Is It Chilly Out There? International Investment Agreements and Government Regulatory Autonomy [AIB Insights Vol 16 No 1 (2016 Q1)]

AIB Insights Vol. 16, No. 1 ConCerns ThaT inTernaTional invesTmenT agreements (IIAs) impact a government’s right to regulate and lead to “regulatory chill” have once again surfaced in the wake of the negotiations on the Pacific Rim’s Transpacific Partnership (TTP) and the US-EU Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). These concerns are not new and have persisted since NAFTA Chapter 11 on investment highlighted the threat of private access to international arbitration through investor state dispute settlement provisions (ISDS) and led to unprecedented challenges to government regulations, particularly in the area of health, safety, and the environment (HSE). Are these concerns valid, and to what extent do such trade and investment agreements impact the regulatory development process and lead to regulatory chill? In this essay, I briefly introduce some insight from my on research based on interviews with HSE regulators in Canada, before reflecting on the broader implications for international trade and investment policy and domestic regulatory development in other countries.