Scholarlink

<p>The article argues that FET operates as a floating signifier whose indeterminacy is not accidental but structurally constitutive of investment arbitration. Drawing on Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory alongside Greimasian narrative semiotics, It demonstrates how arbitral practice progressively sediments an investor-protective interpretation through semiotic capture, while simultaneously reproducing instability through what it terms the suture paradox. Through close analysis of landmark awards and recent treaty reforms, the paper reveals how interpretive communities, rather than texts, govern the evolution of FET. It advances four original contributions, semiotic capture, suture paradox, actantial pre-loading, and discourse-formed interpretation, and proposes institutional, rather than purely textual, reforms aimed at restructuring the production of meaning within investment law and addressing its legitimacy crisis in contemporary international economic governance debates more broadly.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Fair and Equitable Treatment as Floating Signifier: Laclau-Mouffe Discourse Theory and the Structural Indeterminacy of the FET Standard in Investment Arbitration

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月24日

查看全文
  • Rawnak Miraj Ul Azam

摘要

The article argues that FET operates as a floating signifier whose indeterminacy is not accidental but structurally constitutive of investment arbitration. Drawing on Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory alongside Greimasian narrative semiotics, It demonstrates how arbitral practice progressively sediments an investor-protective interpretation through semiotic capture, while simultaneously reproducing instability through what it terms the suture paradox. Through close analysis of landmark awards and recent treaty reforms, the paper reveals how interpretive communities, rather than texts, govern the evolution of FET. It advances four original contributions, semiotic capture, suture paradox, actantial pre-loading, and discourse-formed interpretation, and proposes institutional, rather than purely textual, reforms aimed at restructuring the production of meaning within investment law and addressing its legitimacy crisis in contemporary international economic governance debates more broadly.