Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/66559 
Authors: 
Year of Publication: 
2010
Citation: 
[Journal:] Intereconomics [ISSN:] 1613-964X [Volume:] 45 [Issue:] 4 [Publisher:] Springer [Place:] Heidelberg [Year:] 2010 [Pages:] 227-238
Publisher: 
Springer, Heidelberg
Abstract: 
The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) is far broader in policy coverage than conventional trade agreements for goods. At the same time, governments are offered more flexibility to tailor their obligations to sector- or country-specific needs. As a result, commitments vary widely across sectors and modes of supply. Health insurance has proved far more popular, for instance, than healthcare services. Surprisingly, governments have been less selective in other policy contexts, in particular bilateral investment treaties (BITs). Many signatories of such treaties, including individual EU Members, have undertaken potentially challenging obligations across virtually all service sectors. Yet, though frequently invoked, BITs do not meet the same standards, in terms of transparency, open (consensual) rulemaking and legal certainty, as commitments under the GATS.
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size
184.17 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.