In the wake of these tensions, the recent attempt to establish a multilateral legal framework for di di has resulted in a complete failure of the debate on the regulation of LDCs. In the late 1990s, the OECD began negotiating a multilateral investment agreement (MAI). The aim was to create a strong framework for FDI regulation, which dealt with market liberalization, protection of (foreign) investments and international dispute resolution. The MAI would become the equivalent of the GATT/WTO, where the GATT would provide the rules and rules governing international trade and the MAI the rules and rules applicable to international investment. This independent nature of the MAI was highlighted in particular by the United States and it was stated that the MAI would be open to all OECD members and that non-OECD members could also participate. The OECD`s choice as a negotiating framework was highly controversial, as it excluded the participation of the majority of developing countries. However, OECD members argued that the MAI negotiations would be the best in the OECD, with 85% of all FDI flows being made up of OECD countries. In addition, the preference given to the OECD as the main point of discussion in May may also be linked to the disappointment of the United States with regard to the outcome of the TRIM negotiations in the WTO. AMI supporters (such as the United States, Canada and several EU member states) continue to promote investment provisions that are similar to regional trade agreements, bilateral investment agreements, bilateral free trade agreements and discussions within the Global Trade Organization, which will be incorporated into the General Agreement on Trade in Services.
Before the end of 1998, British Trade Minister Brian Wilson announced that investment negotiations could be transferred to the WTO. The procedures for the transmission of multilateral agreements, which were less concluded under Section 1.5.1 of the ADR, were attempts to create a legal framework for global internal market regulation, reflecting the problems encountered by the WTO in its search for a new AGREEMENT on TRIM. So far, the TRIMs negotiations have not reached more than one small compromise. The main outcome of the TRIPS agreement in the WTO was to reaffirm that the existing GATT/WTO rules are now applicable to the most pressing problem in establishing a global regulatory framework for foreign direct investment, the question of the extent to which the regulation of foreign direct investment should reconcile the aspirations of the “open economy” with the desire to protect the special interests of states, labour and the environment. Multilateral agreements allow all signatories to be treated in the same way. No country can make better trade agreements to one country than another. Same land. It is particularly important for emerging economies. Many of them are smaller, which makes them less competitive.
The status of the most favoured nation provides the best trading conditions a nation can obtain from a trading partner. Developing countries benefit the most from this trade status. In Spanish, multilateral environmental agreements (MEA) form the global international legal basis for global efforts to address certain environmental issues. MEAs, which are relevant to mangrove conservation, offer the opportunity to strengthen management, offer a common approach to environmental issues and provide a certain level of protection, at least on paper (Van Lavieren et al., 2012).