Nafta S First Decade Accomplishments And Failures From The Mexican Perspective

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.

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

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.

This volume provides practitioners, academics and students with the first definitive coverage of NAFTA investment arbitration. Given the level of foreign direct investment within the NAFTA countries, the issue of redress for states in investment cases is a major one. The state dispute settlement mechanisms within NAFTAs Chapter Eleven are recognized as a model worthy of close examination. The experts and scholars who have contributed to this work present a comprehensive overview of the first ten years of practice in the area of investment disputes under the NAFTA provision. As in any nascent undertaking, the successes, failures and controversies that have been the experience of the state parties involved in NAFTA, are keenly reflected in the Chapter 11 cases. It is in these experiences, as described by in the chapters of this timely volume, that the readers will find substantive and procedural insights into an emerging new area of public international economic law. Many see the workings of the NAFTA agreement, particularly Chapter 11, as a Rorschach test for how state parties can approach and effectively adjudicate investment disputes. For this reason all practitioners and scholars concerned with international trade and foreign direct investment issues should consult this book. Published under the Transnational Publishers imprint.

NAFTA entered into force in 1994 after a bitter Congressional debate. But NAFTA in operation has proved no less controversial than NAFTA before ratification, for both supporters and opponents of trade liberalization have cited experience with the agreement to justify their positions. To provide a factual basis for this ongoing debate, the authors evaluate NAFTA's performance over the first seven years, comparing actual experience with both the objectives of the agreement's supporters and the charges of its critics. They then examine future challenges and opportunities in the trade and investment relationships among the three partner countries and the broader implications for new trade initiatives throughout the hemisphere.

This new book brings together contributions from recognized experts in trade policy, discussing and evaluating economic integration in the Western Hemisphere, the alternative trade strategies being pursued in this area and Latin American relationships with United States and Canada. These essays provide progress reports concerning the different regional and sub-regional groupings that have developed within the hemisphere and discuss the inter-relationships of Western Hemispheric trading arrangement with the multilateral trading systems. The difficulties encountered in hemispheric trade negotiations and the implications for the countries involved are also considered. This book will be of great interest to students and researchers engaged with international trade and economic policy, as well as policy specialists in business organizations and government.