Trade Law and Quality of Life—Dispute Resolution under the NAFTA Side Accords on Labor and the Environment

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 439-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack I. Garvey
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
International Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
The North

Law, like other forms of life, evolves in response to changing environments. When cosmic change alters environment, viability is tested. The North American Free Trade Agreement was born into a radically new social and political environment for the making of international trade agreements. Its viability has centered on a fundamental alteration in international trade law, appearing as the NAFTA Side Agreements on labor, health and environmental regulation; specifically, as the dispute resolution process of the Side Agreements.

scholarly journals Labor Standards in the eu-South Korea Free Trade Agreement

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-121
Author(s):  
Giovanni Gruni
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Labor Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Law

The European Union (eu) includes clauses on labor rights in free trade agreements with partner countries. One of these clauses was added to the Free Trade Agreement between the eu and South Korea. This article looks at the clause as an attempt of the eu to include labor rights in international trade law. The argument of the article is that the labor clause does include several innovative features which entrench the presence of labor law in international trade agreements. However, the clause remains mainly about political cooperation and struggles to define enforceable legal obligations on states. This is so because of the exceptions in the first part of the clause, the vagueness of the labor rights obligations and the lack of an enforcement mechanism.

Due Diligence in International Trade Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 312-328
Author(s):  
Markus Krajewski
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Trade Regime ◽  
International Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law

This chapter assesses and analyses elements of due diligence in existing international trade agreements. It highlights due diligence obligations in this field, such as obligations to cooperate, to negotiate in good faith, or to notify about measures which could be harmful to other countries. The chapter also discusses elements applicable to the negotiation and implementation of trade agreements, especially with regard to the requirements of human rights and sustainable development impact assessments. The chapter argues that, even though due diligence is not a term of art in international trade law, it could be seen as a cornerstone of the international trade regime.

scholarly journals L'élaboration et le fonctionnement des mécanismes d'arbitrage au sein de I'ALE et de FALENA, du GATT et de l'OMC

2005 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 461-478
Author(s):  
Frédéric Bastien
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Great Part ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Trade Agreements ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Do So

The increasing importance of international trade explains in great part the role that dispute resolution plays in trade agreement. Diversification, government's intervention in the economy, readiness of interest groups to defend their cause, all these elements make trade negotiations a much more difficult task today thon it used to be fifty years ago. Quarrels and dispute over international trade are therefore more likely to arise and it's impossible today to negotiate international trade agreements without dispute resolution mecanism. Success or failure of different type of arbitration lies in the definition of the substantive rules of trade agreements. For binding arbitration to work properly, such rules must be clear and precise. But this solution implies that independant countries renounce in part to their sovereignty. To do so, Canada and the United States decided to keep their own trade laws and accepted to submit them to binding arbitration. The same thing was done when free trade was extended to Mexico. At multilateral level, this type of arrangement would be much more difficult to implement.

Federalism and Liberalization: Evaluating the Impact of American and Canadian Sub-federal Governments on the Negotiation of International Trade Agreements

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 259-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Kukucha
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Area ◽  
International Trade Agreements ◽  
American States ◽  
Canadian Provinces ◽  
The Impact

This article argues that federal systems in Canada and the United States allow for the successful pursuit of sub-federal offensive and defensive priorities in the negotiation of international trade agreements. It is also clear, however, that the coercive American intrastate system limits the relevance of American states in this process, especially when compared to Canada’s relatively cooperative interstate model. Canadian provinces and territories also benefit from ideational considerations, including policy expertise and trust-ties with federal negotiators, which further strengthens sub-federal legitimacy and influence in this policy area. This study evaluates the incremental and significant impact of Canadian and American sub-federal governments across a number of sectors on the negotiations and final legal texts of the Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement, the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Developments Relating to U.S. Trade Negotiations—KORUS, NAFTA, and Trade Promotion Authority

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (3) ◽  
pp. 510-513 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
Final Agreement ◽  
Trade Promotion ◽  
Trade Deals ◽  
Trump Administration

Consistent with his approach on the campaign trail, President Trump has demonstrated a continued interest in revamping U.S. trade agreements. By the late spring of 2018, the Trump administration had negotiated modest changes to the United States-Republic of Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) in favor of U.S. interests. It had yet to reach any final agreement with regard to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), despite the expiration of an initial deadline that was designed to ensure adequate time for a vote on the negotiated agreement by the present Congress. To ease the passage of future trade deals, Trump has triggered the three-year extension of a process that provides expedited congressional consideration of negotiated trade agreements.

Making Sense of U.S. Trade Policy: What Recent Negotiations Can Tell Us

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 378-380
Author(s):  
Inu Manak
Keyword(s):  
Trade Policy ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
The North ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
The U.S

U.S. trade policy is not what it used to be. Since the U.S. withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership in January 2017, Indo-Pacific trade relations have been in constant flux. It is not clear where U.S. trade policy will end up, particularly with regard to its relationship with China. However, the conclusion of two renegotiations of previous U.S. trade agreements can tell us generally about the new U.S. approach and what this means for our trading partners. I will discuss developments from the renegotiation of the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement (KORUS) and the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) as a replacement for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

The challenges of federalism to Canada’s international trade relations: The Canada–European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement

2017 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-119
Author(s):  
Ali Tejpar
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
International Trade Agreements ◽  
Implementation Processes ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
International Model ◽  
Canadian Federalism ◽  
Canadian Context

As one of the first “second-generation” free trade agreements that address indirect and non-tariff barriers, the Canada–European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) is likely to serve as an international model. CETA, however, highlights significant challenges for Canadian federalism in both the negotiation and implementation processes of this and any such future trade agreements. While the inclusion of sub-federal governments allows for provinces/territories to help shape the provisions that fall within their jurisdictions, this paper argues that subsequent challenges arise in conveying a unified Canadian commitment to implement the agreement. Overall, the CETA negotiations demonstrated the significant institutional weaknesses of current federal–provincial/territorial relations with respect to international trade agreements. In the Canadian context, this suggests a need for “summit federalism” to ensure that all federal–provincial/territorial governments align their terms and interests and convey a unified commitment to fulfilling Canada’s current and future international trade agreements.

The New Face of CEFTA and its Dispute Resolution Mechanisms

2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ljiljana Biuković
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Economic Integration ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Western Balkans ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism ◽  
The Eu

AbstractAmendments made to the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) in 2006 mark significant developments in the economic integration of the Western Balkans. Among those amendments were changes to the Agreement's dispute resolution mechanism. This article analyzes the latest developments in economic integration in the Western Balkans and examines the nature and operation of the dispute resolution mechanisms used in CEFTA. Explanations for important changes to the dispute settlement process in CEFTA are suggested by examining the context of the members' economic, political, social and legal surroundings. The article surveys ongoing tendencies in the development of dispute resolution mechanisms in other regional trade agreements, in particular those utilized by the European Union (EU), as a means of exploring the rationale behind the new CEFTA. It argues that the EU practice—developed in EU association agreements with third countries—has inspired the 2006 amendments to the CEFTA dispute resolution mechanism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document