International investment agreements (IIAs) are designed as key tools to promote cross-border direct investment and protect investors. However, these agreements often fail to balance the relationship between investor rights and host country development needs. Focus on how to find a new balance between promoting analytical framework of law and economics, comprehensively consider international law, economic theory and empirical data, and critically evaluate existing international investment agreements from the three dimensions of investor protection standards, dispute settlement mechanisms and agreement flexibility. In response to these issues, a series of reform recommendations were put forward, including introducing differentiated investor protection standards, improving the dispute settlement mechanism to increase its transparency and fairness, and increasing the flexibility of the agreement to adapt to the development levels of different countries.

Di Liu. Reconstruction of the Path of Balancing Interests between Investors and Host Countries in International Investment Agreements. International Journal of Social Sciences and Economic Management (2024), Vol. 5, Issue 1: 126-137. https://doi.org/10.38007/IJSSEM.2024.050114.

[1] Li Jianing, Han Lu. Research on the impact and response of US long-arm jurisdiction on Chinese foreign-related enterprises - taking TikTok as an example [J]. Tsinghua Law Review, 2023, 11(01): 232-255

[2] Hu Pingren, Chen Si. Analysis of the reasons why sovereign countries accept international human rights standards [J]. Public Governance Research, 2024, 36(01): 83-96.DOI: 10.13975/j.cnki.gdxz.2024.01.007

[3] Shao Yongle. On the return of interest after the contract is invalid—based on an empirical investigation of judicial cases [J]. Financial Law, 2024, (01): 145-160. DOI: 10.16823/j.cnki.10-1281 /d.2024.01.011

[4] Liu Xinran. Research on the international trade dispute settlement mechanism under the background of "One Belt and One Road" [J]. National Circulation Economy, 2024, (01): 52-55. DOI: 10.16834/j.cnki.issn1009-5292.2024.01.014

[5] Sun Nanshen. On corporate liability issues and dispute resolution in investment arbitration [J]. Jinling Law Review, 2023, (00): 258-283

[6] Peng Xianqi. Dilemmas and breakthroughs of China’s investment dispute settlement mechanism in Nigeria - Taking the “Zhongshan Fucheng Case” as an example [J]. African Studies, 2023, 20(01): 184-203+236-237

[7] Ha T L , Hai L V , Farhad T . A study on the nonlinear dynamics of ASEAN financial integration[J]. Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies,2024,31(1):2-14

[8] Jiang W , Luo D , Wang L , et al. Foreign ownership and bribery in Chinese listed firms: An institutional perspective[J].Journal of Business Research,2024,174114530.

[9] Wang W , Zou Y , Cheng Y , et al. The impact of EU-ETS on the global marine industry and the relevant investment dispute resolutions[J].Frontiers in Marine Science,2024,1

[10] Zhang S , Li N . Addressing Climate Change through International Investment Agreements: Obstacles and Reform Options[J]. Sustainability,2024,16(4)

[11] Fagbemi F , Oke F D . Climate change vulnerability-foreign direct investment linkage: Why climate change preparedness matters in Sub-Saharan Africa[J]. Research in Economics,2024,78(1):52-60