Doctor of Philosophy / This thesis is concerned with the role of the United States investment insurance agency, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), in enforcing property and contract rights on behalf of United States (U.S.) infrastructure investors, pursuant to the deregulation of infrastructure markets across the developing world. Drawing on evidence from two recent high profile breach of regulatory contract disputes between OPIC insured U.S. energy companies and Indonesia and India respectively, the thesis finds that while legalized modes of dispute settlement have proliferated, the ‘rules of the game’— their efficacy in delimiting outcomes—emerge as a function of state power and interests, as states undertake to enforce or resist legal obligations. Second, and contrary to the image of U.S. foreign economic policy-makers as beholden to corporate interests, the thesis finds that the agency’s transformation from ‘aid to trade’ as underpinned the expansion of U.S. infrastructure investors to the developing world during the 1990s was driven by state officials consistent with evolving conceptions of U.S. national interests, central to which was the desire to expand markets for U.S. foreign investors and capital goods exporters. In this regard, the transformation of developing country infrastructure markets and the shift in the modes of resolving investor-state expropriation disputes as but one element of economic globalization and the ‘legalization’ of dispute settlement respectively are revealed as a function of U.S. material interests and power at the point of enforcement. The thesis contends, however, that the changes observed reflect not only U.S. power and interests but a specifically American conception of private property and contract rights so as to reveal OPIC investment insurance as a conduit for the diffusion of shifting property norms concerning regulatory taking (expropriation) from the United States to the world economy at large.

Doctor of Philosophy / This thesis is concerned with the role of the United States investment insurance agency, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), in enforcing property and contract rights on behalf of United States (U.S.) infrastructure investors, pursuant to the deregulation of infrastructure markets across the developing world. Drawing on evidence from two recent high profile breach of regulatory contract disputes between OPIC insured U.S. energy companies and Indonesia and India respectively, the thesis finds that while legalized modes of dispute settlement have proliferated, the ‘rules of the game’— their efficacy in delimiting outcomes—emerge as a function of state power and interests, as states undertake to enforce or resist legal obligations. Second, and contrary to the image of U.S. foreign economic policy-makers as beholden to corporate interests, the thesis finds that the agency’s transformation from ‘aid to trade’ as underpinned the expansion of U.S. infrastructure investors to the developing world during the 1990s was driven by state officials consistent with evolving conceptions of U.S. national interests, central to which was the desire to expand markets for U.S. foreign investors and capital goods exporters. In this regard, the transformation of developing country infrastructure markets and the shift in the modes of resolving investor-state expropriation disputes as but one element of economic globalization and the ‘legalization’ of dispute settlement respectively are revealed as a function of U.S. material interests and power at the point of enforcement. The thesis contends, however, that the changes observed reflect not only U.S. power and interests but a specifically American conception of private property and contract rights so as to reveal OPIC investment insurance as a conduit for the diffusion of shifting property norms concerning regulatory taking (expropriation) from the United States to the world economy at large.

Submitted by Fernando Mistura (f.mistura@gmail.com) on 2011-10-10T19:43:49Z No. of bitstreams: 1 20111010 - ThesisMistura.pdf: 9859237 bytes, checksum: 549c3f8971cac6c47966b93ec2c8debc (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Gisele Isaura Hannickel (gisele.hannickel@fgv.br) on 2011-10-10T19:48:44Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 20111010 - ThesisMistura.pdf: 9859237 bytes, checksum: 549c3f8971cac6c47966b93ec2c8debc (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Gisele Isaura Hannickel (gisele.hannickel@fgv.br) on 2011-10-10T19:48:59Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 20111010 - ThesisMistura.pdf: 9859237 bytes, checksum: 549c3f8971cac6c47966b93ec2c8debc (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2011-10-11T12:42:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 20111010 - ThesisMistura.pdf: 9859237 bytes, checksum: 549c3f8971cac6c47966b93ec2c8debc (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-10-07 / This dissertation has sought to identify the role of BRIC country governments in the internationalization of their firms. Drawing upon an exploratory comparative analysis of BRIC OFDI trends and policies, it contributes to further an initial understanding of this phenomenon by shedding light on how and why BRIC governments have been promoting their multinationals. For this, it analysed specific OFDI-related policies implemented by BRIC countries as a way of highlighting policy-gaps and the effects of institutional set-ups in the development of internationalized companies. The rapid rise of MNCs from BRIC countries is quite a recent phenomenon. Although they had invested abroad before, only since the early 2000s OFDI by BRIC MNCs has become substantial. BRIC MNCs are becoming major players in many industries, taking-over competitors in both developed and developing countries, and reshaping competition in many industries. In this process, BRIC governments have played an important role. While until the early 1990s, BRIC governments restricted OFDI because of a negative perspective on its effects on home economies (e.g., reduction in investments at home, exports of jobs, and constraints to the balance-of-payments), in the 2000s their perception of OFDI changed. They have become more aware of the importance of OFDI for the competitiveness of their firms and industrial upgrade. While China, and to a lesser extent India, are one step further, having already put in place a comprehensive set of specific OFDI promoting policies, Brazil and Russia have yet to take further steps in order to create an enabling environment for their companies to fully exploit the advantages of global expansion / Esta dissertação procurou identificar o papel dos governos na internacionalização produtiva de empresas dos países BRIC. Por meio de uma análise comparativa do comportamento dos investimentos diretos no exterior (IDE) destes países e dos mecanismos existentes de suporte à internacionalização das empresas, foi possível identificar as diferentes maneiras de envolvimento desses governos na internacionalização produtiva de suas empresas e apontar lacunas de políticas públicas nestes países. Destarte, esta dissertação contribui à compreensão inicial sobre como e por que os governos destes países têm promovido o desenvolvimento de multinacionais. A rápida ascensão das multinacionais dos países BRIC é um fenômeno recente. Apesar de terem investido no exterior anteriormente, apenas a partir do início dos anos 2000 que o IDE de empresas destes países tornou-se significativo. Desde então, as multinacionais dos países BRIC estão se tornando importantes players em diversas indústrias, adquirindo competidores de países desenvolvidos e em desenvolvimento, e redesenhando a concorrência em muitas indústrias globais. Neste processo, os governos dos países BRIC têm desempenhado um papel importante. Até o início dos anos 1990, o IDE era restringido porque era associado a efeitos negativos sobre as economias domésticas (como por exemplo, à redução de investimentos no país de origem, à exportação de empregos, e a problemas na balança de pagamentos). Desde o início dos anos 2000, entretanto, os governos dos países BRIC mudaram de percepção e passaram a adotar políticas favoráveis à internacionalização produtiva de empresas domésticas. Eles perceberam a importância da internacionalização para a manutenção ou expansão da competitividade das empresas domésticas em um mundo globalizado. A China, e em menor grau a Índia, estão um passo adiante, tendo já posto em prática um conjunto de instrumentos específicos que facilitam a internacionalização de suas empresas. O Brasil e a Rússia ainda têm de tomar novas medidas para criar um ambiente propício para que suas empresas possam mais facilmente explorar as vantagens da expansão global.