【正文】 d in the next section. Investmentled development through domestic policy reform Reform of the international financial architecture and a successful conclusion to the Doha Round of WTO negotiations would both contribute to a stronger and more stable basis for continuing investment in developing countries. But the ongoing failure of the international munity to deliver results in either of these areas means that renewed focus must be placed on other strategies, including domestic reform in developing countries. In general terms, the elements of a domestic environment that encourage development through foreign investment are well understood, having been mapped out by, for example, the OECD in its Framework for Investment (2020) based on the 10 areas identified by the 2020 UN Monterrey Consensus on Financing for Development and the World Bank in its World Development Report 2020. A prehensive but not exhaustive list of policy areas include those that have direct effects on investment, like investment policy and investment promotion programmers, as well as those that have indirect effects, such as trade policy, petition policy, tax policy, corporate governance standards, policies for promoting responsible business conduct, human resource development and labor market policy, infrastructure development, and financial and public sector governance. The particular policy mix appropriate for a specific country will depend on its individual circumstances. Attempts to transfer regulatory structures from other countries, especially developed countries, with little or no adaptation to local conditions have not proved to be successful. As well, creating the right investment environment is not a onetime policy shift but rather a plex, multifaceted and longterm process (see box). Recent research shows that investment promotion programmers can have a positive effect on the attractiveness of a particular jurisdiction. On the other hand, trying to ‘pick winners’ has not been successful and the World Bank, among others, advocates moving away from specific incentives to domestic policy measures that improve the general climate for investment in host countries (World Development Report 2020). An important benefit of such an approach is that reforming the domestic policy environment will promote investment and growth generally, not just FDI. Improved transparency, for example, is likely to be disproportionately advantageous to small and medium local firms with few resources to devote to pliance with government requirements. Transparency, improved efficiency in government administration and more secure property rights may also contribute to moving small businesses from the informal economy to the formal, with positive effects on tax revenues. Developing countries seeking the right domestic policy mix must confront a tension between attracting investment and achieving development objectives. States must balance social needs and investor preferences. For example, regulators must develop and enforce standards, including those related to health and safety, labor, the environment and human rights, even if doing so will impose costs on investors. Disincentives to invest, however, can be minimized to the extent that such regulation is transparent, efficient, predictable and free of corruption. Similarly, an effective tax system will be needed to capture value create through FDI, but if the tax system is fairly administered investment disincentives associated with the tax burden will be reduced. Domestic reforms can be plemented with IIA In many cases, a domestic reform strategy is unlikely to be sufficient to attract stable long term investment flows. Some states simply lack capacity to a