气候变化已经成为全人类的科学共识，需要各国采取措施积极应对。而国际投资仲裁中投资者诉东道国气候变化应对措施使得东道国面临巨额赔偿的威胁，可能导致东道国监管措施遭遇“寒蝉效应”。本文在对比国际投资仲裁实践中对此问题不同的判定方式后，认为需要采取“情况变化测试”来判定东道国是否需要赔偿。此外，还应该通过完善现有的国际投资协定等具体措施，来明确东道国合理善意行使气候变化应对措施给投资造成影响的无需赔偿。同时，出于人类共同应对气候危机的要求，东道国针对气候变化的立场表态也不影响其在投资争端中的抗辩。

Climate change has become the scientific consensus of all mankind and requires countries to take active measures to address it. In international investment arbitration, climate change regulations may face an investor’s threat to arbitrate, exposing the host country to the risk of large amounts of compensation, which may lead to regulatory chill. In this regard, after comparing the different approaches to this issue in international investment arbitration practice, this paper argues that the "Changed Circumstances Test" should be adopted to determine whether the host country needs to pay compensation. In addition, specific measures such as the amendment of IIAs should be adopted to clarify that host countries are not required to compensate for the impact on investment caused by the reasonable and good faith exercise of climate change regulations. At the same time, the host country's position on climate change does not affect its defence in investor-state disputes, as required by the common human response to the climate crisis.