Book Launch Event: Reforming Arbitration Reform: Emerging Voices, New Strategies

On June 28, 2025, Peking University School of Transnational Law (STL) hosted a book launch event for “Reforming Arbitration Reform: Emerging Voices, New Strategies and Evolving Values.” The event featured the book’s co-editors Professor Crina Mihaela Baltag from Queen Mary University of London and Professor Mark Feldman from Peking University STL, alongside contributing authors Dr. Kabir Duggal from Columbia Law School and Professor Kevin W. Gray from Peking University STL.

From left to right: Dr. Kabir Duggal (Columbia Law School), Professor Mark Feldman (Peking University School of Transnational Law), Professor Crina Mihaela Baltag (Queen Mary University of London), and Professor Kevin W. Gray (Peking University School of Transnational Law).

Overview

Professor Crina Mihaela Baltag and Professor Mark Feldman opened the session by providing an overview of the Reforming Arbitration Reform book project. Professor Baltag discussed the origins of the book project, which began with the 20th Institute for Transnational Arbitration/American Society of International Law (ITA-ASIL) Conference. Prof. Baltag and Prof. Feldman co-chaired that event, which was held in Washington DC in 2023. The Reforming Arbitration Reform book includes contributions from many of the ITA-ASIL Conference participants as well as other leading international arbitration scholars and practitioners from around the world.

Diversity Challenges and Statistical Realities

Dr. Kabir Duggal addressed multiple forms of diversity challenges, emphasizing intersectionality where practitioners face overlapping barriers including gender, race, sexual orientation, accent, nationality, and professional background. He highlighted the disconnect between stated diversity commitments and actual decision-making, where stakeholders default to traditional choices from New York and London when stakes are high. He pointed out that even gender diversity progress primarily benefits white European and North American women, while other groups remain marginalized. He encouraged students as future arbitration leaders to drive systemic change.

Professor Mark Feldman referenced ICSID’s annual detailed reports on arbitration practice, including appointment statistics by region. He noted that while ICSID presents data for the “Asia-Pacific” region, closer examination reveals that appointments from this region are predominantly from Australia and New Zealand, highlighting how data presentation can obscure rather than illuminate true regional diversity patterns.

From left to right: Dr. Kabir Duggal, and Professor Mark Feldman

Professor Kevin W. Gray discussed intersectionality theory, referencing Kimberly Crenshaw’s framework for understanding how people face multiple overlapping identity-based challenges including race, gender, nationality, and disability. He noted that the book excellently addresses diversity questions with intersectionality as a recurring theme, specifically recommending Chapter 2, which examines investment arbitration’s effects on race, environmental protection, and indigenous rights.

Professor Kevin W. Gray

Professor Crina Mihaela Baltag expanded on these themes using Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“SCC”) data, revealing important qualitative disparities behind quantitative improvements. She noted that while female arbitrator appointments reached 51%, this was partly because the SCC board makes over 40% of appointment decisions, with concerning fee gaps persisting between male and female tribunal chairs. She also noted that arbitral tribunals should accommodate diverse needs regarding venues and scheduling.

Professor Crina Mihaela Baltag

The panel then extensively explored arbitration institutions’ role in advancing reform. Representatives from arbitration institutions provided examples of their practices. Chi Wenhui from the Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration described their balanced approach to presiding arbitrator appointments, providing parties with curated candidate lists featuring practitioners from different legal traditions and jurisdictions. The Guangzhou Arbitration Commission representative Chen Chen discussed their dormant arbitrator program, designed to provide opportunities for newer practitioners by carefully matching case complexity to arbitrator experience levels when the institution serves as appointing authority.

The second person from the left is Chi Wenhui (Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration). The third person from the left is Chen Chen (Guangzhou Arbitration Commission)

Chris Campbell from Baker Hughes pointed out that encouraging generational trends emerged, with younger decision-makers demonstrating greater openness to diversity considerations. He emphasized that for in-house counsel, it’s about more than just fairness; it’s a business imperative. They need to show how diverse arbitrators lead to better outcomes and fresh perspectives, securing management’s buy-in. Equally, diverse practitioners must actively market themselves.

The second person from the left is Chris Campbell (Baker Hughes)

Alice Wang from Pinsent Masons shared client-side perspectives, noting that arbitrator appointments involve senior management who tend toward traditional choices for high-stakes matters. However, she observed clients becoming more sophisticated, asking about the strategy for appointing arbitrators. She noted that in China, gender diversity is less problematic than seniority diversity, with younger clients showing greater openness to diverse appointments.

The first person from right is Alice Wang (Senior Associate, Pinsent Masons)

Third-Party Funding Developments

Professor Mark Feldman then shifted the discussion to third-party funding developments in arbitration. Panelists addressed practical implications, noting that respondents naturally consider security for costs when facing funded claimants. The discussion highlighted evolving judicial attitudes, with Alice Wang observing that while courts initially showed resistance around 2009-2010, jurisdictions like Singapore and Australia now increasingly recognize third-party funding as legitimate and beneficial for arbitration access.

Group Photo

In brief, the panel emphasized that achieving meaningful arbitration reform requires coordinated action: institutions should continue innovative appointment practices, practitioners must actively build professional visibility and educate clients about diversity benefits, while young professionals should prepare for opportunities and demonstrate specialized expertise to advance meaningful change.

Co-sponsoring institutions for the book launch event included the Guangzhou Arbitration Commission, the Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration, Hui Zhong Law Firm, Taylor Wessing, Pinsent Masons and Young ITA.