Moving the Goal Post! How Some NAFTA Tribunals Have Challenged the FTC Note of Interpretation on the Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard Under NAFTA Article 1105
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Article 1105 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) provides that NAFTA Parties must accord to investments of investors treatment “in accordance with international law, including fair and equitable treatment” (“FET”). In the last two decades, Article 1105 has undoubtedly become the most controversial and contested provision of NAFTA Chapter 11. In the words of one writer, “Article 1105 has become the alpha and omega of investor-state arbitration under Chapter 11 of NAFTA.” The FET debate started when three controversial awards were rendered in 2000 on the scope and meaning of Article 1105. The Pope & Talbot tribunal held, inter alia, that Article 1105 requires the application of the FET standard independently (and in addition) to the minimum standard of treatment under international law.
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 | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.007 |
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".