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 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.

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 United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Enters into Force

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (4) ◽  
pp. 772-775
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
North American ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
United States Mexico

On November 30, 2018, Canada, Mexico, and the United States signed an agreement renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). By the spring of 2020, all three countries had approved this agreement—known in the United States as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA)—through their respective domestic ratification processes. The USMCA entered into force on July 1, 2020, amid extended U.S.-Mexico and U.S.-Canada border restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On August 6, 2020, President Trump imposed tariffs on Canadian aluminum—tariffs that his administration had previously put in place in 2018 but had removed in 2019 in order to smooth the USMCA's path to ratification.

Regiones ganadoras y cultivos perdedores de México en el TLCAN. Perspectivas para T-MEC

2020 ◽  
pp. 26-39
Author(s):  
Marcos Noé Maya Martínez
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Trade Liberalization ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Economic Integration ◽  
North American ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
United States Mexico

In Mexican agriculture there are branches and regions that have benefited from the trade liberalization and economic integration under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), but there are sectors, essentially those of basic grains that have been affected by liberalization, which exacerbates the country's food dependence. To understand the trends already in the framework of the United States, Mexico and Canada Agreement (USMCA) a projection (extrapolation) of the next 11 years will be made, based on the behavior already analyzed.

scholarly journals CURRENT STATE AND PROSPECTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AREA

2020 ◽  
pp. 74-84
Author(s):  
S. Yakubovskiy ◽  
T. Rodionova ◽  
O. Tsviakh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Interest Rates ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
North American ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
The United States ◽  
Investment Activity ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
The North ◽  
The U.S

This research aims to analyze current economic state of the North American Free Trade Area and to identify possible prospects for its development. The article explores the prerequisites for the formation of NAFTA, reasons for revising the agreement and compares the differences between the previous and updated agreements, an impact of integration association on the socio-economic status, trade and investment activity of the participating countries, prospects for its development and analysis of its economic cooperation with Ukraine. The empirical analysis shows a significant relationship between the U.S. GDP and foreign trade with Mexico and Canada, unemployment and interest rates. Its results revealed that the U.S. trade with Canada had a positive impact on the U.S. GDP; at the same time the U.S. trade with Mexico had a negative impact on the U.S. GDP, which became the main argument for President Trump in his pressure on Mexico to revise the terms of the NAFTA agreement. The regression analysis also showed that there is an inverse relationship between GDP and interest rate in the United States from 1994 to 2018. It was determined that the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) is not fundamentally different from the previous one, but it can create new opportunities, for example, for workers and farmers in the United States, and new difficulties for Canada and Mexico. This agreement tightens labor standards and protection of intellectual property rights, especially in Mexico, thus, probably decreasing the attractiveness of Mexican economy to foreign investors, that is likely to reduce the U.S. investment in Mexico. Thus, Canada and Mexico are expected to receive less benefit from the USMCA for their economies than the United States.

scholarly journals Trayectorias de las relaciones bilaterales de Colombia y México con Estados Unidos

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 165
Author(s):  
Lesly Katherin Herrera Riveros ◽  
José Antonio Galindo Domínguez
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Analytical Perspective ◽  
United States Mexico

ResumenLa pertinencia de la firma del Tratado de Libre Comercio de Colombia con Estados Unidos ha sido puesta en debate en diferentes momentos, al igual que la firma del TLCAN por parte de México. Con este ensayo se busca recapitular la trayectoria de las relaciones bilaterales de estos dos países con Estados Unidos, con el fin de mostrarlas desde una perspectiva analítica de largo plazo e identificar los puntos clave de los acercamientos, sus implicaciones y posibles similitudes o diferencias. Se cierra con una breve introducción a los acuerdos firmados en el proceso de apertura económica de cada país y sus principales consecuencias.Palabras claves: Dependencia económica y política, política exterior colombiana, Estados Unidos, México.**********************************************************************Trajectories of the bilateral relations of Colombia and Mexico with the United StatesAbstractThe pertinence of the signature of the Free Trade Agreement between Colombia and the United States has been questioned at different times, as well as the signature of the North American Free Trade Agreement by Mexico. This essay aims at a reconstruction of the trajectory of the bilateral relations of Colombia and Mexico with the United States, in order to expose them from a long-term analytical perspective, and identify the key points of the approaches, their implications and possible similarities or differences. The essay concludes with a brief introduction of the signed agreements in the process of economic openness of each country and its main consequences.Key words: Political and economic dependency, colombian exterior policy, United States, Mexico.**********************************************************************Trajetórias das relações bilaterais entre a Colômbia e o México com os Estados UnidosResumo:A pertinência do Tratado de Libre Comércio entre a Colômbia e os Estados Unidos, tem sido debatida em distintos momentos, mesmo como o TLCAN por parte do México. Este ensaio visa conferir a trajetória das relações bilaterais entre estes países e os Estados Unidos e identifica pontos chave, implicações e possíveis semelhanças e diferenças entre eles. Mostra-se o conteúdo geral dos acordos nos processos de apertura económica de cada país, mesmo como suas consequências.Palavras chave: Dependência económica e política, política exterior colombiana, Estados Unidos, México.

The Political Economy of MERCOSUR

1994 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 101-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luigi Manzetti
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Patterns ◽  
Research Technology ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
The North ◽  
Economic Trends

Recent literature on regional integration has stressed the key role that emerging trading blocs will have in shaping the world economy of the 21st-century. With the end of the Cold War, policymakers have refocused their attention on economic issues. Economic trends — such as rapid changes in research, technology, capital flow, and trade patterns — have assumed a new importance. Increasing competition in world markets has induced industrialized countries to cluster together in regional economic blocs. This has been the case with the European Community (EC), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) signatories (the United States, Canada, and Mexico), and possibly Japan and its East Asian neighbors. However, these experiments in regional integration differ appreciably in nature. For instance, the EC explicitly seeks an economic and political union, whereas the NAFTA is simply a free trade area whose goal is the eventual elimination of restrictions on investment flows.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document