在国际投资仲裁中，归因是判断是否存在国家行为，并令国家承担国际法律责任的起点。ARSIWA第四条和第五条分别规定了国家机关和准国家实体行为归因于国家的认定标准，即传统理论中的“结构标准”和“职能标准”。然而，理论标准的分野并未贯彻到投资仲裁实践中。投资仲裁中的归因对个案事实的依赖性较强，因此表现出的个案差异较大。实践中，仲裁庭虽然依照ARSIWA的逻辑对第四条和第五条进行选择适用，却在实际论证中倾向于将“结构标准”和“职能标准”混合适用，产生了创新的“结构和职能标准”。这种做法主要源于ARSIWA归因规则的内在关联性和同一案件中各归因规则证明材料的高度相似性。

In international investment arbitration, attribution is the starting-point of state responsibility. Art.4 and Art.5 of ARSIWA respectively indicate the traditional attribution rules to attribute conduct of state organs and para-statal entities to the states, namely the “structural test” and the “functional test”. However, in practice, the investment tribunals have not followed these distinctive rules. The application of attribution rules in investment arbitration appears with great variation upon individual cases. Following the logic underlying ARSIWA, even though tribunals apply Art.4 and Art.5 respectively, with regard to specific standards applied, they turn to a comprehensive test combining “structural test” and “functional test”, adopting a considerably innovative “structural and functional test”. This tendency of the tribunals results from the intrinsic relevance between ARSIWA attribution rules, and from the similar factual basis applied to respective attribution rules within one case.