ABSTRACT
Having become a leading source of outward investment, China’s investment treaty policy and practice is evolving, first of all by changing the template of reference, from the synthetical European model to the analytical North American version. While retaining typical Chinese features, the definition of investment is being progressively enriched with new characteristics, to enhance interpretive predictability. Specifically, the ratione legis requirement (also known as ‘legality requirement’), a constant with very limited exceptions in China’s practice, is being clarified as referring exclusively to civil laws and regulations on investment admission and management. Also, the introduction of objective criteria in most recent stipulations aims at providing clear references regarding what constitutes an investment. As such, China’s policy is arguably driven by pragmatism (as trying to provide answers to currently unsettled issues), convenience (as alterations to established policy patterns are taken with the goal to better protect Chinese interests abroad) and prudence (as amendments rely on major actors’ best practices). Both aspects, typical also of ASEAN’s investment treaty practice, may become a global standard, especially were they to be ultimately included in the agreements China is negotiating with the US and the EU.
