Cracking a Sledgehammer with a Nut: Provisional Measures for the Climate Change Dilemma in Investor–State Dispute Settlement
クルミで大ハンマーを割る：投資家・国家間紛争解決における気候変動ジレンマへの暫定措置 (AI 翻訳)
Gu Fang
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、国際投資法と気候ガバナンスの交差が生むISDSの構造的課題に対し、暫定措置を手続的再構築の手段として提案する。実体審理に代わるものではなく、緊急性と不可逆性を考慮した暫定措置が、投資家・国家・共同体の利益を一時的に調整し、気候変動訴訟における手続的均衡を実現すると論じる。既存の実体法アプローチの限界を踏まえ、予防的かつ集団的な気候損害に対応する新たな枠組みを提示する。
English
This article addresses the structural challenge in ISDS arising from the intersection of international investment law and climate governance, proposing provisional measures as a procedural reorientation. Grounded in tribunals' inherent powers, these measures temporarily balance investor, state, and community interests by weighing urgency and irreversibility, without displacing substantive adjudication. The framework enables ISDS to respond to the temporal and collective realities of climate governance while maintaining consensual legitimacy.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本はISDS関連の紛争事例は少ないが、気候変動対策と投資保護の調和は、今後の通商政策や投資協定の見直しに影響し得る。特に、再生可能エネルギー投資や化石燃料関連投資を巡る紛争リスクは、日本企業の海外展開にも関わるため、手続的枠組みの理解は有用。
In the global GX context
Globally, this paper contributes to the growing scholarship on climate litigation and investment arbitration, offering a procedural mechanism that complements substantive climate defenses. It provides a doctrinal basis for tribunals to address climate urgency within ISDS, relevant to the ongoing debates on ISDS reform and climate change in international economic law.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:投資仲裁と気候変動の交差に関する理論的枠組みを提供し、暫定措置の新たな活用可能性を示す。
🏢実務担当者:気候関連投資紛争のリスク管理や、ISDS手続における暫定措置の戦略的活用に示唆を与える。
🏛政策担当者:ISDS改革や投資協定の気候条項設計において、暫定措置の役割を考慮する必要性を示す。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Abstract The intersection of international investment law and climate governance has created a structural challenge for investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS): how to balance regulatory autonomy, investor protection, and collective environmental interests. Existing approaches centred on systemic integration, proportionality, or treaty exceptions during the merits phase remain retrospective and insufficient to address the preventive and collective dimensions of climate change damage. This article proposes a procedural reorientation towards provisional measures as an under-explored yet doctrinally grounded mechanism for addressing climate-related investment disputes. Doctrinally, provisional measures, grounded in tribunals’ inherent powers, embody a preventive procedural logic that allows ISDS to temporarily accommodate community interests alongside investor and state rights. Without purporting to resolve the climate–investment law dilemma, or to displace substantive adjudication on expropriation or fair and equitable treatment, such measures operate within a bounded procedurally oriented space that weighs urgency and irreversibility. By contextually interpreting the established thresholds of prima facie jurisdiction, urgency, necessity, and rights preservation, tribunals can deploy provisional measures not as exceptional remedies, but as instruments of procedural balance in climate-sensitive adjudication. In doing so, this procedural framework enables ISDS to respond to the temporal and collective realities of climate governance while maintaining its consensual legitimacy.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1017/s2047102526100430first seen 2026-08-16 05:06:15
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。