Implications Of A North American Free Trade Region

The proposed North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) represents a historic change in relations among Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The effect of the agreement on the three economies has generated controversy and some degree of alarm within each country. In this book, noted trade and development experts review the available literature on the effects of NAFTA on the three member countries and the world trading system. They evaluate how NAFTA will affect areas such as economic growth, employment, income distribution, industry, and agriculture in Canada, Mexico, and the United States; and consider the significance the trade agreement holds for the rest of the world. Drusill K. Brown begins the discussion by providing an overview and comparison of the general results from recent studies. Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda and Sherman Robinson explore in greater detail the potential effects of NAFTA on wages and employment in Mexico and the United States. Sidney Wintrab reviews industry-specific effects of NAFTA, in particular, the environment, the social agenda, and human rights and democracy. Finally, Carlos Alberto Primo Braga considers the implications of NAFTA on the rest of the world. Following each of these chapters, international scholars assess the alternatives and provide recommendations for future research.

This document discusses the challenge from Mexico, the North American trade regime, North American trade and investment patterns, and issues and options for the future. It also examines what is involved in a tripartite agreement.

This book is a collection of timely and detailed articles on the North American Free Trade Agreement written by experts in the field who examine the Canadian, US and Mexican points of view. The scholars provide an overview as well as their insights of how NAFTA impacts on macroeconomic issues, national perspectives and bilateral issues, cross-border and industry-specific issues and the environment. This book serves as an excellent primary source of information on many of the significant aspects of NAFTA.

Seminar paper from the year 2007 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Region: USA, grade: 2,3, Free University of Berlin, language: English, abstract: In the wake of globalization, many countries are reducing trade barriers and tariffs, resulting in a rise of free-trade areas in which the participating countries trade freely among each other without any restrictions. The goal of these agreements is the increase of wealth in each nation's economy. To reach this goal, the USA, Canada and Mexico negotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which came into effect on January, 1st 1994. It was the world's largest free-trade area with a combined population of over 360m people and a total GDP of 6$ trillion. Today, the NAFTA area comprises a 12.5$ trillion economy and a 430m strong population. For the first time, two highly industrialized, rich countries affiliated themselves with a poorer, newly industrialized country. At the time of its ratification, the agreement was extremely controversial in all three member states and opinions in political camps differed vastly. Supporters of the contract were mostly big companies and investors who were hoping that it would loosen restrictions and barriers on the capital market. Opponents of the agreement were trade unions which, especially in the United States, railed heavily against it. They feared outsourcing and massive job displacements to Mexico, a country in which labor is incredibly cheap and environment protection laws are lax or do not even exist. In Mexico, landowners were skeptical of NAFTA because they feared unfair competition with US-American farmers who are still to this day greatly subsidized by the government.

Examines negotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Analyses issues involved and provides policy recommendations through study of the potential impact and critical factors concerning trade, investment, labour, the environment, and intellectual property. Also covers the impact upon and adjustments required in major industrial sectors - energy, steel, automobiles, textiles and apparel, agriculture, and the financial system.

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) entered into force on January 1, 1994. The agreement was signed by President George H. W. Bush on December 17, 1992, and approved by Congress on November 20, 1993. The NAFTA Implementation Act was signed into law by President William J. Clinton on December 8, 1993 (P.L. 103-182). The overall economic impact of NAFTA is difficult to measure since trade and investment trends are influenced by numerous other economic variables, such as economic growth, inflation, and currency fluctuations. The agreement likely accelerated and also locked in trade liberalization that was already taking place in Mexico, but many of these changes may have taken place without an agreement. Nevertheless, NAFTA is significant, because it was the most comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA) negotiated at the time and contained several groundbreaking provisions. A legacy of the agreement is that it has served as a template or model for the new generation of FTAs that the United States later negotiated, and it also served as a template for certain provisions in multilateral trade negotiations as part of the Uruguay Round. The 115th Congress faces numerous issues related to NAFTA and international trade. President Donald J. Trump has proposed renegotiating NAFTA, or possibly withdrawing from it. Congress may wish to consider the ramifications of renegotiating or withdrawing from NAFTA and how it may affect the U.S. economy and foreign relations with Mexico and Canada. It may also wish to examine the congressional role in a possible renegotiation, as well as the negotiating positions of Canada and Mexico. Mexico has stated that, if NAFTA is reopened, it may seek to broaden negotiations to include security, counter-narcotics, and transmigration issues. Mexico has also indicated that it may choose to withdraw from the agreement if the negotiations are not favorable to the country. Congress may also wish to address issues related to the U.S. withdrawal from the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade agreement among the United States, Canada, Mexico, and 9 other countries. Some observers contend that the withdrawal from TPP could damage U.S. competitiveness and economic leadership in the region, while others see the withdrawal as a way to prevent lower cost imports and potential job losses. Key provisions in TPP may also be addressed in 'modernizing' or renegotiating NAFTA, a more than two decade-old FTA. NAFTA was controversial when first proposed, mostly because it was the first FTA involving two wealthy, developed countries and a developing country. The political debate surrounding the agreement was divisive with proponents arguing that the agreement would help generate thousands of jobs and reduce income disparity in the region, while opponents warned that the agreement would cause huge job losses in the United States as companies moved production to Mexico to lower costs. In reality, NAFTA did not cause the huge job losses feared by the critics or the large economic gains predicted by supporters. The net overall effect of NAFTA on the U.S. economy appears to have been relatively modest, primarily because trade with Canada and Mexico accounts for a small percentage of U.S. GDP. However, there were worker and firm adjustment costs as the three countries adjusted to more open trade and investment. The rising number of bilateral and regional trade agreements throughout the world and the rising presence of China in Latin America could have implications for U.S. trade policy with its NAFTA partners. Some proponents of open and rules-based trade contend that maintaining NAFTA or deepening economic relations with Canada and Mexico will help promote a common trade agenda with shared values and generate economic growth. Some opponents argue that the agreement has caused worker displacement.