scholarly journals The Development of the Free Trade Area of the Americas: A Guide For Legal Research

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle S. Viegas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
Common Market ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
The World

At the 1994 Summit of the Americas, leaders of democratic nations in the Western Hemisphere committed to establishing a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) by January 2005. The Declaration of Principles resulting from that Summit called for building on “existing sub-regional and bilateral arrangements in order to broaden and deepen hemispheric economic integration and to bring the agreements together.” Although ambitious, this endeavor was undertaken during a decade marked by an unprecedented proliferation of trade agreements. In 1991, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay agreed to initiate the formation of a common market now known as the MERCOSUR. Then in 1994, Canada, Mexico and the United States signed the North American Free Trade Agreement which replaced the United States-Canada Free Trade Agreement. Later that year, nations around the world formalized the existing General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, creating the World Trade Organization. In 1997, the Andean Community of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela formalized its plans to establish a common market. Members of the Caribbean Community and Common Market also agreed in several protocols to further their economic and social integration. During the 1990's, numerous other trade agreements were negotiated, and their development continues at the same rapid pace today.

The Investment Provisions of the Canada—United States Free Trade Agreement: A Canadian Perspective

1990 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 394-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Raby
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Good Deal ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
The World ◽  
Trading Partners

This is a good deal, a good deal for Canada and a deal that is good for all Canadians. It is also a fair deal, which means that it brings benefits and progress to our partner, the United States of America. When both countries prosper, our democracies are strengthened and leadership has been provided to our trading partners around the world. I think this initiative represents enlightened leadership to the trading partners about what can be accomplished when we determine that we are going to strike down protectionism, move toward liberalized trade, and generate new prosperity for all our people.On January 2, 1988, President Ronald Reagan of the United States and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada signed the landmark comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the two countries that already enjoyed the largest bilateral trade relationship in the world. The FTA was subsequently ratified by the legislatures of both countries, if only after a bitterly fought election on the subject in Canada. On January 1, 1989, the FTA formally came into effect.

The Political Economy of NAFTA/USMCA

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustavo A. Flores-Macías ◽  
Mariano Sánchez-Talanquer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
The North ◽  
Positive Side ◽  
The One ◽  
United States Mexico

When the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into force on January 1st, 1994, it created the largest free trade area in the world, and the one with the largest gaps in development between member countries. It has since served as a framework for trilateral commercial exchange and investment between Canada, Mexico, and the United States. NAFTA’s consequences have been mixed. On the positive side, the total value of trade in the region reached $1.1 trillion in 2016, more than three times the amount in 1994, and total foreign direct investment among member countries also grew significantly. However, the distribution of benefits has been very uneven, with exposure to international competition reducing economic opportunity and increasing insecurity for certain sectors in all three countries. Twenty-four years later, the three countries renegotiated the terms of NAFTA and renamed it the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA). The negotiation responded in part to the need to modernize the agreement, but mostly to President Donald Trump’s concerns about NAFTA’s effect on the U.S. economy and the fairness of its terms. Although the revised agreement incorporated rules that modernize certain aspects of the institutional framework, some new provisions also make trade and investment relations in North America more uncertain.

scholarly journals The contradictions of regionalism in North America

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (S1) ◽  
pp. 147-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANN CAPLING ◽  
KIM RICHARD NOSSAL
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Implications ◽  
The North ◽  
The World

AbstractStudents of regionalism almost reflexively include North America in their lists of regions in contemporary global politics. Inevitably students of regionalism point to the integrative agreements between the countries of North America: the two free trade agreements that transformed the continental economy beginning in the late 1980s – the Canada–US Free Trade Agreement that came into force on 1 January 1989, and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the United States, Mexico, and Canada, that came into force on 1 January 1994 – and the Secutity and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), launched in March 2005. These agreements, it is implied, are just like the integrative agreements that forge the bonds of regionalism elsewhere in the world. We argue that this is a profound misreading, not only of the two free trade agreements of the late 1980s and early 1990s and the SPP mechanism of 2005, but also of the political and economic implications of those agreements. While these integrative agreements have created considerable regionalisation in North America, there has been little of the regionalism evident in other parts of the world. We examine the contradictions of North America integration in order to explain why North Americans have been so open to regionalisation but so resistant to regionalism.

scholarly journals The History and Future of Peru’s Fast Growing Economy

Perceptions ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Restifo
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
The World ◽  
Growing Economy

After the United States’ withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the world of free trade entered a free-for-all, as countries searched for a viable course of direction toward a new free trade agreement. Peru seems to be leading an organized effort for the development of free trade agreements both within Latin America and across the Pacific. This is not surprising, as an analysis of Peru’s economic history will demonstrate. Despite its social complications, free trade has usually led to prosperity for Peru. With it currently being one of Latin America’s fastest growing economies, the loss of the TPP grants Peru the opportunity to see if their endurance and success will continue as they become more internationally integrated. If Peru succeeds with its plans of expanding free trade, which is analyzed in this paper, the country may serve as a model for countries just embarking to participate in the world of free trade economic policy.

Free Trade Area or Common Capital Market? Notes on Mexico-US Economic Integration and Current NAFTA Negotiations

1992 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 53-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaime Ros
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Economic Integration ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Investment Liberalization ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
Mexican Government ◽  
Trade And Investment

This Article addresses some of the key issues involved in understanding current trade negotiations between Mexico and the United States, as well as their significance for the process of economic integration in North America. These issues derive from the new setting produced by (a) Mexico's trade and investment liberalization in the 1980s, (b) the incentives which underlie the drive towards integration, as well as (c) those factors which will condition the final content of the current negotiating process.A free trade agreement (FTA) with the United States could be seen as the logical conclusion of the process of trade and investment liberalization carried out by the Mexican government ever since the mid-1980s. At the same time, it also represents a shift in Mexico's initial trade strategy, from multilateralism to bilateralism, or from globalization to regionalization, as a consequence of the global trend, toward the end of the 20th century, to create large regional economic blocs.

scholarly journals Free Trade Agreements With The United States: 8 Lessons For Prospective Parties From Australia’s Experience

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 395-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen R. Tully
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States

Abstract This article identifies 8 key lessons for those States contemplating a free trade agreement with the United States (U.S.) arising from Australia’s experience. The standards of intellectual property protection under the Australia-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and their impact on pharmaceutical prices in Australia are a particular focus. Prospective parties must first conduct a national interest self-assessment which reviews the desired strength of intellectual property protection under national law and their preference for using flexibilities available to them under the existing international intellectual property rights framework. The United States negotiates free trade agreements in light of previous ones, negotiating outcomes obtained in other fora and the decisions of international trade tribunals. Negotiations typically occur behind closed doors, which is a process having adverse implications for transparent decision-making, public consultation periods and contributions from interested non-governmental actors. A concluded agreement will build on prior treaties and influence the course of future international arrangements. But the impact of a United States free trade agreement is not always clear, including because of a lack of reliable data, and the extent of national legal change is a contested issue given existing reform agendas and external influences. The United States seek to redesign national health care systems in its own image and had little success in Australia’s case. National legal systems need not be harmonised: although there can be some convergence in intellectual property rights regimes, significant differences may also remain. Negotiators must reconcile competing cultures, philosophies and perspectives between States for a free trade agreement to be worthwhile.

The Free Trade Area of the Americas and the Market for Processed Orange Products

2003 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Spreen ◽  
Charlene Brewster ◽  
Mark G. Brown
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
The United States ◽  
Price Impact ◽  
Spatial Equilibrium ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
Spatial Equilibrium Model ◽  
The World ◽  
The Impact

The proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas would join the world's two largest processed orange producing regions: Brazil and the United States. Because the United States currently imposes a sizeable tariff on imported processed orange products, there is concern by U.S. orange growers over possible adverse effects resulting from tariff elimination. A model of the world processed orange market is developed as a spatial equilibrium model with implicit supply functions based on the dynamic behavior of orange production. The model is used to estimate the impact of U.S. tariff elimination on U.S. production, grower and processor prices, and imports. The results suggest a sizeable price impact on U.S. producers if the tariff is eliminated.

The European Union and MERCOSUR: Prospects for a Free Trade Agreement

2000 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Bulmer-Thomas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Customs Unions ◽  
Trade Area

Negotiations between the European Union and MERCOSUR aim to establish the first free trade agreement ever between two customs unions. Among the potential obstacles are compliance with World Trade Organization rules, treatment of “sensitive” products, and competition from the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas. This analysis reviews the economic background on both sides, the motivation, and the prospects for success, along with the agreement’s potential impact on the largest third party, the United States.

scholarly journals PENGARUH ASEAN-CHINA FREE TRADE AREA TERHADAP KOMODITI TEKSTIL INDONEISA PERIODE 2008-2015

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 47-56
Author(s):  
Raudah Aghnia Ahda ◽  
Made Siti Sundari ◽  
Idfi Setyaningrum
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
World Bank ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
T Test ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
The World Bank ◽  
The World

This study aims to determine whether there is different value between exportand import performance before ACFTA and after ACFTA by developing hypothesis from the previous studies. To test the proposed hypothesis, this Study employed the independent samples t-test with data from the World Bank database. The case study was carried out with concern on textile business between Indonesia and China. The results indicate that the exports value has different mean following the free trade agreement. Similar result occurs at the import value of textile from China toIndonesia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document