scholarly journals From NAFTA to USMCA: Can a Good Idea that Came Too Late Be Born Again?

Norteamérica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hubert Escaith
Keyword(s):  
Geographical Location ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Transport Infrastructure ◽  
Business Services ◽  
Services Sector ◽  
The North ◽  
Trade Perspective ◽  
United States Mexico ◽  
Born Again

This article analyzes from the trade perspective the lower-than-expected growth dividends of the export-led strategy adopted by Mexico in the 1990s. Particular attention is given to employment, labor productivity, and regional outcomes. The North American Free Trade Agreement (nafta) caused Mexican exports to skyrocket in the first years of its implementation. This initial lift was quickly sapped by China’s emergence after its entry into the World Trade Organization (wto) in 2001. Recent years witnessed a renewed dynamism of Mexican presence in the U.S. market. In an international context marked by deglobalization and decoupling, this rebound is expected to continue under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (usmca). Yet, in order to deliver economic growth, Mexico needs to diversify the geographical location of its exporting industries. The analysis of Mexican exports shows also that idiosyncratic weaknesses, such as the low contribution of the business services sector or the deficient trade and transport infrastructure, must be addressed.

scholarly journals NAFTA Is Renegotiated and Signed by the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-159 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Dairy Products ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
Rules Of Origin ◽  
The North ◽  
United States Mexico

A twenty-four-year-old agreement was reborn on October 1, 2018, when President Trump announced that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) had been successfully renegotiated. The deal came after an arduous, year-long negotiation process that almost left Canada behind. As one indicator of its contentiousness, the deal lacks an agreed-upon name, but the United States is referring to it as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). It keeps some key NAFTA provisions mostly the same, including with respect to state-to-state dispute resolution, but eliminates, modifies, and adds other provisions. Among the changes: investor-state dispute settlement has been eliminated as between the United States and Canada; rules of origin for automobiles and rules for U.S. dairy products have been modified; and new provisions address labor protections, intellectual property rights, rights for indigenous persons, rules for trade negotiations with non-market countries, and the agreement's termination. The agreement was formally signed by the leaders of all three countries on November 30, 3018. It must be approved through the domestic ratification procedures of the three countries before it enters into force.

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 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.

scholarly journals Impacts of U.S., Mexican, and Canadian Trade Agreement on Commodity and Labor Markets

2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-63
Author(s):  
Xin Zhao ◽  
Stephen Devadoss ◽  
Jeff Luckstead
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Labor Markets ◽  
Migrant Workers ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
The North ◽  
United States Mexico

AbstractThe North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) renegotiation has resulted in an updated agreement known as the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA). Given the contentious nature of the renegotiation process, we analyze the impacts of the USMCA relative to a “what if” scenario of failed NAFTA renegotiation to examine the economy-wide impacts of USMCA on bilateral trade, production, consumption, prices, and domestic and cross-border labor markets. Our results show that, had NAFTA renegotiation failed, the ensuing economic conditions would have created incentive for more, not fewer, migrant workers to enter the United States. USMCA benefits Mexican and Canadian consumers marginally but harms U.S. consumers slightly.

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 The The Impact of the Renegotiation of United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) on the Agricultural Exports of Sinaloa State of Mexico

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-55
Author(s):  
José G. Vargas-Hernández ◽  
Icela Flores Osuna ◽  
Omar Vargas-González
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Agricultural Exports ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The North ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
United States Mexico ◽  
The Impact

Purpose: Mexico, like other countries, invested in measures to attract foreign direct investment to its territories. It, therefore, signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, a treaty that facilitated Mexico to be the largest direct exporter to the United States. However, in 2018 the agreement was renegotiated and replaced with United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA). This research is carried out to determine the advantages and disadvantages of renegotiation for Sinaloa's agricultural exports, with the question of whether it would negatively impact the Sinaloa's agricultural exports. Methods: The study focuses on the impact of renegotiation of the NAFTA on agricultural exports of the state of Sinaloa with indicators such as the Exports-Trade, GDP, and GDP Per capita of Mexico, opening to new markets, and logistics. Results: The renegotiation has a direct relationship with agricultural production in Sinaloa, with a serious negative effect, since overproduction would be created if the new destination for exporting from Sinaloa was not quickly available. Implications: This research can be of much use to the main agricultural exporting companies in Sinaloa, government agencies, and the Sinaloa Chambers of Commerce for decision making and policy formulation.

scholarly journals Scenarios for small and medium enterprises provisions in USMCA renegotiation. A critical analysis of challenges and opportunities

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (13) ◽  
pp. 37-57
Author(s):  
José G. Vargas Hernández ◽  
Jorge Armando López Lemus
Keyword(s):  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Small And Medium Enterprises ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
The North ◽  
Strategic Review ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
United States Mexico ◽  
Medium Enterprises

The objective of this document is to establish some scenarios for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) based on a critical analysis of the provisions in the renegotiation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), its challenges and opportunities. The critical analysis starts from the questionable position of USMCA’s withdrawal and its consequences for SMEs of not giving continuity through a renegotiation process between the three partners. Based on some sources of information, the study of the results of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the USMCA, and the strategic review of their challenges and opportunities for SMEs, some possible scenarios are established after the renegotiation of the USMCA, as well as some strategic proposals for SMEs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document