Poll: NAFTA

Last updated: April 1st, 2001

Poll Discussion

The North American Free Trade Area (NAFTA) has been in effect since January 1, 1994. Under the NAFTA, Canada, Mexico and the United States have agreed to reduce barriers to trade in goods and services, established rules governing free trade amongst the party nations, and established corresponding treaties for labor rights and the environment. Seven years after its introduction, the UICIFD revisits the NAFTA to assess its impact on development. The NAFTA binds the economies of the United States and Canada, two highly developed post-industrial nations, with that of Mexico, which lags behind both nations in terms of both economic and social development. Ideally, the costs of joining the treaty for each nation will be offset by the benefits gained. In the same manner, neither the costs nor benefits of joining the treaty should be disproportionately distributed among the party nations. In terms of economic and social development, the costs and benefits of NAFTA can flow in either direction. For example, a United States-based manufacturer could relocate to Mexico, attracted by the incentive of lower labor costs. To what extent is an increase in manufacturing jobs a benefit to Mexico? If so, does it offset costs due to rapid industrialization on the environment? Or to labor rights? Is such a benefit short or long term for Mexico? Likewise, what sectors of the United States benefit from such a move? Do the profits gained from such a relocation offset the job loss in the United States? What do you think?