The Evolution of U.S. Views on FTA Investment Protection: From Nafta to the United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement

2004 ◽  
pp. 503-566
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Investment Protection

scholarly journals NAFTA, Alberta Oil Sands Royalties, and Change: Yes We Can?

2009 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 335 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard J. Roth
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Oil Sands ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
The North ◽  
The Government ◽  
Domestic Law

The Government of Alberta has recently announced that it intends to increase oil sands royalty rates. This article reviews these proposed changes to determine if they comply with the investment protection obligations Canada assumed under c. 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In addition to ensuring non-discriminatory treatment of investors, c. 11 of the NAFTA prohibits expropriation of investments without compensation. What constitutes expropriation under the NAFTA may be broader than the expropriation protection under either American or Canadian domestic law. The result is that American investors in Canada may have greater protection against expropriation than Canadian investors in Alberta. Likewise, Canadian investors in the United States may also be in a preferred position relative to American investors in their own country. The article concludes that the Government of Alberta may have to compensate U.S. investors in Alberta’s oil sands if it carries through with the oil sands royalty changes it has announced.

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.

AHMED GALAL AND ROBERT Z. LAWRENCE, ED., Building Bridges: An Egypt–US Free Trade Agreement (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998). Pp. 121. $29.95 cloth.

2000 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 312-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samira Salem
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Brookings Institution ◽  
Optimal Form

Has the time come for a free-trade agreement (FTA) between Egypt and the United States? According to the contributors to Building Bridges, an FTA is the logical next step in the Egypt–U.S. relationship. This policy-oriented volume explores the conditions under which the benefits of an FTA between the parties would be maximized. Although the contributors reach different conclusions regarding the optimal form of the Egypt–U.S. FTA, consensus is reached on one point: an FTA between Egypt and the United States will produce economic benefits for both nations.

Central American integration through infrastructure development: A case study of Costa Rican hydropower

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denielle M. Perry ◽  
Kate A. Berry
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Central America ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Market ◽  
Central American ◽  
Infrastructure Development

At the turn of the 21st century, protectionist policies in Latin America were largely abandoned for an agenda that promoted free trade and regional integration. Central America especially experienced an increase in international, interstate, and intraregional economic integration through trade liberalization. In 2004, such integration was on the agenda of every Central American administration, the U.S. Congress, and Mexico. The Plan Puebla-Panama (PPP) and the Central America Integrated Electricity System (SIEPAC), in particular, aimed to facilitate the success of free trade by increasing energy production and transmission on a unifi ed regional power grid (Mesoamerica, 2011). Meanwhile, for the United States, a free trade agreement (FTA) with Central America would bring it a step closer to realizing a hemispheric trade bloc while securing market access for its products. Isthmus states considered the potential for a Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) with the United States, their largest trading partner, as an opportunity to enter the global market on a united front. A decade and a half on, CAFTA, PPP, and SIEPAC are interwoven, complimentary initiatives that exemplify a shift towards increased free trade and development throughout the region. As such, to understand one, the other must be examined.

Neoliberalism and Counterinsurgency

Colombia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard D. Mahoney
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Latin American ◽  
North American ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
Trade Promotion ◽  
The U.S

How did the U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement come about? The officially named “U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement” was the stepchild of a rancorous hemispheric divorce between the United States and five Latin American governments over the proposal to extend the North American Free Trade Agreement...

The North American Free Trade Agreement: An ecological-economic synthesis for the United States and Mexico

1994 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward B. DeBellevue ◽  
Eric Hitzel ◽  
Kenneth Cline ◽  
Jorge A. Benitez ◽  
Julia Ramos-Miranda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
North American ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ecological Economic ◽  
The North

AIIB shows increased US-China institutional rivalry

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
South East Asia ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Regional Institutions ◽  
Institutional Competition

Significance London's actions drew a harsh, if unofficial, reaction from the White House. It underscores the growing rivalry between the United States and China over the changing architecture of global and regional institutions. Impacts Institutional competition will not spill over much into the security field, where China's neighbours seek to balance it. Increased European involvement in South-east Asia will accelerate movement towards an EU-ASEAN free trade agreement. Increased international prestige could help Chinese President Xi Jinping's domestic clout.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document