Unlike the Pacific, Europe generally has a well-developed parking system and a series of European laws and multilateral agreements to protect them. However, the effectiveness of this protection is not uniform and the main objective of iucn`s European programme (2005-2008) is to improve this protection in the weakest areas. The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) was a draft agreement negotiated in secret between the members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) between 1995 and 1998. [1] It sought to create a new body of universal investment laws that would give companies unconditional rights to financial transactions around the world, regardless of national laws and civil rights. The project gave companies the right to sue governments when national health, labor or environmental laws threatened their interests. When his draft was published in 1997, it drew widespread criticism from civil society groups and developing countries, particularly because of the possibility that the agreement would complicate the regulation of foreign investors. After leading an intense global campaign against the MAI by critics of the treaty, France, the host country, announced in October 1998 that it would not support the agreement, which effectively prevented its adoption through the OECD`s consensual procedures. As a result of these tensions, the recent attempt to create a multilateral regulatory framework for foreign direct investment has culminated in a total collapse of the debate on the regulation of foreign direct investment. In the late 1990s, the OECD opened negotiations for a Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI). The aim was to create a solid framework for the regulation of the IDI, which focused on market liberalization, (foreign) investment protection and international dispute resolution.

The MAI would become the equivalent of gatt/WTO, where GATT would provide the rules and rules governing international trade and the MAI the rules and rules applicable to international investment. This independent nature of the MAI was particularly emphasized by the United States and it was stated that the MAI would be open to all OECD and non-OECD members. The election of the OECD as the venue for negotiations was highly controversial, as it excluded the participation of the majority of developing countries. Such a restriction may be based on the importance of military activities or on the fact that they rely on national resources, the benefits of which should be primarily beneficial to national actors and the State. The latter concerns energy resources, minerals and fishing areas. Although there may be a general trend towards liberalization, restrictions on foreign direct investment in activities considered «strategic» remain widespread. In developed countries, the fear of terrorist attacks has led to a marked increase in restricted practices. In developing countries, on the other hand, public authorities continue to nationalize the assets of foreign companies in the name of the «national interest», particularly in promotional activities.

. . .