Global Value Chains as a Constraint on Sovereignty: Evidence from Investor–State Dispute Settlement

Abstract

That economic integration constrains state sovereignty has been a longstanding concern and the subject of much study. We assess the validity of this concern in the context of two very particular components of contemporary economic globalization: global value chain (GVC) integration and Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). First, we document that host states have abandoned nearly 24 percent of regulations disputed by private investors in ISDS between 1987 and 2017. This behavior is puzzling because ISDS only requires host states to provide monetary compensation to investor-claimants and not the abandonment of disputed regulations. We theorize that host states are more likely to abandon a disputed regulation when the claimant has a greater potential to disrupt GVCs in the host economy. We then employ the non-parametric difference-in-differences estimator by Imai, Kim, and Wang (2021) and find that ISDS filings cause substantial decreases in GVC trade. Following this result, we provide descriptive statistics and qualitative evidence that support our core theoretical proposition that multinational corporations (MNCs) with the potential to disrupt GVC integration are more likely to see host states changing regulations in their favor. Our argument and evidence suggest that GVC integration can grow an MNC’s power to such an extent that the host state abandons a regulation that the MNC disputes.