The paper analyzes systematic patterns of investment treaty rule-making using a large sample of bilateral investment treaties (BITs). Focusing on national treatment and transfer provisions, it finds that BITs signed between two developing countries are typically less wide-ranging than North-South BITs. Yet restrictions in South-South BITs are ‘levelled out’ by the treaties’ most-favoured-nation provisions leading to a de‐facto coherence in developing countries’ BIT‐networks. The paper concludes by speculating whether this paradoxical pattern might have been unintended on the part of developing country negotiators
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.