text: other hand, it was true that international tribunals used such indices merely as signposts to facilitate assessment of the loss and that much depended on the individual facts of the case. Jurisprudence in the matter varied from State to State. That did not, however, vitiate the principle, the statement of which w&s an acknowledgement of current pract!.:e. 360. For yet some other members, the expression “econom!cally assessable damage” was much too subjective. It depended on the philosophical approach and created controversial interpretations. The term was neither explained in the report nor made clear in the article itself, No indication was given - 197 -whether it excluded moral. damage of the State itself cr included costs of preventive measuree or economic losses actually sustained as a direct result of such measures. Obviouely, the term did not refer to quantifiable economic losses alone. But was it sufficient for a loee to be economically quantifiable in order for it to be regarded as economically assessable damage? Or did the loss have to have been actually sustained? Guch questions took on particular importance in environmental law and most likely there had not yet been any arbitral decisions on them. The question of what could or should be understood by the term %conomically assessable damage” gave rise to many complex i6sues, many of them of a contemporary nature, which the paragraph felled to elucidate. 361. A few members also felt that in the final analysis what mattered was that compensation should be adequate. This was, in their view, particularly relevant in cases of natfonaliration, That meant that the financial statue of the offending State, in such r,ases, should also be taken into account. This approach was cossistent with the concept of “excessive onerousness” which was introduced in article 7 on restitution in kind, but not in article 8 on
analysis: The text appears to be discussing international law and the concept of "economically assessable damage" in the context of environmental law and nationalization. The language used is formal and technical, indicating that the text is likely from a legal or academic document. The discussion of compensation and restitution also suggests that the text is related to international disputes and claims.