Regional Analysis: North American Free Trade Agreement
In today's globalized economies, virtually every country in the world belongs to some form of regional integrated trade organization whether by direct membership, bilateral or multilateral agreement. Regional integration is a process by which sovereign states in a particular region enter into an agreement to promote economic growth through the reduction of barriers to trade restrictions and safeguard common interests such as the environment. The removal of trade barriers results in a free trade zone thus creating a single market. Sovereign nations have many differences, some may be more economically sound and others may have a greater labor force or better technology. In the end, all regional nations must find a method to work together for the common good of all parties. The development of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was to solidify the nations occupying the North American continent, Canada, the United States (U.S.) and Mexico. Many proponents question the success of NAFTA for these nations. This essay will examine the advantages and disadvantages of regional integration and the regional economic development of these nations as members of NAFTA.
NAFTA is trade agreement implemented January 1, 1994 between the U.S., Canada and Mexico which removes restrictions on trade between the three countries to encourage free competition, improve investment opportunities and increase market access "for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)" (Tomasetti, H., 2004). Some of the advantages NAFTA has afforded its members are the eradication of tariffs, product price reductions and increased profit margins. NAFTA has eliminated tariffs on all goods traded betw...
... middle of paper ...
...oor results of NAFTA in Mexico leaves one asking who truly benefits from NAFTA and are the countries in the Northern Hemisphere prepared for regional integration under a multilateral or unilateral agreement.
References
Hill, C.W.L (2005). International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill/Irwin. New York, NY
Moreno-Brid, J. C. (2007). Economic development and industrial performance in mexico post-nafta. Retrieved January 25, 2008 from http://www.eclac.cl/celade/noticias/paginas/3/28353/JCMoreno.pdf
Senate Committee of Foreign Relations (2004). NAFTA: Ten years after. Retrieved January 24, 2008 from http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2004/April/20040420162429AEneerG0.7202722.html
Tomasetti, H. (2004). The benefits of nafta for smes. Retrieved January 23, 2008 from http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/tic/fta/nafta/roo.htm
All walks of life are presented, from prevailing businessmen of white-collar status, to those of the working class and labor industry, as well as individuals who deal in the black market of smuggling illegal immigrants across the border into the U.S. Hellman’s work explores the subject of Mexico’s economic situation in the 1990s. NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) closely tied the United States and Mexico during this period, as well as similar policies such as GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) that were also created. These issues pertaining to economic policies between the two nations, Mexico and the United States are seen highlighted throughout her work.
In this paper I will discuss the history and practices of the Maquiladora industry. I will discuss its background, its problems, the benefits it offers to United States companies, and the impact the NAFTA has and will have on the industry. In addition, I will make a suggestion on a possible strategy the Maquiladoras can adopt in order to address the challenges brought on by the NAFTA, to ensure it remains a strong force in the future.
After three years of debate NAFTA was established in 1994. Fears concerning NAFTA included job creation, loss and transfer, wages and infrastructure. (Ganster/Lorey 188-189) However, with the implementation of NAFTA the economy grew. Ganster and Lorey reveal that bilateral trade increased by $211.4 per year from 1989 to 2004. Commerce grew by 20 percent in the first six months of 1994. There were advantages and disadvantages of NAFTA, nevertheless, NAFTA “intensified the integration of the two economies rather than distancing them.” (Ganster/Lorey 190)
Throughout history, the United States has initiated policies, peace agreements, or laws which were believed to bring prosperity, and success, however those policies as a result were created in the U.S. best self-interest. One of these policies is known as NAFTA, which was a trade agreement created to open up free trade around the globe, however this policy backfired, deeply scaring and deteriorating the Latin American economy, and its people. Specifically, NAFTA known as the North American Free Trade Agreement, took effect on January 1, 1994 was a treaty which entered by the United States, Canada, and Mexico used to eliminate tariff barriers, in order to encourage economic prosperity between these three countries. A quarter century later, the
“The Perilous State of Mexico.” The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 21 Feb. 2009. Web. 16 Feb. 2014.
The NAFTA is involved in this phenomenon because since the agreement involves Mexico it in turn creates job opportunities for the Mexicans and on top of that Mexican workers are part of an underdeveloped country which in turn means they are going to get less money due to the condition of their economy. And for American businessmen that is a very desirable quality in a potential employee due to how much profit the companies and factories will make simply by giving more low paying jobs to Mexicans and decreasing the American workforce. This source relates to economic globalization, because the NAFTA is essentially an economic agreement between major countries to save money and reduce trading taxes. This agreement causes an economic rise in all of these countries by causing an increase in jobs in Mexico and increasing companies’ profits in the US and
NAFTA, or, the North American Free Trade Agreement is an agreement signed by the USA, Mexico and Canada that effectively reduced and sought to eventually eliminate all tariffs from items traded between the three countries. This trade bloc has very directly affected the state of Texas as it is right on the border and actually comprises most of the border between Mexico and the United States. NAFTA, enacted in 1942 under President Bill Clinton, has to date increased exports from Texas to Mexico by 53% and created over 190,000 new jobs in the state of Texas (Texas Public Policy). This is not to say that NAFTA is without fault. The agreement, according to the Department of Labor, has hurt 21,019 jobs in Texas and cost many Mexican citizens their
The goal of NAFTA was to systematically eliminate most tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade and investment between the countries. NAFTA has allowed U.S., Mexico, and Canada to import and export to other at a lower cost, which has increased the profit of goods and services annually. Because the increase in the trade marketplace, NAFTA reduces inflation, creates agreements on intern...
Globalization has become one of the most influential forces in the twentieth century. International integration of world views, products, trade and ideas has caused a variety of states to blur the lines of their borders and be open to an international perspective. The merger of the Europeans Union, the ASEAN group in the Pacific and NAFTA in North America is reflective of the notion of globalized trade. The North American Free Trade Agreement was the largest free trade zone in the world at its conception and set an example for the future of liberalized trade. The North American Free Trade Agreement is coming into it's twentieth anniversary on January 1st, 2014. 1 NAFTA not only sought to enhance the trade of goods and services across the borders of Canada, US and Mexico but it fostered shared interest in investment, transportation, communication, border relations, as well as environmental and labour issues. The North American Free Trade Agreement was groundbreaking because it included Mexico in the arrangement.2 Mexico was a much poorer, culturally different and protective country in comparison to the likes of Canada and the United States. Many members of the U.S Congress were against the agreement because they did not want to enter into an agreement with a country that had an authoritarian regime, human rights violations and a flawed electoral system.3 Both Canadians and Americans alike, feared that Mexico's lower wages and lax human rights laws would generate massive job losses in their respected economies. Issues of sovereignty came into play throughout discussions of the North American Free Trade Agreement in Canada. Many found issue with the fact that bureaucrats and politicians from alien countries would be making deci...
Hill, C., Wee, C. and Udayasankar, K. 2012.International Business:An Asian Perspective. 8th ed. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
The political force moved away from the painstakingly and time-consuming technique of multilateral tariff negotiations to smaller regional and bilateral provisions - the Regional Trade Agreement. In these arrangements; members accord preferential treatment , basically agreeing to liberalize the exchange of goods and services amongst each another giving regard to certain trade barriers. RTA is not the first-hand way of trade liberalization though. Initially, when multilateral trade discussions used to happen, two-sided and multiparty FTA”s filled the vacuum. There were restrictions from stringent and premeditated trade arrangements earlier, thus a lot of states are now moving towards freer trade for their own benefits.
15. Hill, Charles W.L. International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace. New York : McGraw-Hill, 2007.
Daniels, J. D., Radebaugh, L. H., and Sullivan, D. P., (2011). International Business: Environments and Operations. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Low tariffs on import increases jobs outsourcing which will negatively affect the employment opportunities in developed countries. The RTA signed between US, Mexico and Canada (NAFTA) reduced tariffs on imports allowing foreign companies to expand and outsource their production. (EPI, 2003) As a result, the bargaining power of American workers was undercut. (Faux, 2013) NAFTA caused the loss of 700,000 jobs as the production moved to Mexico. The jobs lost were mainly from California, Texas and Michigan, where the majority of US manufacturing relies. Besides that, the majority of the workers who lost their jobs suffered a permanent loss of income. (Faux, 2013) Moreover, NAFTA enabled the US employers to force workers to accept lower wages and benefits and blackmail local governments into giving tax reductions for their corporations and other subsidies. (Faux,
Stonehouse, G., Campbell, D., Hamill, J. & Purdie, T. (2004). Global and Transnational Business (2nd ed.). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.