NAFTA's Threat to Central American and Caribbean Basin Exports: A Revealed Comparative Advantage Approach

1994 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gladstone A. Hutchinson ◽  
Ute Schumacher
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Central American ◽  
Medium Term ◽  
The North ◽  
The Us ◽  
Potential Benefits

The recent passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between Canada, Mexico and the United States (US) marks an important step in the movement towards greater regionalism of trade among the countries in the Americas. From the perspective of the United States, the potential benefits to be gained from the anticipated increase in trade, economies of scale in production, increased access to the resources of production, and lower prices for the US market (due to the increased competition for consumer goods) combine to make its involvement in NAFTA desirable despite whatever limitations are posed, in the short and medium term, by Mexican underdevelopment (SerraPuche, 1992;US-ITC, 1991a).

US-Mexico Free Trade: Implications for the United States

1992 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 29-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sidney Weintraub
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Congress ◽  
The North ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Changing Attitudes

The Moment of Truth has come for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The US Congress will have to stop talking and vote to accept or reject the agreement negotiated among Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The disagreement on NAFTA in the United States is about free trade with Mexico, not with Canada. A US-Canada free trade agreement (FTA) already exists.This controversy over NAFTA has been fierce in the United States, much more so than in Mexico. This comparison speaks volumes about changing attitudes. It was almost unthinkable a decade ago that Mexico would so drastically alter its traditional position of maintaining economic and political distance from the United States. This change would not have been possible but for la decena trágica, the years of the 1980s. Beyond that, Mexico has more at stake in a free trade agreement. It has the smaller economy (about 1/27th that of the United States) so that changes, for better or worse, are magnified.

Trump trade threats pose many challenges for Mexico

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Medium Term ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The North ◽  
Percentage Points

Significance The statement is the latest in a string of similar announcements by companies fearful of obstacles to free trade being put in place between Mexico and the United States. Trump has consistently engaged in protectionist, anti-Mexican rhetoric, pressuring US firms to abandon planned investments in Mexico, demanding a renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and threatening to impose a 20% border tax or selective tariffs on Mexican exports. Impacts Mexico will see diminished foreign direct investment (FDI) in 2017 due to uncertainty over the future of NAFTA. A moderate-sized hit to Mexican exports could knock around 0.5 percentage points off growth, possibly contributing to a recession. In the medium term, China could take advantage of worsening US-Mexico relations to deepen economic and political ties with Mexico.

scholarly journals O Congresso dos Estados Unidos e os impasses na aprovação do NAFTA | The Congress of the United States and the impasses in the approval of NAFTA

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. e57624
Author(s):  
Angelo Raphael Mattos
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
North American ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Bill Clinton ◽  
The North ◽  
The Us

A partir das competências constitucionais do Congresso dos Estados Unidos em política externa, das plataformas dos partidos Democrata e Republicano de 1992, bem como dos argumentos a favor e contra a implementação do North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), o artigo objetiva compreender e discutir as razões da dificuldade enfrentada por Bill Clinton para aprovar o NAFTA no Congresso dos EUA em 1993. Os resultados das análises dos diferentes grupos domésticos, incluindo os atores Executivo e Legislativo, indicam que posições ideológicas, sobretudo presentes no Partido Democrata, como questões trabalhistas e ambientais, representaram o principal fator de resistência ao NAFTA no Capitólio.Palavras-chave: Congresso; Estados Unidos; NAFTA.ABSTRACTBased on the constitutional powers of the United States Congress in foreign policy, the platforms of the Democratic and Republican parties of 1992, as well as the arguments for and against the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the article aimed to understand and discuss the reasons for Bill Clinton's difficulty in passing NAFTA to the US Congress in 1993. The results of the analyzes of different domestic groups, including the Executive and Legislative actors, indicate that ideological positions, especially present in the Democratic Party, as labor and environmental issues, represented the main factor of resistance to NAFTA in the Capitol. Keywords: Congress; United States; NAFTA. Recebido em: 08 fev. 2021 | Aceito em: 20 set. 2021.

scholarly journals Quebec’s Economic and Commercial Linkages with the United States, 1994–2017

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Earl H. Fry
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Government ◽  
Big Picture ◽  
The Impact

This article examines the ebb and flow of the Quebec government’s economic and commercial relations with the United States in the period 1994–2017. The topic demonstrates the impact of three major forces on Quebec’s economic and commercial ties with the US: (1) the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which became operational in 1994 and was fully implemented over a 15-year period; (2) the onerous security policies put in place by the US government in the decade following the horrific events of 11 September 2001; and (3) changing economic circumstances in the United States ranging from robust growth to the worst recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s. The article also indicates that the Quebec government continues to sponsor a wide range of activities in the United States, often more elaborate and extensive than comparable activities pursued by many nation-states with representation in the US. 1 1 Stéphane Paquin, ‘Quebec-U.S. Relations: The Big Picture’, American Review of Canadian Studies 46, no. 2 (2016): 149–61.

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...

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 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

Prospects for Mexico and Central America to end-2017

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Central America ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The North ◽  
And Migration ◽  
Business As Usual

Subject Prospects for Mexico and Central America to end-2017. Significance The economies of Mexico and Central America will maintain a ‘business as usual’ stance until renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) formally starts later in the year. Growth momentum in the region is therefore likely to be maintained for the rest of 2017. Nonetheless, threats to trade and migration links with the United States, and to remittance income, will drive uncertainty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document