Are free trade agreements good for the environment? A panel data analysis

This study empirically examines the relationship between free trade agreements (FTAs) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. For this purpose, we use three different FTAs: the Southern Common Market, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and the Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement. These FTAs are between developing, both developing and developed, and only developed countries, respectively. Panel unit root, panel cointegration, and fully modified ordinary least squares estimations are employed to examine the long‐run relationship between GHG emissions and trade liberalization. The results indicate that the environmental effects of FTAs depend on the different agreement types. When FTAs are between only developed or developing countries, overall there is no environmental damage, and these types of FTAs can be beneficial for the environmental quality in the long run. However, when developing and developed countries are in a trade agreement, overall environmental quality decreases due to increased GHG emissions.     

North America: A case for economic integration

The recent protectionist trend in trade policy in the United States and other OECD countries is making it more difficult for debtor countries, such as Mexico, to meet their external obligations. In contrast, Mexico and most other debtor nations have adopted more liberal trade policies in recent years. The success of the United States-Canada Free Trade Agreement will expand trading opportunities in the North American economies; however, Mexico is expected to encounter difficulties in competing in this market because of the barriers to trade and investment flows that have existed in the past. This paper discusses the potential impact of a North American Free Trade Agreement on the Mexican economy and the prospects for such an agreement in the current political economy.     

The macroeconomic impact of NAFTA termination

US President Trump has threatened to leave the North American Free Trade Agreement. How much would each member country gain or lose if this threat were carried out? Would trade imbalances within the region diminish? What would the transition to new production and consumption patterns look like? I provide quantitative answers to these questions using a dynamic general equilibrium model with a multi-sector input–output production structure, heterogeneous firms that make forward-looking export participation decisions, and adjustment frictions in trade and factor markets. Regional trade flows would fall dramatically, and while the US trade deficit with Canada would decline, the deficit with Mexico would grow. Welfare would fall by 0.04%, 0.12%, and 0.2% in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, respectively, and transition dynamics would significantly affect welfare in both the short run and the long run.     

试析《中美洲自由贸易协定》多角化影响

历经9年的艰苦谈判之后,美国与中美洲五国及多米尼加签署了《中美洲自由贸易协定》(CAFTA-DR).该协定的签署对于中美洲国家而言意义重大,借助该协定的实施,中美洲国家的贸易与直接投资将会得到大幅度的增长,地区经济将会快速发展.同时,CAFTA-DR的签订,改变了中美洲原先的次区域一体化优先路线,对中美洲未来的区域一体化进程将会产生深远的影响.     

NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BILATERAL TRADE EFFECTS

This study evaluates the effects of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on bilateral trade between the United States and Canada and between the United States and Mexico. Trade flow estimates are from a vector autoregression (VAR) model. The VAR methodology allows modeling bilateral trade in a flexible manner that incorporates both the interaction between different variables and the dynamics of trade, output, prices, and the exchange rate. After testing the outside sample forecasting ability of the models, the study produces dynamic forecasts of bilateral trade. It then compares forecasts incorporating the effects of the NAFTA with baseline forecasts. The results suggest expanded trade for all three countries and an improvement in the U.S. trade position with both Canada and Mexico.     

Abenomics and Japan's Trade Policy in a New Era

Trade policy, in particular, the Trans‐Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP), has been a centerpiece of the Abe administration's economic strategy. The TPP's contributions to Japan's growth strategy include: (i) creating trade and investment opportunities abroad for Japanese companies through ambitious liberalization targets; (ii) advancing domestic reforms – with the largest service and agricultural liberalization commitments to date; and (iii) increasing bargaining leverage in other trade negotiations. But the domestic reform goals of Abenomics in agriculture have come up short due to opposition from domestic lobbies. American trade politics – which culminated in the US withdrawal from the TPP – have upended the goals of trade policy under Abenomics. Japan's best option in this new environment is to deliver on high quality, multi‐party trade agreements: concluding negotiations with Europe; scaling up the ambition of Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership; and salvaging a TPP 11. The merits of a bilateral free trade agreement with the USA will depend on how the Trump administration operationalizes its America First policy.     

What have the FTA and the NAFTA done to the Canadian labor market?

A central concern with respect to globalization is its effects on institutions. Institutions are thought to provide protections against the casual damage inflicted by market processes and, in various ways, to contribute toward aggregate economic efficiency. The effects of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement and the North American Free Trade Agreement on the Canadian labor market and its institutions provide a useful case study of the effects of globalization because Canadian trade is so heavily concentrated with the United States. In this paper I show that, while the agreements imposed considerable costs on employees in some manufacturing industries, overall, Canadian institutions have not been substantially changed by the agreements. Where those institutions have changed, other factors have been much more important.     

Association of Southeast Asian Nations Economic Integration: Developments and Challenges

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was formed in 1967 for geopolitical reasons, but faced with the competitive threat from the North American Free Trade Agreement and the European Single Market, it embarked in 1992 on the ASEAN Free Trade Area in goods, followed by liberalization of services trade and investment flows. A subsequent competitive threat from the rise of China and India led to the ASEAN Economic Community in 2003, targeted at creating a single market and production base and a competitive region with equitable economic development and integrated with the global economy. The ASEAN Economic Community is not quite a common market as it allows for only freer flows of capital and free flows of skilled labor. ASEAN's economic diversity led to difficulties with implementation and the need to narrow the development gap. ASEAN's dependence on global markets and investors led to the emphasis on open regionalism, support of the World Trade Organization, and free trade agreements with its major trade and investment partners.     

Intraindustry Specialization and the Proposed Korea–United States Free Trade Agreement

Changes in intraindustry specialization indicators over the 2000–2007 period are used to assess factor adjustment pressures that may arise in Korea from the proposed Korea–United States Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA). There is considerable scope for intraindustry specialization between Korea and the United States. Results show few industries in Korea are candidates for adjustment problems. The 14 industries that may face adjustment pressures account for 13% of all Korean imports from the United States. Long tariff phase-out periods, tariff-rate quotas and import safeguards will be used to ease factor adjustment pressures in import-sensitive industries.     

建立中国-东盟自由贸易区的贸易效应分析

在当今世界经济的发展中,区域经济一体化是战后世界经济发展的重要特征,也是当前世界经济发展的客观必然趋势。按照《中国-东盟全面经济合作框架协议》时间框架,中国-东盟自由贸易区于2010年1月1日全面建成。本文首先介绍了中国-东盟自由贸易区的发展状况;然后采用定性分析法,通过对建立中国-东盟自由贸易区的贸易效应分析,可以看出中国东盟的经济还有很大的发展空间,只要将贸易区内存在的问题处理妥当,中国一东盟自由贸易区在建成后将能发挥更大的潜力。     

Understanding the recent Sino-U.S. trade conflict

ABSTRACT

To understand Sino-U.S. trade relations, this article interprets the trade imbalance between China and the United States from the Trump administration’s perspective. The Trump administration claims that the Chinese government’s subsidies and high import tariffs cause the Sino-U.S. trade deficit, resulting in job losses in the U.S. The Trump administration therefore argues that imposing high tariffs on Chinese exports can resolve the deficit. The article finds that U.S. statistical accounting overestimates the deficit. Reducing China’s imports cannot increase U.S. employment, and China provides the United States with low-price and high-quality products. Chinese investors tend to invest the surplus by purchasing U.S. Treasury bonds. In addition, the United States limits Chinese investments due to ‘national security’ concerns. China’s upgrading to the high end of the global value chain is a consequence of economic development. Therefore, the two countries should rebalance Sino-U.S. trade by seeking economic and trade cooperation via trade negotiations.     

TRADE CREATION AND DIVERSION EFFECTS OF THE U.S.-CANADIAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

This study empirically estimates and evaluates the economic benefits of the U.S. and Canadian Free Trade Agreement (FTA). Most past studies rely on aggregate data. The analysis here emphasizes the trade effects of removing tariff and nontariff barriers on each commodity group classified by the Standard International Trade Classification. Estimating the amount of trade expansion under FTA for both countries involves using the import demand elasticities from a dynamic demand model. Results show that U.S. imports from Canada are more sensitive to domestic, import, and world prices than are Canadian imports from the United States. U.S. imports from Canada would increase roughly £3.257 billion compared to the £2.432 billion increase for Canadian imports from the United States .     

US–Japan Trade Frictions: The Past,the Present,and Implications for the US–China Trade War

The United States and Japan have been involved in trade frictions over a number of products including textiles, steel, automobiles, semi‐conductors, and agricultural products over the last 50 years. US–Japan trade frictions have taken basically two forms: (i) the United States attempting to restrict Japan's exports to the United States; and (ii) the United States attempting to increase its exports to Japan by “opening” the Japanese market. By putting pressure on Japan to adopt necessary measures, the United States sought to achieve two main objectives: (i) to reduce its trade deficit vis‐à‐vis Japan; and (ii) to protect and/or promote US industries. The United States failed to achieve the first objective, while some success was achieved for the second objective. The United States triggered a trade war against China with the objectives of: (i) reducing the bilateral trade deficit; and (ii) stopping unfair trade practices by Chinese firms such as violations of intellectual property rights and forced technology transfer. Based on the experiences from the US–Japan trade frictions, the United States may achieve some success for the second objective, but not for the first. The chances of achieving the second objective would increase if the United States cooperates with countries such as Japan and the European Union, which are faced with similar problems.     

Trade and development policy in Mexico in the context of North American economic relations

This paper examines Mexico's trade and development policies and analyzes how these policies complement or conflict with those of the other North American nations. Looking closely at the periods 1950–1973 and 1973–1975, the authors explain how Mexico's development policies have marred or enhanced its ability to interact with the United States and Canada. They then show how the Mexico's history and strengths make it a strong candidate for partnership with Canada and the United States in a new North American Free Trade Agreement, a multilateral arrangement that will be important for continued economic prosperity in the North American region.     

Short-Term and Long-Term Margins of International Trade: Evidence from the Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement

We investigate the impact of the Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA) on Canadian exports to Chile, particularly the dynamic effects of the agreement on extensive and intensive margins of trade. Consistent with the literature, we find that the extensive margin effects occurred later than the intensive margin effects and became more prominent in the long-term. Surprisingly, the intensive margin effects died off in the long-term. A theoretical model is constructed to show that our results can arise in a standard setting of intra-industry trade.     

北美自由贸易区经济周期协动性的实证研究

自《北关自由贸易协议》签订并实施以来,美国、加拿大、墨西哥三国间的经贸联系日益密切。三国间经贸投资联系的加强必然会作用于三国宏观经济波动的传导,并改变北美自由贸易区内美、加、墨三国经济周期协同的特点。本文首先探讨了《北美自由贸易协议》对美国、加拿大、墨西哥三国间贸易与投资的积极效应,然后对三国在北美自由贸易区成立前后的经济周期协动性变化的特征事实进行了分析,最后考察并检验了《北美自由贸易协议》对三国间经济周期协动性的影响。     

Adjustment to trade reform in Ecuador

This paper simulates output adjustments and income redistribution in Ecuador with the emerging Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA). The Specific Factors (SF) model of production is used to develop comparative statistics elasticities of changing prices on factor prices and output as Ecuador adjusts to free trade. Skilled and unskilled labor stands to lose due to falling prices in the services and agricultural sectors. Returns to capital and output fall in sectors exposed to import competition while they increase in sectors expected to enjoy higher export demand. The magnitude of the adjustment is large.     

Tariff evasion and rules of origin violations under the Canada‐U.S. Free Trade Agreement

Abstract Using product‐level data on trade between Canada and the U.S., this paper presents evidence of tariff evasion and violation of the rules of origin occurring under the Canada‐U.S. Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA). It shows that more imports go unreported at the destination country when tariffs are higher. Consistent with the tariff evasion hypothesis, this result implies that the trade creation effect of a free trade agreement may in fact be due to less underreporting. Further, this paper shows that the larger Canadian tariff preference margin for the U.S. is associated with more goods originating in third countries being transshipped through the U.S. territory for re‐export. The preference margin is also positively correlated with the value of excess imports from the U.S., which qualify for preferential treatment. Both results suggest the presence of persistent violations of CUSFTA’s rules of origin.     

Trade creation and trade diversion in the Canada – United States Free Trade Agreement

In this paper the changes in trade patterns introduced by the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement are examined. Variation in the extent of tariff liberalization under the agreement is used to identify the impact of tariff liberalization on the growth of trade both with member countries and non-member countries. Data at the commodity level are used, and the results indicate that the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement had substantial trade creation effects, with little evidence of trade diversion. JEL Classification: F13, F14
Création de commerce et diversion de commerce dans l'Accord de libre-échange Canada-U.S. Ce mémoire examine les changements dans les patterns de commerce international engendrés par l'Accord de libre-échange entre la Canada et les Etats-Unis. La variation dans l'intensité de libéralisation tarifaire selon les secteurs dans l'Accord est utilisée pour identifier l'impact de la libéralisation tarifaire sur la croissance du commerce à la fois entre les pays membres et avec les pays non-membres. A l'aide de données par produits, on montre que l'Accord a eu des effets substantiels de création de commerce mais qu'il n'y a pas lieu de croire qu'il y a eu beaucoup de diversion de commerce.     

The Scope and Limits of a Public–Private Hybrid: Dispute Settlement under NAFTA Chapter 19

Globalisation is often depicted as having led to an increase in private authority at the expense of that of the state. It is important to correctly specify the scope that private authority has achieved and the capacity of states to push back and limit that authority. This article grounds these theoretical issues in a discussion of the hybrid, public–private dispute settlement mechanism set up in the original Canada–US Free Trade Agreement (CUSTFA), and later extended into Chapter 19 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). It finds that privatising the enforcement process did make a difference. Trade experts on panels saw things differently to judges and in ways that were more sympathetic to exporters. This favoured Canadian and Mexican interests. However, the arrangement lacked deep roots. It was a late-stage compromise in trade negotiations. This rendered it vulnerable to a US counterattack once panels began to rule in favour of Canadian and Mexican challenges to US trade determinations. The transfer of quasi-judicial authority to a public–private hybrid proved contingent, partly on the hegemonic state's ongoing level of comfort with the arrangement, as well as on a lack of business consensus within the United States.