The typical provisions of BITs and ITPs are clauses relating to the standards for the protection and treatment of foreign investment, which generally deal with issues such as fair and equitable treatment, total protection and security, national treatment and the most frequent treatment of nations.  Provisions for compensation for losses suffered by foreign investors as a result of expropriation or war and dispute are generally an essential element of these agreements. Most of them also regulate the cross-border transfer of funds related to foreign investment. Environmental regulations are also becoming more common in I2As. :104 Malaysia has currently signed IGAs with more than 60 countries around the world to protect Foreign investment and the repatriation of Profess. IIA Navigator This IIAs database – the IIA Navigator – is managed by the IIA section of UNCTAD. You can browse THE IIAs that are completed by a given country or group of countries, view the recently concluded IIAs, or use advanced research for sophisticated research tailored to your needs. Please quote as: UNCTAD, International Investment Agreements Navigator, available at investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/ There are many examples of PTIAs. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is remarkable. While NAFTA addresses a very wide range of issues, including cross-border trade between Canada, Mexico and the United States, Chapter 11 of the agreement contains detailed foreign investment provisions similar to those contained in the ILO.
 Other bilateral examples of PTIA are available in the JAPAN-Singapore EPA, in the Republic of Korea-Chile Free Trade Agreement and in the U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement.  Despite this potential to generate development-friendly benefits, the changing complexity of the IGE system can also create challenges. Among other things, the complexity of the current I2 network makes it difficult for countries to maintain political coherence. The provisions agreed in one IGE may be incompatible with those of another IGE. For developing countries less able to participate in global system I2, this complexity of the IGE framework is particularly difficult to manage.