The Right to Regulate in Natural Resources Investment Disputes: A Legal Analysis under International Investment Law.

This dissertation critically examines the extent to which international investment law preserves the sovereign right of States to regulate in the natural resources sector without incurring liability. It situates this inquiry within the broader normative tension between investment protection and the pursuit of non-economic objectives, such as environmental protection, climate action, and indigenous rights—areas where regulatory measures are not only desirable but often legally required under other branches of international law. The natural resource sector thus provides a particularly revealing test case for assessing whether the investment regime adequately accommodates sovereign regulatory space. Drawing on a comprehensive survey of arbitral jurisprudence, treaty practice, and contractual arrangements, the study analyses how tribunals have interpreted and applied key legal doctrines—including the sole effect doctrine, police powers, proportionality analysis, and judicial deference—in disputes involving natural resources. It finds that while tribunals increasingly acknowledge States’ regulatory prerogatives, their reasoning remains fragmented, inconsistent, and frequently weighted toward investor protection. In parallel, treaty drafting and contractual practice have sought to recalibrate the balance, through explicit right to regulate clauses, codified police powers carve-outs, and the cautious reform of stabilization clauses. Yet the effectiveness of these innovations ultimately depends on arbitral interpretation, which has too often treated non-investment obligations as peripheral. To address these shortcomings, the dissertation argues for a more systematic application of systemic integration under Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. This interpretive approach provides an immediately available method for reconciling investment law with States’ parallel obligations under international human rights, environmental, and climate regimes. It does not require treaty renegotiation or institutional overhaul but instead reorients arbitral reasoning toward greater coherence across international law. The study thus contributes to ongoing debates on the reform of investment law by offering the first sector-specific examination of the right to regulate in natural resources governance. It highlights the need for a recalibrated interpretive framework that not only protects investors but also preserves States’ capacity to fulfil their sovereign and international legal responsibilities in the public interest.