to responsible investment and sustainable development. It illustrates the Forum’s pre-eminence on the global investment calendar and confirms the need for a global platform on investment-development issues.

For more information, please visit http://unctad-worldinvestmentforum.org/. The site includes information on and footage of previous World Investment Forums, as well as copies of previous World Investment Forum reports.

T H E W A Y F O R W A R D

153

NOTES

1 Many successful developing countries maintained a significant level of government influence over the direction of economic growth and development throughout; see UNCTAD (2011). Development-led globalization: Towards sustainable and inclusive development paths, Report of the Secretary-General of UNCTAD to UNCTAD XIII.

2The G-20, in its 2010 Seoul declaration, asked international organizations (specifically, UNCTAD, WTO and OECD) to monitor the phenomenon of investment protectionism.

3See Sauvant, K.P. (2009). “FDI Protectionism Is on the Rise,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 5052.

4For example, the World Bank’s Guidelines on the Treatment of Foreign Direct Investment, the OECD’s Policy Framework for Investment (PFI), and instruments developed by various regional organizations and NGOs.

5These include, inter alia, the UN Global Compact, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, the IFC’s Sustainability Framework and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

6See ILO Global Employment Trends 2012, available on www.ilo.org.

7See, for example, UNCTAD (2011). “Promoting investment for development: Best practices in strengthening investment in basic infrastructure in developing countries,” note by the UNCTAD secretariat to the Investment, Enterprise and Development Commission, TD/B/C.II/14, www.unctad.org.

8United Nations (2013). Report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda.

9India, for example, requires the largest 100 listed companies on its major stock exchanges to report on environmental and social impacts.

10For example, the Johannesburg Stock Exchange

in South Africa. Many other exchanges, such as BM&FBovespa in Brazil, have actively promoted voluntary mechanisms such as reporting standards and indices to incentivize corporate sustainability reporting.

11 Producer of the most widely used sustainability reporting guidelines. According to a 2013 KPMG study, 93% of the world’s largest 250 companies issue a CR report, of which 82% refer to the GRI Guidelines. Three-quarters of the largest 100 companies in 41 countries produce CR reports, with 78% of these referring to the GRI Guidelines; KPMG, Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2013.

12 A global system for companies and cities to measure, disclose, manage and share environmental information and host to the Climate Disclosure Standards Board. Over 4,000 companies world-wide use the CDP reporting system.

13 Producer of the International Integrated Reporting Framework, recognises sustainability as a contributor to value creation.

14Works to catalyze action by the finance, accounting and investor community to support a fundamental shift towards resilient business models and a sustainable economy.

15Provides standards for use by publicly-listed corporations in the United States in disclosing material sustainability issues for the benefit of investors and the public.

16 The Sustainable Stock Exchanges (SSE) initiative is a joint initiative coordinated by UNCTAD, the UN Global Compact, UNEP Finance Initiative and the UN-supported Principles for Responsible Investment. For more information, please visit www.SSEinitiative. org.

17Based on Doran, G.T. (1981). “There’s a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management’s goals and objectives,” Management Review, 70 (11), pp. 35-36.

18The universe of “core IIAs” principally consists of

N O T E S

154

BITs and other agreements that contain provisions on investment, so-called “other IIAs”. Examples of the latter include free trade agreements (FTAs) or economic partnership agreements (EPAs). As regards their substantive obligations, “other IIAs”, usually fall into one of three categories: IIAs including obligations commonly found in BITs; agreements with limited investment-related provisions; and IIAs focusing on investment cooperation and/or providing for future negotiating mandate on investment. In addition to “core IIAs”, there are numerous other legal instruments that matter for foreign investment, including double taxation treaties (DTTs).

19 Examples include the interaction between IIAs and other bodies of international law or policy in the field of public health (e.g. the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, WHO FCTC), environment (e.g. the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes) or human rights (e.g. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), to name a few. In the context of ensuring coherence between investment protection and climate change, WIR10 suggested a “multilateral declaration” clarifying that IIAs do not constrain climate change measures enacted in good faith.

20 In some countries the existence of an IIA is a prerequisite for the granting of investment guarantees.

21 This impact is generally stronger in the case of preferential trade and investment agreements (PTIAs) than with regards to BITs. See UNCTAD (2009). “The Role of International Investment Agreements in Attracting Foreign Direct Investment to Developing Countries,” UNCTAD Series on International Investment Policies for Development. New York and Geneva: United Nations. See also UNCTAD (2014). "The Impact of International Investment Agreements on Foreign Direct Investment: An Overview of Empirical Studies 1998-2014”, IIA Issues Note - working draft. http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/. For a full discussion of FDI determinants, see WIR98.

22 See also Poulsen, L.N.S. and E. Aisbett (2011). “When the Claim Hits: Bilateral Investment Treaties and Bounded Rational Learning.” Crawford School Research Paper No. 5.

23UNCTAD (2015). "Recent trends in IIAs and ISDS", IIA Issues Note, No. 1, p. 5.

24As discussed in WIR04, interaction can be either autonomous-liberalization-led or IIA-driven, or anywhere in-between.

25This is in line with the traditional view of international law, as governing relations between its subjects, primarily between States. Accordingly, it is impossible for an international treaty to impose obligations on private actors (investors), which are not parties to the treaty (even though they are under the jurisdiction of the respective contracting parties).

26Article 13 “Investor Obligation” provides: “COMESA investors and their investments shall comply with all applicable domestic measures of the Member State in which their investment is made.”

27UN Human Rights Council Resolution A/HRC/ RES/26/9, “Elaboration of an International Legally Binding Instrument on Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises with respect to Human Rights”, adopted on 26 June 2014 (dated 14 July 2014).

28In fact, in the course of the past century, international law has been moving away from the traditional, strict view towards including, where appropriate, non-State actors into its sphere. See, e.g., Bianchi, A. (2009).

Non-State Actors and International Law. Dartmouth: Ashgate.

29Also the 2012 Revision of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Guidelines for International Investment refer to investors’ obligations to comply with the laws and regulations of the host State at all times and, in particular, to their obligation to comply with national and international labour laws, even where these are not effectively enforced by the host State.

N O T E S

155

30 The two numbers refer to the aggregate amounts of compensation claimed and obtained by the three claimants constituting the majority shareholders of former Yukos Oil Company in the ISDS proceedings against the Russian Federation. See Hulley Enterprises Limited (Cyprus) v. The Russian Federation, UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 226, Award, 18 July 2014; Yukos Universal Limited (Isle of Man) v. The Russian Federation, UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 227, Award, 18 July 2014; Veteran Petroleum Limited (Cyprus) v. The Russian Federation, UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 228, Award, 18 July 2014.

31 Nottage, H. (2003). "Trade and Competition in the WTO: Pondering the Applicability of Special and Differential Treatment", Journal of International Economic Law, 6 (1), p. 28.

32Based on six categories as identified in WTO (2000) “Implementation of Special and Differential Treatment Provisions in WTO Agreements and Decisions,” Note by Secretariat, WT/COMTD/W/77, 25 October 2000, available at www.wto.org. More recently, also the Doha Ministerial Declaration (2001) reaffirmed SDT as an integral part of the multilateral trade regime.

33COMESA Investment Agreement (2007), Article 14(3).

34 For details, see UNCTAD (2011). “Sovereign Debt Restructuring and International Investment Agreements,” IIA Issues Note, No. 2. www.unctad. org. Abaclat and others v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/5, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 4 August 2011.

35Any comprehensive effort to reform the ISDS regime would also have to go beyond IIA clauses, and address other rules, including those for conducting international arbitrations (e.g. ICSID or UNCITRAL).

36Experience with ISDS has revealed numerous instances of unclear or ambiguous clauses that risk being interpreted in an unanticipated and broad manner. Therefore the table includes options to clarify. However, these clarifications should not be used by arbitrators to interpret earlier clauses that

lack clarifications in broad and open-ended manner.

37 Absence of ISDS – and hence of the possibility to be subject to financial liabilities arising from ISDS – may make it easier for countries to agree to certain standards of protection.

38Similarly, one can combine far-reaching liberalization or protection clauses with a possibility to lodge reservations (e.g. for preand post-establishment clauses, and for existing and future measures). See UNCTAD (2006). “Preserving Flexibility in IIAs: The Use of Reservations”, UNCTAD Series on International Investment Policies for Development. New York and Geneva: United Nations.

39Sachs, J.D. (2012). "From Millenium Development Goals to Sustainable Development Goals", Lancet, 379: 2206–2211 (p. 2209).

40OECD (2009). Private Sector Participation in Infrastructure. Paris: OECD.

41World Bank (2013). Financing for Development Post2015. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, p. 32.

42World Bank (2012). Inclusive Green Growth: The Pathway to Sustainable Development. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, p. 4.

43Examples and case studies can be found in UNDP 2008. Sharing innovative experiences: Examples of successful public-private partnerships; World Bank (2009). The role and impact of Public-Private partnerships in education. Washington, D.C.: World Bank; IFC (2011). IFC support to Health Public-Private Partnerships. Washington, D.C.: World Bank; UNECE (2012). Discussion paper: A preliminary reflection on the best practice in PPP in Healthcare sector.

44Griffiths, J., M. Martin, J. Pereira, T. Strawson (2014). “Financing for development post-2015: Improving the contribution of private finance”. Study requested by the European Parliament’s Committee on Development. Brussels: European Union, p. 32.

45There exist a number of useful guides, for instance World Bank (2009). Public-private partnerships: Reference Guide. Washington, D.C.: World Bank;

N O T E S

156

UNECE (2008). Guidebook on promoting good governance in PPPs. New York and Geneva: United Nations.

46 Export Finance and Insurance Corporation (2014). “Environmental and social responsibility”. http://stpf. efic.gov.au; Oesterreichische Kontrollbank (2012). “Austrian Environmental and Social Assessment Procedure“. http://www.oekb.at; Delcredere/Ducroire (2014). “Delcredere/Ducroire’s Environmental and Social Policy”. http://www.delcredereducroire. be; Nippon Export and Investment Insurance (2009). “Guidelines on Environmental and Social Considerations in Trade Insurance”. http://nexi. go.jp; Atradius Dutch State Business (2014). “Environmentaland social aspects”. http://www. atradiusdutchstatebusiness.nl; UK Export Finance (2014). “Guidance to Applicants: Processes and Factors in UK Export Finance Consideration of Applications”. https://www.gov.uk; Overseas Private Investment Corporation (2010). “OPIC – Environmental and Social Policy Statement”. http://www.opic.gov/ sites/default/files/consolidated_esps.pdf.

47 Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (2014). “Environmental and Social Sustainability”. http:// www.miga.org.

48UN ECOSOC (2013). Public aid as a driver for private investment.

49Eurodad (2014). A dangerous blend? The EU’s agenda to ‘blend’ public development finance with private finance. Brussels: Eurodad.

50Griffiths, J., M. Martin, J. Pereira, T. Strawson (2014). “Financing for development post-2015: Improving the contribution of private finance”. Study requested by the European Parliament’s Committee on Development. Brussels: European Union, p. 35.

51UN DESA (2012). World Economic and Social Survey 2012: In Search of New Development Finance. New York: United Nations, p. 60.

52United Nations (2009). Innovative Financing for development: the I–8 group. New York: United Nations.

53See WIR14.

54Some typologies differentiate between social and impact investment, with the former stressing the generation of societal value, and the latter profit, but the distinction is not clear (a mix of impact and profit prevails in both types); many organisations and institutions use the terms interchangeably.

55The Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria has secured pledges of about US$30 billion since its creation in 2002, and over 60% of pledges have been paid to date World Bank (2013). Financing for Development Post-2015. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, p. 19.

56The Global Environment Fund GEF - a partnership between 182 countries, international agencies, civil society, and private sector - has provided US$11.5 billion in grants since its creation in 1991 and leveraged US$57 billion in co-financing for over 3,215 projects in over 165 countries (the World Bank, 2013: 19).

57www.aecfafrica.org

58http://www.gavialliance.org/funding/give-to-gavi/ gavi-matching-fund/

59http://www.iffim.org/bonds/

60http://www.climatewise.org.uk/storage/climatewisedocs/Fixed_Income_Statement.pdf

61http://research.crowdsourcing.Org/2013cf- crowdfunding-industry-report

62www.kiva.org

Typeset, figures and cover designed by Pablo Cortizo.

N O T E S

157