The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Human Rights, Risks, and New Strategies for Global Investment
Abstract
It is often argued that the rules and practices of foreign direct investment can threaten the protection of human rights. That danger used to arise from the fact that the investors simply dismissed concern for these rights as their responsibility. This is no longer so. Major lenders and project sponsors now regularly make commitments to human rights and to allied principles governing environmental protection and health and safety. The danger instead arises from the way in which the two domains are being brought together. The collision that threatens is not over whether, but over how commercial imperatives are to be integrated with this branch of social justice. The article aims at diagnosis of the problem and considers some possible solutions to it. It frames the issues in terms of several competing fundamental principles, and draws on concrete examples from the investment contracts regulating the Baku – Tibilisi - Ceyhan (BTC) and Chad/Cameroon pipeline projects. Once the areas of potential collision between these contracts and human rights requirements are explored, the essay considers a significant alteration to the BTC agreement, designed to open it up more effectively to human rights concerns. The analysis ends with a consideration of some model clauses for investment contracts in the future.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Measures that states adopt to comply with their human rights obligations would lie outside the scope of any stabilisation clauses.”
From Reconsidering Sovereignty, Ownership and Consent in Natural Resource Contracts: From Concepts to Practice (2018) · cites this paper as Leader (2006) and Cotula (2008)
In the citing paper
“These rights/duties limit what states can lawfully agree to when concluding the contract.”
From Reconsidering Sovereignty, Ownership and Consent in Natural Resource Contracts: From Concepts to Practice (2018) · cites this paper as Leader (2006)
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Cotula, L. (2018) · European Yearbook of International Economic Law · doi:10.1007/8165_2018_23 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Leader, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Essex (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Leader, Sheldon
- ORCID
- Leader, Sheldon
- Venue
- Journal of International Economic Law
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-08-20
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 657-705
- ISSN
- 1369-3034 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3758
- OpenAlex
- W1986373384
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 7.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of International Economic Law (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › International Arbitration and Investment Law
- Social Sciences › Law › Corporate Law and Human Rights
- Social Sciences › Law › Comparative International Legal Studies
- Keywords
- human rights, foreign direct investment, investment contracts, investment risk, environmental protection, health and safety, Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, social justice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Human Rights, Risks, and New Strategies for Global Investment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jiel/jgl015
- The paper
- Leader, S. (2006). Human Rights, Risks, and New Strategies for Global Investment. Journal of International Economic Law. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgl015
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.