We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Very little empirical research has been conducted in relation to China’s BIT law and practice. This chapter makes a novel attempt to comprehend China’s BIT-making by applying an empirical (or quantitative) approach. Existing literature has tried to rationalize Chinese BITs’ generational evolution by attributing this to China’s policy shift, transitioning from using BITs to attract foreign investment to using BITs to protect its outbound investment. Because of this policy shift, Chinese BITs are being reframed or remodeled, moving from a conservative and protectionist approach with the stress on sovereignty in regulating foreign investment to a liberal approach with more focus on foreign investors’ protection. Although the Chinese government has never made it clear to the outside world why and how its BITs have changed, the general wisdom attributes this change to the government’s self-determined policy move. Through its empirical study, the chapter looks for correlation between Chinese BITs and a variety of factors shaping a host state’s BIT policy. The finding seems to suggest that China’s BIT policy change is due to some outside pressures as well as certain endogenous factors.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.