What Is Nafta North American Free Trade Agreement

What is clear is that NAFTA is still a flash in the air for political views on globalization and free trade in general. Opposition to NAFTA has grown and made it much more politically difficult to implement other similar free trade agreements. This was clearly demonstrated in the summer of 2005, when the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) stagnated in Congress due to a lack of support. Two journalists, Dawn Gilbertson and Jonathan J. Higuera, who wrote in the Republic of Arizona to mark the tenth anniversary of NAFTA, summed it up this way: “The reality of 10-year-old NAFTA is this: an ever-changing story of winners and losers, largely separated by where you work and what you do.” The same goes for the impact of NAFTA on small businesses. For some, it was an opportunity to grow and for others a challenge to overcome. Fourth, NAFTA has established procedures to resolve trade disputes. The parties would begin with a formal discussion, followed by a discussion at a meeting of the Free Trade Commission, if necessary. If the disagreement was not resolved, a committee reviewed the dispute. The process allowed all parties to avoid costly lawsuits in local courts and helped them interpret the complex rules and procedures of NAFTA. This protection against trade disputes also applied to investors.

One of the most affected agricultural sectors has been the meat industry. Mexico became the second largest importer of U.S. agricultural products in 2004 due to a small player in the U.S. export market prior to 1994, and NAFTA may have been a major catalyst for this change. Free trade removed barriers that hindered business between the two countries, so Mexico provided a growing market for meat for the United States and increased sales and profits for the U.S. meat industry. A simultaneous notable increase in Mexico`s GDP per capita significantly changed meat consumption patterns as per capita meat consumption increased. [70] A study published in the August 2008 issue of the American Journal of Agricultural Economics found that NAFTA increased U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico and Canada, even though most of the increase occurred a decade after its ratification. The study focused on the impact that progressive periods of “phased implementation” of regional trade agreements, including NAFTA, have on trade flows.

Most of the increase in Members` agricultural trade, which was only recently transferred to the World Trade Organization, was due to very high trade barriers prior to NAFTA or other regional trade agreements. [91] Many U.S. small businesses were dependent on exporting their products to Canada or Mexico under NAFTA. ==References==As trade representatives, this trade has supported more than 140,000 small and medium-sized enterprises in the United States. [94] Other sub-agreements have been adopted to address concerns about the potential impact of the Treaty on the labour market and the environment. Critics feared that low wages in Mexico would attract U.S. and Canadian companies, leading to a relocation of production to Mexico and a rapid decline in manufacturing jobs in the U.S. and Canada. .

This entry was posted in Geen categorie. Bookmark the permalink.