Examples of chapter 11 NAFTA disputes, a trade-investment-environment experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What has been the impact of regional trade agreements on the way the environment is protected in each region? What has been the role of the dispute settlement mechanisms in such processes? Have those agreements found a way to reconcile trade and environmental protection? Those are some of the questions that will be dealt with. In particular in relation to one regional process the NAFTA. This trilateral treaty, between Canada, Mexico and the USA, contains a large set of provisions and 3 complex dispute settlement mechanisms to ensure its application: a general scheme for controversies, (Chapter 20), a specific device for antidumping and countervailing duty disputes (Chapter 19), and an innovative procedure for the settlement of disputes between an investor and a Member State (Chapter 11) on which we will concentrate. NAFTA's Chapter 11 was designed to provide a predictable legal framework to create a favorable environment for the increase in investment opportunities inside Member States, especially by means of clear rules and an effective method of dispute settlement between an investor and a NAFTA Member State, the mechanism enables investors to resort to binding international arbitration if the host government of a Member state violates the investment provisions of NAFTA. The analysis will pay special attention to the incidence of this mechanism on environmental protection; for that purpose will be analyzed 12 cases relating to takings, which are one sort of indirect expropriation by the enacting of a regulation that limits or modifies the investment. Those cases have become a central issue in the discussion of the NAFTA given the danger they represent to the regulatory capacity of the States and the damage they have inflicted to the protection of the environment by forcing the reverse of some environmental laws. As will be demonstrated, one of the causes for the problems of Chapter 11 has been the lack of definition of an investment, lack that may have been done with the purpose of encompassing as much different kind of investments as possible, and to protect them against all the possible measures taken by the governments. Nevertheless, this fault has proven to be an expensive one, not only monetarily but also from an environmental point of view.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".