“…Notably, though, in addition to utilizing the third‐generation approach in recent BITs, China has also utilized the approach in most of its preferential trade agreements that include comprehensive rules on investment . Seemingly modeled in part on an approach currently being used by NAFTA members, China's third‐generation BITs aim to “strike a better balance between the rights of the investor and the host state.” Fair and equitable treatment in accordance with customary international law continues to be guaranteed, but MFN and national treatment are conditioned upon “like circumstances.” In addition, China's intentions regarding investor–state dispute resolution and MFN treatment are made explicit. For example, the China–New Zealand preferential trade agreement states that the MFN clause “does not encompass a requirement to extend to investors of the other Party dispute resolution procedures.” Likewise, in the China–Canadian BIT, China's most recently signed BIT as of early 2014, Article 5(3) provides that MFN treatment “does not encompass the dispute resolution mechanisms.” Moreover, both the China–New Zealand and China–Canada agreements include more “elaborate” investor–state dispute resolution sections than China's second‐generation BITs…”