Nafta Revisited

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) significantly affects industry and the economy in the United States, Canada and Mexico. The agreement not only affects trade but the environment, and labour unions among other things. This new book discusses the latest economic effects of NAFTA and how it has impacted the lives of workers in North America. Preface: NAFTA; NAFTA: Economic Effects on the United States After Five Years; NAFTA: Estimated U.S A Bibliography; NAFTA Labour Side Agreement: Lessons for the Worker Rights and Fast-Track Debate; NAFTA: Estimates of Job Effect and Industry Trade Trends After 4 Years; Adjustment Assistance for Workers Dislocated by the North American Free Trade Agreement; CBI-NAFTA Parity; North American Free Trade Agreement and Environmental Issues; NAFTA: Related Environmental Issues and Initiatives Updated; International Investor Protection: 'Indirect Expropriation' Claims Under NAFTA Chapter 11; North American Free Trade Agreement: Truck Safety Considerations; Chilean Trade and Economic Reform: Implications for NAFTA Accession; NAFTA, Mexican Trade Policy, and US-Mexico Trade: A Longer Term Perspective; Maquiladoras and NAFTA: The Economics of US-Mexico Production Sharing and Trade; NAFTA Implementation: The Canadian Woolens Controversy; NAFTA's Effect on Canada-US Trade and Investment; Index.

The contrast between the benefits which the North American Free Trade Area (NAFTA) was supposed to bring to Mexico and the actual consequences is the subject of thi s incisive analysis. '

Seminar paper from the year 2007 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Region: Middle- and South America, grade: 1,0, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 29 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: On January 1, 1994, Mexico, Canada, and the United States established the largest free trade area under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) after two and a half years of negotiation. This agreement created a free trade area on the North American subcontinent with approximately 431 million inhabitants and a GDP of about $15.3 trillion in 2006. NAFTA represented an important milestone in global trade policy, not just because of the sheer size of the free trade area it has created, but also with regard to the comprehensiveness of the agreement. It covered not just merchandise trade but also issues related to investment, environmental policies, energy generation, and labor markets. NAFTA's primary goal was the creation of a free-trade area with free movement of goods, service and capital, but no common market. In order to prevent the abuse of different external import tariffs, NAFTA implemented strict rules of origin. NAFTA is focused on economic cooperation and does not - in contrast to the European Union - intend a deeper political integration or the transfer of national sovereignty to a supranational organization. The creation of NAFTA is based on the fact that three countries, despite different size, economic structure, and ethnical background pursued the same goal, the establishment of a closer regional economic integration. Differences in economic terms between the member countries can be clarified by the distribution of NAFTA's GDP in 2006. More than 86.2 percent of NAFTA's total GDP was generated by the United States whereas Mexico contributed only 5.5 percent, which reflects the state of Mexico's economic development. Additionally, the Mexican GDP per capita amounted to only 18 respectively 20 percent of the GD

Seminar paper from the year 2007 in the subject Politics - Region: Middle and South America, grade: 1,0, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, language: English, abstract: On January 1, 1994, Mexico, Canada, and the United States established the largest free trade area under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) after two and a half years of negotiation. This agreement created a free trade area on the North American subcontinent with approximately 431 million inhabitants and a GDP of about $15.3 trillion in 2006. NAFTA represented an important milestone in global trade policy, not just because of the sheer size of the free trade area it has created, but also with regard to the comprehensiveness of the agreement. It covered not just merchandise trade but also issues related to investment, environmental policies, energy generation, and labor markets. NAFTA’s primary goal was the creation of a free-trade area with free movement of goods, service and capital, but no common market. In order to prevent the abuse of different external import tariffs, NAFTA implemented strict rules of origin. NAFTA is focused on economic cooperation and does not - in contrast to the European Union - intend a deeper political integration or the transfer of national sovereignty to a supranational organization. The creation of NAFTA is based on the fact that three countries, despite different size, economic structure, and ethnical background pursued the same goal, the establishment of a closer regional economic integration. Differences in economic terms between the member countries can be clarified by the distribution of NAFTA’s GDP in 2006. More than 86.2 percent of NAFTA’s total GDP was generated by the United States whereas Mexico contributed only 5.5 percent, which reflects the state of Mexico’s economic development. Additionally, the Mexican GDP per capita amounted to only 18 respectively 20 percent of the GDP per capita in the United States and Canada.4 This heterogeneity between the three participating countries may be the most significant aspect of this agreement. This paper discusses NAFTA’s accomplishments and failures after its first decade from the Mexican perspective as the agreement has been confronted with skepticism from its inception until today. While Mexican officials understood NAFTA as a measure to modernize the country through free trade, critics feared the transformation of the Mexican economy to a huge maquiladora where investors are mainly focused on the exploitation of Mexico’s low labor costs.5 Since the beginning of negotiations, Mexico’s former President Salinas has raised high expectations on the Mexican side in economic and social terms with his statement: “The whole point of NAFTA for Mexico is to be able to export goods and not people. That means creating jobs in Mexico.” In order to highlight whether NAFTA resulted in economic as well as social improvements, this paper focuses on a comparison of these two aspects.

The contrast between the benefits which the North American Free Trade Area (NAFTA) was supposed to bring to Mexico and the actual consequences is the subject of thi s incisive analysis. '

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was launched amid great hopes and controversy in 1994. More than a dozen years later, progress toward economic integration has stalled. Mexico's economy remains far behind those of Canada and the United States, and such pressing issues as energy security remain unaddressed. In Requiem or Revival? scholars and policymakers from all three nations dissect NAFTA's failure to fulfill its early promise and evaluate the prospects for further integration. The authors explore the interaction between regionalism and multilateralism, the impact of the "new trade" agenda, and NAFTA's unresolved problems—migration, security, and energy. Recognizing the limits of the NAFTA framework, they examine its relationship to the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas negotiations and the Doha Development Round, and they discuss various ways in which NAFTA could be revamped or improved. The result is an intriguing volume offering important insights on the future of economic integration in North America and beyond. Contributors include Chantal Blouin (North-South Institute), Theodore H. Cohn (Simon Fraser University, emeritus), I. M. Destler (University of Maryland), Charles F. Doran (Johns Hopkins University–SAIS), Christina Gabriel (Carleton University), Sergio Gómez Lora (IQOM, Inteligencia Comercial), Jerry Haar (Florida International University), Laura Macdonald (Carleton University), Gordon Mace (Université Laval), Isidro Morales (University of the Americas), Glauco Oliveira (University of Southern California), Antonio Ortiz Mena (CIDE), Jeffrey J. Schott (Peterson Institute for International Economics),Anne Weston (North-South Institute),Tamara Woroby (Towson University, Johns Hopkins University––SAIS), and Jaime Zabludovsky (Soluciones Estratégicas).