Cavanagh, Anderson, Serra and Espinosa: Happily ever NAFTA?

Cavanagh, J, and S Anderson. 2002. Happily Ever NAFTA? Foreign Policy 132: 58-60.

The Bad Idea that Failed: Cavanagh and Anderson
"Looking back on its nearly nine years of existence, has NAFTA delivered or disappointed?" (58).

"More than eight years of monitoring reveal that, yes, the accord has boosted investment and trade...And yes, increased international competition may have helped fuel the dramatic rise in labor productivity rates during the 1990s...But workers, communities, and the environment in all three countries have suffered from the agreement's flaws" (58).

"Why have increased trade and investment failed to reduce poverty or raise wages? Part of the answer is that in a globalized marketplace, highly mobile employers have even more power to suppress workers who fight for their faire share of the benefits. And these firms often find allies among governments desperate for foreign investment" (58).

There is no increased spending on the environment. There are wider income gaps. "We argue that strong controls were needed to ensure that trade and investment supported social goals, rather than the narrow interests of large corporations" (59-60).

The Proof is in the Paycheck: Serra and Espinosa

"NAFTA's fundamental objectives as a free trade and investment pact have been achieved" (60). They speculate that this investment spurned on productivity gains in the 90s. They don't agree with claims that NAFTA has harmed the environment, wages or agriculture.

NAFTA cannot be blamed for small farmer poverty in Mexico, as this is a path-dependent problem. NAFTA cannot be blamed for a fall in real Mexican wages b/c the measurement was wrong. NAFTA cannot be blamed for falling environmental spending b/c that was a problem from long ago as well. NAFTA cannot be blamed for rising inequality and the authors argue that "Hard data show that trade liberalization tends to improve income distribution" (62).

Nice Theories, Sad Realities: Cavanagh and Anderson:

NAFTA is not just about trade and investment flows. The evidence you provided was inadequate.

More Accuracy Less Activism: Serra and Espinosa:

No, you're wrong.