气候投资争端中间接征收界定的困境及出路OACHSSCD

Efforts to achieve the objectives of the Paris Agreement have intensified tensions between na-tional climate governance measures and the existing international investment law regime,particularly in relation to the determination of"indirect expropriation".Because international law has not clearly defined the boundary between legitimate regulatory action and compensa-ble indirect expropriation,investment arbitration practice has produced fragmented decisions and incon-sistent legal standards,thereby undermining legal certainty.This dilemma largely stems from the long-standing jurisprudential conflict between the"police powers"doctrine and the"sole effects"doctrine.The transformative nature of climate governance has further amplified this tension,revealing a form of"systemic incompatibility"between the traditional investment law framework and the demands of global climate governance.Addressing this challenge requires structural reform.At the treaty level,reform should move beyond piecemeal amendments by clarifying the substantive standards of key investment pro-tection clauses and incorporating well-designed exception provisions to preserve regulatory space for cli-mate policies.At the adjudicative level,a structured four-step analytical framework should be developed to provide clearer guidance for arbitral tribunals.Guided by the vision of building"a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind,"China should also play a proactive role in promoting treaty reform and sha-ping judicial practice,while exploring and contributing a"Chinese solution"that balances the interests of investors,host states,and the global community.