Developing a Progressive Agenda for Reform of International Investment Law: Canadian perspectives

This report documents an expert meeting held in Ottawa on June 13, 2018, hosted by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). The meeting brought together Canadian government officials, academics, and civil society representatives to discuss the reform of international investment law and the development of a progressive agenda for Canada, specifically regarding the revision of its Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA) model.

• Participants argued that traditional investment treaties, designed primarily to protect investments abroad, lack empirical evidence supporting the claim that they meaningfully promote investment flows.
• The Government of Canada expressed a commitment to a progressive trade and investment agenda, incorporating strengthened provisions on gender, labour, environment, Indigenous Peoples, and small and medium-sized enterprises, and announced public consultations for the revised FIPA model.
• Civil society and academic experts contended that current investment treaties and investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms can obstruct the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), exacerbate gender inequality, and hinder urgent climate change actions.
• The Clayton/Bilcon v. Canada case was cited as an example of how ISDS tribunals can undermine domestic environmental impact assessment (EIA) processes and rewrite national law without deference to domestic authorities.
• Experts proposed that investment treaties should shift from a narrow focus on investor protection toward a model supporting sustainable development, suggesting that simple tweaks to the FIPA model are insufficient.
• Proposed reforms to balance investor rights include introducing enforceable obligations for investors regarding corruption, taxation, human rights, and labour, as well as providing a 'safe harbour' for climate change mitigation measures.
• Regarding dispute settlement, participants suggested various alternatives to traditional ISDS, including the total elimination of ISDS, the use of state–state dispute settlement, or the adoption of a permanent investment tribunal system as seen in CETA.
• There is a call for broader impact assessments and cost-benefit analyses prior to negotiating investment treaties to evaluate risks to human rights, gender, and the environment both in Canada and abroad.
• Some participants suggested that political risk insurance and investor–state contracts could serve as complementary or alternative methods to protect investors without the policy-chilling effects of ISDS.

APA

International Institute for Sustainable Development (2018). Developing a Progressive Agenda for Reform of International Investment Law: Canadian perspectives. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/report-ottawa-expert-meeting-june-2018.pdf

Chicago

International Institute for Sustainable Development. Developing a Progressive Agenda for Reform of International Investment Law: Canadian perspectives. 2018. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/report-ottawa-expert-meeting-june-2018.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=International Institute for Sustainable Development |title=Developing a Progressive Agenda for Reform of International Investment Law: Canadian perspectives |date=2018 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/report-ottawa-expert-meeting-june-2018.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{internationalinstituteforsustainabledevelopment2018developing, author = {{International Institute for Sustainable Development}}, title = {{Developing a Progressive Agenda for Reform of International Investment Law: Canadian perspectives}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2018}, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/report-ottawa-expert-meeting-june-2018.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }