學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 論永續金融政策在國際投資法下之適法性——以歐盟永續投資分類規則為例
The Legitimacy of Sustainable Finance Policies under International Investment Law: A Case Study of the EU Taxonomy Regulation作者 鍾子晴
Chung, Tzu-Ching貢獻者 薛景文
Hsueh, Ching-Wen
鍾子晴
Chung, Tzu-Ching關鍵詞 永續金融
國際投資法
投資人與地主國爭端解決機制
永續投資分類規則
技術篩選標準
Sustainable finance
International Investment Law
Investor-to-State Dispute Settlement
Taxonomy Regulation
Technical screening criteria日期 2023 上傳時間 2-Aug-2023 13:09:17 (UTC+8) 摘要 當氣候變遷已成定局，「永續發展」成為所有地球人共同追求的目標，世界各國政府無一不使出渾身解數，希望能夠在有限的資源下，最小化此一環境風險帶來的影響。「永續金融政策（Sustainable finance policies）」作為政府的手段之一，希望能夠透過支持、鼓勵或要求投資人於作成投資決策時，將環境、社會及治理（Environmental, Social and Governance）因素納入考量，以創造長期的價值投資，以推廣政府的永續發展目標，簡言之，即是希望以私人資本市場資金，填補政府於推展經濟體之永續轉型時所欠缺者，進而達成永續發展目標。惟如所有追求公共利益之政策一般，永續金融政策同樣可能受到外國投資人在投資人與地主國爭端解決（Investor-To-State Dispute Settlement, ISDS）機制的挑戰，尤其是透過「永續投資分類規則」定義何謂「永續經濟活動」，將與國際投資法的「環境盲」特性有所衝突。公共政策目的是否以及如何在ISDS仲裁庭中受到考慮，一向是國際投資法的一大爭議，尤其是在環境、永續發展等議題上，衝突更加劇烈。本研究欲透過文獻回顧法整理相關文獻、國際投資仲裁案例及國際投資條約，進行以歐盟「永續投資分類規則」為基礎之永續金融政策體系，與國際投資法規範間的合致性分析。經檢視過往環境相關的仲裁案件，本研究發現ISDS仲裁庭並非如反對者所言的強烈反對環保，反之許多仲裁庭相當願意給予公共利益目的一定程度的考慮，並試圖在地主國的環境保護義務及投資保障義務間取得平衡，同樣趨勢亦顯示於近期歐盟與第三國簽訂的投資保障協定當中。然而針對「永續投資分類規則」，本文認為其「技術篩選標準」之設定有產生歧視性及專斷性的疑慮，尤其是引發眾多爭議的「使用天然氣或核能之發電活動」。若有投資人提交ISDS案件且進入實質審理，即使假設仲裁庭使用對環境政策較為寬容的審查標準，仍可能取得不利結果，故在類似政策的設計及執行上需格外謹慎。
Inevitable climate change has driven “sustainable development” to become a shared objective for everyone on Earth. In response, governments are exhausting every available resource, striving to reduce the repercussions of this environmental threat. One of their key strategies is the implementation of “Sustainable Finance Policies”. These policies are designed to foster long-term, valuable investments by mandating that investors consider environmental, social, and governance factors when making decisions. The ultimate goal is to use private capital market funds to compensate for any shortfall in government support, accelerating the sustainable transformation of the economy.However, public-interest policies like this often face challenges from the Investor-to-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism. Since “Taxonomy Regulation” aims to define what kinds of economic activities to be “sustainable”, it could incite conflict due to the “climate-blind” of international investment law. How the ISDS tribunals would consider public policy goals is a controversial aspect of international investment law, particularly concerning environmental and sustainable development-related issues. The purpose of this study is to analyze the consistency between the sustainable finance policy system—based on the European Union`s “Taxonomy Regulation”—and international investment law by examining related literature, international investment arbitration cases, and treaties.Upon reviewing previous environmental ISDS cases, this study suggests that tribunals were not opposed to environmental protection, contrary to what critics might argue. In fact, many tribunals have shown a willingness to accommodate the states’ public interest considerations, achieving a balance between host states’ environmental and investment protection obligations. However, when considering the EU’s “Taxonomy Regulation”, it becomes evident that such policies may raise concerns about discrimination and arbitrariness. Despite more friendly standards applied by the recent ISDS tribunals, unfavorable outcomes could still occur to the host states, necessitating caution in the design of similar policies.參考文獻 中文書籍丘宏達，現代國際法，修訂二版（2008年）。李貴英，國際投資法專論，初版（2004年）。經濟部投資業務處，國際投資協定分析釋義，初版（2012年）。中文期刊論文李貴英，論歐洲聯盟國際投資政策之法律規範，歐美研究，42卷2期，頁339-389（2012年）。李貴英，析論國際投資仲裁制度之改革與歐洲聯盟「投資法院體系」（Investment Court System）之倡議，月旦法學雜誌，291期，頁81-93（2019年）。吳建輝，歐盟作為規則產生者: 以其在能源憲章公約之參與為例歐美研究，44卷3期，頁239-304（2014年）。鄭昀欣，歐盟新型態經貿協定有關投資議題之特色，經濟前瞻，189期，頁97-101（2020年）。陳麗娟，歐盟永續金融興起之概況，國會季刊，49卷1期，頁1-16（2021年）。中文學位論文羅傑，國際投資法上合理規制措施之研究─以間接徵收規範為中心，國立交通大學科技法律研究所碩士論文（2013年）。徐右瑩，歐盟再生能源躉購措施之合法性分析：以歐盟國家補助與SCM協定為中心，國立交通大學科技法律研究所碩士論文（2016年）。葉宇陽，國際投資與環境保護規範之衝突與協調，東吳大學法學院法律學系碩士班碩士論文（2021年）。練家安，國際投資法下地主國規制權與外國投資人保護之探討，東吳大學法學院法律學系碩士班碩士論文（2022年）。英文書籍RUDOLF DOLZER, et al., PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW (3 ed. 2022).LONE WANDAHL MOUYAL, INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND THE RIGHT TO REGULATE : A HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE (Routledge. 2016).UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMISSION FOR ASIA AND THE PACIFIC, FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT GOVERNANCE (United Nations. 2020).ANDREAS GOLDTHAU & JAN MARTIN WITTE, GLOBAL ENERGY GOVERNANCE: THE NEW RULES OF THE GAME (Brookings Institution Press. 2010).英文專論論文Hillard Huntington & Christine Jojarth, Financing the Future: Investments in Alternative Sources of Energy, in GLOBAL ENERGY GOVERNANCE (Andreas Goldthau & Jan Martin Witte eds., 2010).Bradly J. Condon & Tapen Sinha, International Investment Agreements, in THE ROLE OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN GLOBAL ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE (2013).Makane Moïse Mbengue & Deepak Raju, The Environment and Investment Arbitration, in THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION (Thomas Schultz & Federico Ortino eds., 2020).Martin Dietrich Brauch, Reforming International Investment Law for Climate Change Goals, in RESEARCH HANDBOOK ON CLIMATE FINANCE AND INVESTMENT LAW (Michael Mehling & Harro van Asselt eds., forthcoming).Prabhash Ranjan & Pushkar Anand, Determination of Indirect Expropriation and Doctrine of Police Power in International Investment Law, in JUDGING THE STATE IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND INVESTMENT LAW: SOVEREIGNTY MODERN, THE LAW AND THE ECONOMICS (Leïla Choukroune ed. 2016).Benedict Kingsbury & Stephan W. Schill, Public Law Concepts to Balance Investors’ Rights with State Regulatory Actions in the Public Interest—the Concept of Proportionality, in INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC LAW (Stephan W. Schill ed. 2010).Diane A. Desierto, Environmental Protection in International Investment Arbitration: From Defences to Counterclaims, in THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH THE LENS OF INTERNATIONAL COURTS AND TRIBUNALS (Edgardo Sobenes, et al. eds., 2022).Lone Wandahl Mouyal, The Case-Study of Expropriation Claims in International Investment Law and Investment Arbitration, in INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND THE RIGHT TO REGULATE : A HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE (2016).Lone Wandahl Mouyal, General International Law, Investment Protection and the Right to Regulate, in INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND THE RIGHT TO REGULATE : A HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE (2016).英文期刊論文Kyla Tienhaara, Regulatory Chill in a Warming World: The Threat to Climate Policy Posed by Investor-State Dispute Settlement, 7 TRANSNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 229(2018).Iris H. Y. Chiu, Regulating Sustainable Finance in Capital Markets: A Perspective from Socially Embedded Decentered Regulation, 84 LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 75(2021).Alicja Sikora, European Green Deal – Legal and Financial Challenges of the Climate Change, 21 ERA FORUM (2021).Maryam Malakotipour, The Chilling Effect of Indirect Expropriation Clauses on Host States’ Public Policies: a Call for a Legislative Response, 22 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY LAW REVIEW (2020).Christina L. Kuritzky Beharry, Melinda E., Going Green: Managing the Environment through International Investment Arbitration Symposium: Managing the Global Environment through Trade: WTO, TPP, and TTIP Negotiations, and Bilateral Investment Treaties versus Regional Trade Agreements, 30 AM. U. INT`L L. REV. 383(2015).Kyla Tienhaara, et al., Investor-state Disputes Threaten the Global Green Energy Transition, 376 SCIENCE (2022).Barnali Choudhury, International Investment Law and Noneconomic Issues, 53 VAND. J. TRANSNAT`L L. 1(2020).Caroline Henckels, Indirect Expropriation and the Right to Regulate: Revisiting Proportionality Analysis and the Standard of Review in Investor-State Arbitration, 15 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW 223(2012).Kenneth J. Vandevelde, A Unified Theory of Fair and Equitable Treatment, 43 N.Y.U. J. INT`L L. & POL. 43(2010).Ying Zhu, Fair and Equitable Treatment of Foreign Investors in an Era of Sustainable Development, 58 NAT. RESOURCES J. 319(2018).Tanya Gupta, Exploring the Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) Principle and Balancing Investor-State Rights, 4 INT`L J.L. MGMT. & HUMAN. 1398(2021).Eric De Brabandere, Fair and Equitable Treatment and (Full) Protection and Security in African Investment Treaties Between Generality and Contextual Specificity, 18 THE JOURNAL OF WORLD INVESTMENT & TRADE 530(2017).Camille Martini, Avoiding the Planned Obsolescence of Modern International Investment Agreements: Can General Exception Mechanisms Be Improved, and How, 59 B.C. L. REV. 2877(2018).Caroline Henckels, Should Investment Treaties Contain Public Policy Exceptions, 59 B.C. L. REV. 2825(2018).Elena Cima, Promoting Renewable Energy Through FTAs? The Legal Implications of a New Generation of Trade Agreements, 52 JOURNAL OF WORLD TRADE 663(2018).Prabhash Ranjan, Emerging Trends in Investor-State Dispute Settlement in New Free Trade Agreements, GLOBAL TRADE AND CUSTOMS JOURNAL 332(2022).Kiyotaka Morita, Recent Development in the European Union Regarding Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanism-An Analysis of the Comprehensive Economic And Trade Agreement: CETA, 48 HITOTSUBASHI JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLITICS 69(2020).Jacob Stone, Arbitrariness, the Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard, and the International Law of Investment, 25 LEIDEN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 77(2012). 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
國際經營與貿易學系
108351042資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108351042 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 薛景文 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Hsueh, Ching-Wen en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 鍾子晴 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chung, Tzu-Ching en_US dc.creator (作者) 鍾子晴 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Chung, Tzu-Ching en_US dc.date (日期) 2023 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-Aug-2023 13:09:17 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-Aug-2023 13:09:17 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Aug-2023 13:09:17 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0108351042 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/146328 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國際經營與貿易學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 108351042 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 當氣候變遷已成定局，「永續發展」成為所有地球人共同追求的目標，世界各國政府無一不使出渾身解數，希望能夠在有限的資源下，最小化此一環境風險帶來的影響。「永續金融政策（Sustainable finance policies）」作為政府的手段之一，希望能夠透過支持、鼓勵或要求投資人於作成投資決策時，將環境、社會及治理（Environmental, Social and Governance）因素納入考量，以創造長期的價值投資，以推廣政府的永續發展目標，簡言之，即是希望以私人資本市場資金，填補政府於推展經濟體之永續轉型時所欠缺者，進而達成永續發展目標。惟如所有追求公共利益之政策一般，永續金融政策同樣可能受到外國投資人在投資人與地主國爭端解決（Investor-To-State Dispute Settlement, ISDS）機制的挑戰，尤其是透過「永續投資分類規則」定義何謂「永續經濟活動」，將與國際投資法的「環境盲」特性有所衝突。公共政策目的是否以及如何在ISDS仲裁庭中受到考慮，一向是國際投資法的一大爭議，尤其是在環境、永續發展等議題上，衝突更加劇烈。本研究欲透過文獻回顧法整理相關文獻、國際投資仲裁案例及國際投資條約，進行以歐盟「永續投資分類規則」為基礎之永續金融政策體系，與國際投資法規範間的合致性分析。經檢視過往環境相關的仲裁案件，本研究發現ISDS仲裁庭並非如反對者所言的強烈反對環保，反之許多仲裁庭相當願意給予公共利益目的一定程度的考慮，並試圖在地主國的環境保護義務及投資保障義務間取得平衡，同樣趨勢亦顯示於近期歐盟與第三國簽訂的投資保障協定當中。然而針對「永續投資分類規則」，本文認為其「技術篩選標準」之設定有產生歧視性及專斷性的疑慮，尤其是引發眾多爭議的「使用天然氣或核能之發電活動」。若有投資人提交ISDS案件且進入實質審理，即使假設仲裁庭使用對環境政策較為寬容的審查標準，仍可能取得不利結果，故在類似政策的設計及執行上需格外謹慎。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Inevitable climate change has driven “sustainable development” to become a shared objective for everyone on Earth. In response, governments are exhausting every available resource, striving to reduce the repercussions of this environmental threat. One of their key strategies is the implementation of “Sustainable Finance Policies”. These policies are designed to foster long-term, valuable investments by mandating that investors consider environmental, social, and governance factors when making decisions. The ultimate goal is to use private capital market funds to compensate for any shortfall in government support, accelerating the sustainable transformation of the economy.However, public-interest policies like this often face challenges from the Investor-to-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism. Since “Taxonomy Regulation” aims to define what kinds of economic activities to be “sustainable”, it could incite conflict due to the “climate-blind” of international investment law. How the ISDS tribunals would consider public policy goals is a controversial aspect of international investment law, particularly concerning environmental and sustainable development-related issues. The purpose of this study is to analyze the consistency between the sustainable finance policy system—based on the European Union`s “Taxonomy Regulation”—and international investment law by examining related literature, international investment arbitration cases, and treaties.Upon reviewing previous environmental ISDS cases, this study suggests that tribunals were not opposed to environmental protection, contrary to what critics might argue. In fact, many tribunals have shown a willingness to accommodate the states’ public interest considerations, achieving a balance between host states’ environmental and investment protection obligations. However, when considering the EU’s “Taxonomy Regulation”, it becomes evident that such policies may raise concerns about discrimination and arbitrariness. Despite more friendly standards applied by the recent ISDS tribunals, unfavorable outcomes could still occur to the host states, necessitating caution in the design of similar policies. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 4第一節 研究背景與動機 5第二節 研究架構與範圍 7第三節 研究方法 8第四節 研究限制 9第二章 永續金融概論 10第一節 永續金融之發展背景及定義 10第二節 歐盟永續金融政策及「永續投資分類規則」 19第三章 國際投資法對環境議題之適用性 45第一節 與環境相關之國際投資仲裁案件概述 45第二節 與環境相關之國際投資仲裁案件分析 50第四章 歐盟「永續投資分類規則」於國際投資法之適法性 86第一節 歐盟簽署之國際投資協定條款分析 86第二節 永續投資分類規則之適法性分析 96第五章 結論 108附錄：與環境相關之國際投資仲裁案件列表 111參考書目 115 zh_TW dc.format.extent 3094289 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108351042 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 永續金融 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 國際投資法 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 投資人與地主國爭端解決機制 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 永續投資分類規則 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 技術篩選標準 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Sustainable finance en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) International Investment Law en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Investor-to-State Dispute Settlement en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Taxonomy Regulation en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Technical screening criteria en_US dc.title (題名) 論永續金融政策在國際投資法下之適法性——以歐盟永續投資分類規則為例 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The Legitimacy of Sustainable Finance Policies under International Investment Law: A Case Study of the EU Taxonomy Regulation en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文書籍丘宏達，現代國際法，修訂二版（2008年）。李貴英，國際投資法專論，初版（2004年）。經濟部投資業務處，國際投資協定分析釋義，初版（2012年）。中文期刊論文李貴英，論歐洲聯盟國際投資政策之法律規範，歐美研究，42卷2期，頁339-389（2012年）。李貴英，析論國際投資仲裁制度之改革與歐洲聯盟「投資法院體系」（Investment Court System）之倡議，月旦法學雜誌，291期，頁81-93（2019年）。吳建輝，歐盟作為規則產生者: 以其在能源憲章公約之參與為例歐美研究，44卷3期，頁239-304（2014年）。鄭昀欣，歐盟新型態經貿協定有關投資議題之特色，經濟前瞻，189期，頁97-101（2020年）。陳麗娟，歐盟永續金融興起之概況，國會季刊，49卷1期，頁1-16（2021年）。中文學位論文羅傑，國際投資法上合理規制措施之研究─以間接徵收規範為中心，國立交通大學科技法律研究所碩士論文（2013年）。徐右瑩，歐盟再生能源躉購措施之合法性分析：以歐盟國家補助與SCM協定為中心，國立交通大學科技法律研究所碩士論文（2016年）。葉宇陽，國際投資與環境保護規範之衝突與協調，東吳大學法學院法律學系碩士班碩士論文（2021年）。練家安，國際投資法下地主國規制權與外國投資人保護之探討，東吳大學法學院法律學系碩士班碩士論文（2022年）。英文書籍RUDOLF DOLZER, et al., PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW (3 ed. 2022).LONE WANDAHL MOUYAL, INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND THE RIGHT TO REGULATE : A HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE (Routledge. 2016).UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMISSION FOR ASIA AND THE PACIFIC, FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT GOVERNANCE (United Nations. 2020).ANDREAS GOLDTHAU & JAN MARTIN WITTE, GLOBAL ENERGY GOVERNANCE: THE NEW RULES OF THE GAME (Brookings Institution Press. 2010).英文專論論文Hillard Huntington & Christine Jojarth, Financing the Future: Investments in Alternative Sources of Energy, in GLOBAL ENERGY GOVERNANCE (Andreas Goldthau & Jan Martin Witte eds., 2010).Bradly J. Condon & Tapen Sinha, International Investment Agreements, in THE ROLE OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN GLOBAL ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE (2013).Makane Moïse Mbengue & Deepak Raju, The Environment and Investment Arbitration, in THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION (Thomas Schultz & Federico Ortino eds., 2020).Martin Dietrich Brauch, Reforming International Investment Law for Climate Change Goals, in RESEARCH HANDBOOK ON CLIMATE FINANCE AND INVESTMENT LAW (Michael Mehling & Harro van Asselt eds., forthcoming).Prabhash Ranjan & Pushkar Anand, Determination of Indirect Expropriation and Doctrine of Police Power in International Investment Law, in JUDGING THE STATE IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND INVESTMENT LAW: SOVEREIGNTY MODERN, THE LAW AND THE ECONOMICS (Leïla Choukroune ed. 2016).Benedict Kingsbury & Stephan W. Schill, Public Law Concepts to Balance Investors’ Rights with State Regulatory Actions in the Public Interest—the Concept of Proportionality, in INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC LAW (Stephan W. Schill ed. 2010).Diane A. Desierto, Environmental Protection in International Investment Arbitration: From Defences to Counterclaims, in THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH THE LENS OF INTERNATIONAL COURTS AND TRIBUNALS (Edgardo Sobenes, et al. eds., 2022).Lone Wandahl Mouyal, The Case-Study of Expropriation Claims in International Investment Law and Investment Arbitration, in INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND THE RIGHT TO REGULATE : A HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE (2016).Lone Wandahl Mouyal, General International Law, Investment Protection and the Right to Regulate, in INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND THE RIGHT TO REGULATE : A HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE (2016).英文期刊論文Kyla Tienhaara, Regulatory Chill in a Warming World: The Threat to Climate Policy Posed by Investor-State Dispute Settlement, 7 TRANSNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 229(2018).Iris H. Y. Chiu, Regulating Sustainable Finance in Capital Markets: A Perspective from Socially Embedded Decentered Regulation, 84 LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 75(2021).Alicja Sikora, European Green Deal – Legal and Financial Challenges of the Climate Change, 21 ERA FORUM (2021).Maryam Malakotipour, The Chilling Effect of Indirect Expropriation Clauses on Host States’ Public Policies: a Call for a Legislative Response, 22 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY LAW REVIEW (2020).Christina L. Kuritzky Beharry, Melinda E., Going Green: Managing the Environment through International Investment Arbitration Symposium: Managing the Global Environment through Trade: WTO, TPP, and TTIP Negotiations, and Bilateral Investment Treaties versus Regional Trade Agreements, 30 AM. U. INT`L L. REV. 383(2015).Kyla Tienhaara, et al., Investor-state Disputes Threaten the Global Green Energy Transition, 376 SCIENCE (2022).Barnali Choudhury, International Investment Law and Noneconomic Issues, 53 VAND. J. TRANSNAT`L L. 1(2020).Caroline Henckels, Indirect Expropriation and the Right to Regulate: Revisiting Proportionality Analysis and the Standard of Review in Investor-State Arbitration, 15 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW 223(2012).Kenneth J. Vandevelde, A Unified Theory of Fair and Equitable Treatment, 43 N.Y.U. J. INT`L L. & POL. 43(2010).Ying Zhu, Fair and Equitable Treatment of Foreign Investors in an Era of Sustainable Development, 58 NAT. RESOURCES J. 319(2018).Tanya Gupta, Exploring the Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) Principle and Balancing Investor-State Rights, 4 INT`L J.L. MGMT. & HUMAN. 1398(2021).Eric De Brabandere, Fair and Equitable Treatment and (Full) Protection and Security in African Investment Treaties Between Generality and Contextual Specificity, 18 THE JOURNAL OF WORLD INVESTMENT & TRADE 530(2017).Camille Martini, Avoiding the Planned Obsolescence of Modern International Investment Agreements: Can General Exception Mechanisms Be Improved, and How, 59 B.C. L. REV. 2877(2018).Caroline Henckels, Should Investment Treaties Contain Public Policy Exceptions, 59 B.C. L. REV. 2825(2018).Elena Cima, Promoting Renewable Energy Through FTAs? The Legal Implications of a New Generation of Trade Agreements, 52 JOURNAL OF WORLD TRADE 663(2018).Prabhash Ranjan, Emerging Trends in Investor-State Dispute Settlement in New Free Trade Agreements, GLOBAL TRADE AND CUSTOMS JOURNAL 332(2022).Kiyotaka Morita, Recent Development in the European Union Regarding Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanism-An Analysis of the Comprehensive Economic And Trade Agreement: CETA, 48 HITOTSUBASHI JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLITICS 69(2020).Jacob Stone, Arbitrariness, the Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard, and the International Law of Investment, 25 LEIDEN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 77(2012). zh_TW
