Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): An Introduction

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy

  • 233 Accesses

Abstract

While the Investor-State Dispute Settlement System (ISDS) was already under scrutiny for a number of years, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought additional challenges to the global debate.

It may well be that new contractual disruptions and nationalization lead to additional international investment disputes. In spite of the now generalized criticism on ISDS, international arbitration remains the preferred method to resolve ISDS with the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Dispute (ICSID) still administering the largest number of investment cases. A critical examination of the existing ISDS mechanisms is however required. ISDS mechanisms are indeed facing a profound legitimacy crisis. From the duration of the process to the costs involved, or the independence and impartiality of the arbitrators and the accuracy of the decision-making procedure, the arguments against ISDS are legion. One notable alternative would be the use of settlement mechanisms such as conciliation, mediation, or negotiation. These mechanisms have been incorporated in a number of Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs), particularly with China and the EU. The ICSID is also considering a new set of rules for investor-state mediation. Another reform proposal has taken the form of the Draft Code of Conduct for Adjudicators, aimed at enhancing the independence and impartiality of all adjudicators involved in the ISDS process. Other proposed solutions include a regulated use of third-party funding, advisory centers, and a multilateral investment court. All ISDS actors including international organizations and governments are now involved. However, a deeper examination of these solutions is required to identify the practical constraints faced by ISDS. Not to mention that none of the proposed reforms are able the solve present ISDS interrogations and the apparent inaccuracy of a number of decisions in particular. This “Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): Procedural and Substantial Issues” section of our handbook in international investment law and policy proposes to address quite systematically contemporary ISDS issues and reform proposals in a longer-term critical perspective.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    See generally the UNCTAD data for statistics and updates, at: https://unctad.org/topic/investment. See as well the UNCTAD World Investment Reports and, for example, World Investment Report 2016 (2016) Investor nationality: policy challenges, at xii, U.N. Sales No. E.16.I.D.4. https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2016_en.pdf; Langford M, Behn D, Hilleren Lie R (2017) The revolving door in international investment arbitration. J Int Econ Law 20: 301–307; Butler N, Subedi S, (2017) The future of international investment regulation: towards a World Investment Organisation? Neth Int Law Rev 64: 43–46.

  2. 2.

    World Investment Report 2016, p 197–198; Stone SF, Jeon, BN (2000) Foreign direct investment and trade in the Asia-Pacific region: complementarity, distance and regional economic integration. J Econ Integr 15: 461; Chaisse J, Pomfret R (2019) The RCEP and the changing landscape of world trade. Law Dev Rev 12: 162–164.

  3. 3.

    World Investment Report 2018 (2018) Investment and new industrial policies, 2. http://www.iberglobal.com/files/2018/wir2018.pdf. 2.

  4. 4.

    World Investment Report 2019 (2019) Special economic zones. https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2019_overview_en.pdf, p 1–10.

  5. 5.

    Ibid.

  6. 6.

    World Investment Report 2019, 7–9.

  7. 7.

    World Investment Report 2020, International production beyond the pandemic https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2020_overview_en.pdf, p 4.

  8. 8.

    Ibid, p 9.

  9. 9.

    Bakry A (2020) The Covid-19 crisis and investment arbitration: a reflection from the developing countries. Kluwer Arbitration Blog. http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/04/21/the-covid-19-crisis-and-investment-arbitration-a-reflection-from-the-developing-countries/?doing_wp_cron=1598188563.3494489192962646484375; Lovells H (2020) COVID-19: will state measures give rise to a new set of investment claims?. https://www.hoganlovells.com/en/publications/covid-19-will-state-measures-give-rise-to-a-new-set-of-investment-claims

  10. 10.

    Vandevelde KJ (2005) A brief history of international investment agreements. U.C. Davis J Int Law Policy 12: 157, 174–175, 184. Franck SD (2005) The legitimacy crisis in investment treaty arbitration: privatizing public international law through inconsistent decisions. Fordham L Rev 73: 1536; Coe JJ Jr (2003) Taking stock of NAFTA chapter 11 in its tenth year: an interim sketch of selected themes, issues, and methods. Vand J Transnatl L 36: 1385.

  11. 11.

    ICSID (2020) ICSID convention. https://icsid.worldbank.org/resources/rules-and-regulations/convention/overview#:~:text=The%20ICSID%20Convention%20is%20a,by%20the%20first%2020%20States.&text=includes%20final%20provisions%20such%20as,the%20Convention%20(Chapter%20X)

  12. 12.

    World Bank Group (2020) ICSID caseload – statistics 2020, p 6. https://icsid.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/publications/Caseload%20Statistics/en/The%20ICSID%20Caseload%20Statistics%20%282020-1%20Edition%29%20ENG.pdf

  13. 13.

    See World Bank Group, n. 12.; Parra AR (1993) ICSID and new trends in international dispute settlement. Am Soc Int Law Proc 87: 3–4.

  14. 14.

    World Bank Group (2019) ICSID annual report 2019, p 11. https://icsid.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/publications/annual-report/en/ICSID_AR19_CRA_Web_Low_DD.pdf

  15. 15.

    E.T.I Euro Telecom International v. Bolivia, (ICSID, ARB/07/28).

  16. 16.

    ICISD (2018) Working paper #1: proposals for amendment of the ICSID rules. ICSID. https://icsid.worldbank.org/resources/rules-and-regulations/amendments/wp1; ICSID (2019) Working paper #2: proposals for amendment of the ICSID rules. ICSID. https://icsid.worldbank.org/resources/rules-and-regulations/amendments/wp2

  17. 17.

    Norton Rose Fulbright (2017) International arbitration report, p 18. https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/-/media/files/nrf/nrfweb/imported/international-arbitration-review%2D%2D-issue-8.pdf?la=en-us&revision=95faf7c7-da59-45c2-8309-432268bf04e5; van den Berg AJ (2019) Appeal mechanism for ISDS awards: interaction with the New York and ICSID conventions. ICSID Rev Foreign Invest Law J 34: 11.

  18. 18.

    ICSID Annual Report 2019, p 19.

  19. 19.

    See more at Gabriela I, Elisabeta R (2016) The energy charter treaty and settlement of disputes – current challenges. Jurid Trib 6: 72.

  20. 20.

    Id, p 21.

  21. 21.

    ICSID Annual Report 2019, p 22.

  22. 22.

    Id, page 24.

  23. 23.

    Chaisse J (2015) The treaty shopping practice: corporate structuring and restructuring to gain access to investment treaties and arbitration. Hastings Bus LJ 11: 225; See Franck, n. 3, 1536; Klett J (2016) National interest vs. foreign investment – protecting parties through ISDS. Tul J Int Comp Law 25: 214–215.

  24. 24.

    Eliason A (2018) Evidence partiality and the judicial review of investor-state dispute settlement awards: an argument for ISDS reform. Geo J Int Law 50: 1.

  25. 25.

    See our handbook first part’s introduction as well as the chapters dedicated to the Indian example in particular with its new BIT model favouring domestic remedies.

  26. 26.

    Wong J (2006) Umbrella clauses in bilateral investment treaties: of breaches of contract, treat violations, and the divide between developing and developed countries in foreign investment disputes. Geo Mason Law Rev 14: 141.

  27. 27.

    Wellhausen RL (2016) Recent trends in investor–state dispute settlement. J Int Disput Settl 7: 119–120.

  28. 28.

    Paulsson J (1986) Arbitration without privity. ICSID Rev Foreign Invest Law J 232; Cheng T (2020) The search for order within chaos in the evolution of ISDS. ICSID Rev Foreign Invest Law J 3; Sornarajah M (2015) Creating jurisdiction beyond consent. In: Resistance and change in the international law on foreign investment. CUP, pp 136–140.

  29. 29.

    A rather controversial example is the Model India BIT 2016 wherein the foreign investor has to institute proceedings before domestic courts and wait for at least 5 years before initiating proceedings before an international tribunal. See Ranjan P, Anand P (2017) The 2016 model indian bilateral investment treaty: a critical deconstruction. Northwest J Int Law Bus 38. See also Porterfield MC (2015) Exhaustion of local remedies in investor-state dispute settlement: an idea whose time has come? Yale J Int Law Online 41: 3. https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/campuspress.yale.edu/dist/8/1581/files/2016/09/porterfield-final-proof-12-04-151-2i9ya2y.pdf

  30. 30.

    The ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA), Article 33.1 proviso. See discussion in Chaisse J, Jusoh S (2016) The ASEAN comprehensive investment agreement: the regionalisation of laws and policy on foreign investment. Elgar.

  31. 31.

    Malaysian Historical Salvors, SDN, BHD v. The Government of Malaysia, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/10. See discussion, among others in Jusoh S, Razak F, Mazlan A (2017) Malaysia and investor-state dispute settlement, learning from experience. JWIT 18(5–6): 890–917.

  32. 32.

    Coe JJ Jr (2005) Toward a complementary use of conciliation in investor-state disputes – a preliminary sketch. U C Davis J Int Policy 12: 7.

  33. 33.

    Weinstein D (2019) Making mediation more attractive for investor-state disputes. Kluwer Mediation Blog. Available at http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2019/03/26/making-mediation-more-attractive-for-investor-state-disputes/?doing_wp_cron=1597556661.9520120620727539062500; See also Nitschke F (2019) The ICSID conciliation rules in practice. In: Titi C, Fach Gómez K (eds) Mediation in international commercial and investment disputes. Oxford University Press, p 121.

  34. 34.

    Chew S, Reed L, Thomas CJ QC (2018) Report: survey on obstacles to settlement of investor-state disputes. NUS – Centre for International Law Working Paper 18/01. Available at https://cil.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NUS-CIL-Working-Paper-1801-Report-Survey-on-Obstacles-to-Settlement-of-Investor-State-Disputes.pdf

  35. 35.

    Coe J. Settlement of investor-state disputes through mediation—preliminary remarks on processes, problems and prospects. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331344136_Chapter_4_Settlement_of_Investor-State_Disputes_through_Mediation-Preliminary_Remarks_on_Processes_Problems_and_Prospects; See Jack J. Coe Jr, n. 28.

  36. 36.

    Shan W, Wang L (2015) The China–EU BIT and the emerging ‘Global BIT 2.0’. ICSID Rev 30: 264.

  37. 37.

    See Art. 9.18 to 9.30 of CPTPP. Bath V and Nottage L, chapter “International Investment Agreements and Investor-State Arbitration in Asia”.

  38. 38.

    Art. 9.18 of TPP. See also Marshall M (2017) Investor-state dispute settlement reconceptionalized: regulation of disputes, standards and mediation. Pepper Disput Resolut Law J 17: 235–250.

  39. 39.

    Art. 8.20 of EU-Canada CETA. See Marshall, n. 26, 236. See also Joubin-Bret A, Legum B (2014) A set of rules dedicated to investor–state mediation: the IBA investor–state mediation rules. ICSID Rev 29: 18.

  40. 40.

    Zhao C (2018) Investor-state mediation in a China-EU bilateral investment treaty: talking about being in the right place at the right time. Chin J Int Law 17: 1. See also Ali SF, Repousis OG (2017) Investor-state mediation and the rise of transparency in international investment law: opportunity or threat. Denver J Int Law Policy 45: 239.

  41. 41.

    See more at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (2020) International arbitration illuminating the top trends in 2020. https://www.freshfields.com/495e22/contentassets/ef85f9eb59e945ef8d10e93b089e78bb/08100_pg_dr_international-arbitration-trends-2020-interactive_v4.pdf

  42. 42.

    A preview of the completed draft ICSID Mediation Rules released by through Working Paper can be accessed from Nitschke F (2020) A preview of ICSID’s new investor-state mediation rules. Kluwer Mediation Blog. Available at http://mediationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/01/10/a-preview-of-icsids-new-investor-state-mediation-rules/?doing_wp_cron=1597556688.8503229618072509765625. See also ICISD (2018) Investor-state mediation. https://icsid.worldbank.org/services-arbitration-investor-state-mediation

  43. 43.

    See Chang Fa Lo, chapter “Past and Future of Mediation for Investment Disputes: The Case for the Asia-Pacific Regional Mediation Organization (ARMO)”.

  44. 44.

    Jusoh S (2019) Myanmar’s investor-state dispute settlement experience and investor grievance mechanism. In: Esplugues C (ed) Foreign investment and investment arbitration in Asia. Intersentia, pp 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688404.008

  45. 45.

    See Yulia Levashova, chapter “Prevention of ISDS Disputes: From Early Resolution to Limited Access”.

  46. 46.

    Dani M, Akhtar-Khavari A (2018) Rethinking the use of deference in investment arbitration: new solutions against the perception of bias. UCLA J Int Law Foreign Aff 22: 38–39.

  47. 47.

    de las Heras BP (2018) The European Union in international investment governance: a hybrid approach to dispute settlement. Rom J Eur Aff 18: 78.

  48. 48.

    Boisson de Chazournes L (2005) Making the proceedings public and allowing third party interventions. J World Invest Trade 1: 105–108.

  49. 49.

    Guven B, Johnson L (2019) The policy implications of third-party funding in investor-state dispute settlement. CCSI Working Paper 2019. Available at http://ccsi.columbia.edu/files/2017/11/The-Policy-Implications-of-Third-Party-Funding-in-Investor-State-Disptue-Settlement-FINAL.pdf; See also Álvarez Zárate JM, Baltag C and others (2020) Duration of investor-state dispute settlement proceedings. J World Invest Trade 21: 303–310.

  50. 50.

    Noam Zamir, chapter “The Issue of Costs: How much does ISDS Cost and Who Bears the Cost?”.

  51. 51.

    See Zarate, n. 29, 304.

  52. 52.

    Giorgetti C and others (2020) Independence and impartiality of adjudicators in investment dispute settlement: assessing challenges and reform options. J World Invest Trade 21: 447–464. Bjorklund AK and others (2020) The diversity deficit in international investment arbitration. J World Invest Trade 21: 411.

  53. 53.

    See Krista Nadakavukaren Schefer, chapter “Crime in International Investment Arbitration”.

  54. 54.

    Zhu Y (2018) Fair and equitable treatment of foreign investors in an era of sustainable development. Nat Resour J 58: 319. See also Arato J, Brown C, Ortino F (2020) Parsing and managing inconsistency in investor-state dispute settlement. J World Invest Trade 21: 347.

  55. 55.

    Eric De Brabandere (2018) (Re)Calibration, standard-setting and the shaping of investment law and arbitration. Boston Coll Law Rev 59: 2607. Available at https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3708&context=bclr

  56. 56.

    See Arato, n. 32, 368.

  57. 57.

    See more at Marboe I (2018) Damages in investor-state arbitration: current issues and challenges. Brill Research Perspectives in International Investment Law and Arbitration, 2.

  58. 58.

    “Consistency, efficiency and transparency in investment treaty arbitration,” report by the IBA Arbitration Subcommittee on Investment Treaty Arbitration (2018). Available at https://www.ibanet.org/Document/Default.aspx?DocumentUid=A8D68C6C-120B-4A6A-AFD0-4397BC22B569; Arato, n.32, 369.

  59. 59.

    Goldhaber MD (2012) The rise of arbitral power over domestic courts. Stanf J Complex Litig 1: 374.

  60. 60.

    Touzet J, de Vaublanc MV (2018) The investor-state dispute settlement system: the road to overcoming criticism. Kluwer Arbitration Blog. Available at http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2018/08/06/the-investor-state-dispute-settlement-system-the-road-to-overcoming-criticism/?doing_wp_cron=1597575431.6468479633331298828125

  61. 61.

    See Fernando Dias Simoes, chapter “Public Participation: Amicus Curiae in International Investment Arbitration”.

  62. 62.

    Pauwelyn J (2014) At the edge of chaos? foreign investment law as a complex adaptive system, how it emerged and how it can be reformed. ICSID Rev 29: 2.

  63. 63.

    Ubraser S.A. v. Republic of Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/26.

  64. 64.

    See Molly Anning, chapter “Counterclaims Admissibility in Investment Arbitration”.

  65. 65.

    Miller S, Hicks G (2015) ISDS: a reality check. Report by CSIS Scholl Chair in International Business. Available at https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/legacy_files/files/publication/150116_Miller_InvestorStateDispute_Web.pdf

  66. 66.

    Caplan L (2009) Making investor-state arbitration more accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises. In: Rogers CA, Alford RP (eds) The future of investment arbitration. OUP, p 297.

  67. 67.

    See Leonardo Borlini and Stefano Silingardi, chapter “Enforcement of Investment Arbitration Awards”.

  68. 68.

    Sauvant KP, Ortino F. Improving the international investment law and policy regime: options for the future.

  69. 69.

    ICSID (2019) Proposals for amendment of the ICSID rules. Working Paper No. 3 iii. https://icsid.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/amendments/WP_3_VOLUME_1_ENGLISH.pdf

  70. 70.

    See ICSID, N.58.

  71. 71.

    Kennar M (2019) Modernizing ICSID’s rules for investment dispute resolution. ICC Dispute Resolut Bull. Available at https://www.fordham.edu/download/downloads/id/14027/ciam_2019_cle_materials.pdf

  72. 72.

    Mohamadieh K (2019) The future of investor-state dispute settlement deliberated at UNCITRAL: unveiling a dichotomy between reforming and consolidating the current regime. South Centre Investment Policy Brief 16. Available at https://www.southcentre.int/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IPB16_The-Future-of-ISDS-Deliberated-at-UNCITRAL_EN.pdf

  73. 73.

    https://undocs.org/A/72/17

  74. 74.

    Kaufmann-Kohler G, Potesta M (2019) Reform of ISDS: matching concerns and solutions. EJIL Talk. Available at https://www.ejiltalk.org/reform-of-isds-matching-concerns-and-solutions/

  75. 75.

    For detailed comments on the Draft, see “Comments on the Draft Code for Adjudicators in ISDS” (2020) Centre for Arbitration and Research, MNLU-Mumbai, available at http://mnlumumbai.edu.in/pdf/Comments%20on%20Draft%20Code%20of%20Conduct%20(CAR%20Ed.).pdf

  76. 76.

    Giorgetti C (2020) ICSID and UNCITRAL publish the anticipated draft of the code of conduct for adjudicators in investor-state dispute settlement. Kluwer Arbitration Blog. http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/05/02/icsid-and-uncitral-publish-the-anticipated-draft-of-the-code-of-conduct-for-adjudicators-in-investor-state-dispute-settlement/?doing_wp_cron=1598194383.7107789516448974609375#comments

  77. 77.

    Giorgetti C (2020) ICSID and UNCITRAL publish the anticipated draft of the code of conduct for adjudicators in investor-state dispute settlement. Kluwer Arbitration Blog. Available at http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2020/05/02/icsid-and-uncitral-publish-the-anticipated-draft-of-the-code-of-conduct-for-adjudicators-in-investor-state-dispute-settlement/?doing_wp_cron=1597671117.6686971187591552734375

  78. 78.

    Detailed framework on appeal mechanism for ISDS awards can be understood from Albert Jan van den Berg (2019) Appeal mechanism for ISDS awards: interaction with the New York and ICSID conventions. ICSID Rev Foreign Invest Law J 34: 1. Available at https://academic.oup.com/icsidreview/article-abstract/34/1/156/5637244?redirectedFrom=PDF

  79. 79.

    See Roberto Echandi, chapter “Investor-state Conflict Management Mechanisms in International Investment Law: A Preliminary Sketch of Model Treaty Clauses”.

  80. 80.

    Malcolm Langford and others (2020) Matching concerns and solutions: an introduction. J World Invest Trade 21: 174.

  81. 81.

    Brooke Skartvedt Güven (2020) Investor-state mediation: an opportunity to advance sustainable outcomes. Columbia Centre on Sustainable Investment. http://ccsi.columbia.edu/2020/01/03/investor-state-mediation-an-opportunity-to-advance-sustainable-outcomes/

  82. 82.

    Anna Spain (2010) Integration matters: rethinking the architecture of international dispute resolution. Univ Pa J Int Law 32: 1–19.

  83. 83.

    Teresa Cheng, SC, (2019) Investor-state dispute settlement reform – mapping the way forward. J Hong Kong Institute of Chartered Secretaries. http://csj.hkics.org.hk/site/2019/05/19/investor-state-dispute-settlement-reform-mapping-the-way-forward/

  84. 84.

    See Bret, n. 36, 19.

  85. 85.

    Strong SI (2016) Realizing rationality: an empirical assessment of international commercial mediation. Wash Lee Law Rev 73: 2010.

  86. 86.

    See Cheng, n. 4, 5.

  87. 87.

    See Cheng, n. 4, 5.

  88. 88.

    See Guven, n. 70.

  89. 89.

    See Guven, n. 70.

  90. 90.

    Gabriel Bottini and others (2020) Excessive costs and recoverability of costs awards in investment arbitration. J World Invest Trade 21: 286–287.

  91. 91.

    See Arato, n. 46, 340,370.

  92. 92.

    See Guven, n. 70.

  93. 93.

    Catherine Kessedjian and others (2020) Mediation in future investor-state dispute settlement. Academic Forum on ISDS Concept Paper 2020/16 7: 8. https://www.jus.uio.no/pluricourts/english/projects/leginvest/academic-forum/papers/2020/isds-af-mediation-paper-16-march-2020.pdf

  94. 94.

    See Kessedjian, n. 82, 8.

  95. 95.

    See Kessedjian, n. 82, 11.

  96. 96.

    See Kessedjian, n. 82, 11.

  97. 97.

    See Kessedjian, n. 82, 11.

  98. 98.

    See Kessedjian, n. 82, 12.

  99. 99.

    Anna De Luca and others (2020) Responding to incorrect decision-making in investor-state dispute settlement: policy options. J World Invest Trade 21: 406–409.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR

    Julien Chaisse

  2. Hong Kong Commercial and Maritime Law Centre, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR

    Julien Chaisse

  3. School of Business and Law, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK

    Leïla Choukroune

  4. National University of Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia

    Sufian Jusoh

Authors
  1. Julien Chaisse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leïla Choukroune
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sufian Jusoh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julien Chaisse .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Julien Chaisse

  2. School of Business and Law, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK

    Leïla Choukroune

  3. Institute of Malaysia and International Studies, National University of Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

    Sufian Jusoh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Chaisse, J., Choukroune, L., Jusoh, S. (2021). Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): An Introduction. In: Chaisse, J., Choukroune, L., Jusoh, S. (eds) Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5744-2_60-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5744-2_60-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-5744-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-5744-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Law and CriminologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation