Year: 2026
Type: article
Abstract: This opinion piece examines the gender dimension of the ongoing reform of investor–State dispute settlement (ISDS) and argues that diversity remains insufficiently integrated into the agenda of UNCITRAL Working Group III. While the reform process has addressed independence, impartiality, double-hatting, costs, transparency, and institutional design, gender balance in the appointment of adjudicators has received only limited attention. Drawing on recent ICSID statistics and scholarship concerning diversity and legitimacy, the article shows that the representation of women has improved, particularly where appointments are made by arbitral institutions, whereas party appointments remain dominated by established professional networks. It further considers the potential unintended effects of restrictions on multiple roles, which may reduce conflicts of interest but also narrow entry routes for women and other underrepresented practitioners who combine arbitral work with counsel, academic, or expert functions. The opinion piece also assesses the possible contribution of the UNCITRAL Advisory Centre to broadening candidate pools, strengthening appointment transparency, and supporting States with limited ISDS capacity. It concludes that gender diversity should be treated not as a symbolic objective, but as a component of the sociological and institutional legitimacy of the reformed ISDS system, alongside independence, impartiality, and procedural efficiency.
Author: Federica Cristani
Institution: Institute of International Relations Prague
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
OpenAlex ID: W7204266720