Free Trade Agreement of the Americas – Explained

Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA)   Academic Research on Free Trade Agreement of the Americas How confident can we be of CGE-based assessments ofFree Trade Agreements?, Hertel, T., Hummels, D., Ivanic, M., & Keeney, R. (2007). Economic Modelling,24(4), 611-635. This paper explores the criticisms against the CGE for having poor econometric foundations. This paper improves the linkage between econometric estimates of key parameters and their usage in Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) analysis in order to better evaluate the likely outcome of a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). The paper suggests that there is great potential for combining econometric work with CGE-based policy analysis in order to produce a richer set of results that are likely to prove more satisfying to the sophisticated policy maker. Free–trade agreements: For better or worse?, Wonnacott, R. J. (1996).The American Economic Review,86(2), 62-66. The political economy of United States’free tradearrangements, Feinberg, R. E. (2003). World Economy,26(7), 1019-1040. The Hemispheric Social Alliance and theFree TradeArea of theAmericasprocess: the challenges and opportunities of transnational coalitions against neo-liberalism, Saguier, M. I. (2007). Globalizations,4(2), 251-265. The paper analyses the formation of a transnational coalition of civil society organizations coordinated by the Hemispheric Social Alliance to oppose the establishment of a Free Trade Area of the Americas. Drawing on a political process approach from the sociology of social movements, the paper explores the challenges and opportunities of the HSA to construct political alternatives to the neo-liberal agenda of the FTAA project. The paper also analyses the challenges of the HSA. Computational analysis of theFree TradeArea of theAmericas(FTAA), Brown, D. K., Kiyota, K., & Stern, R. M. (2005).The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,16(2), 153-185. This study uses the Michigan Model of World Production and Trade to assess the economic effects of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). The model covers 18 economic sectors in each of 22 countries/regions and is based on Version 5.4 of the GTAP database for 1997, together with specially constructed estimates of services barriers and other data on sectoral employment and numbers of firms. The paper aims to show that if multilateral free trade were adopted by all countries/regions in the global trading system, the welfare effects would be considerably larger. International Labor Standards inFree Trade Agreementsof theAmericas, Manley, T. J., & Lauredo, L. (2004). Emory Int’l L. Rev.,18, 85. The Evolution of FTA Investment Provisions: From NAFTA to the United States-ChileFree Trade Agreement, Gantz, D. A. (2003). Am. U. Int’l L. Rev.,19, 679. Fading green? Environmental politics in the Mercosurfree trade agreement, Hochstetler, K. (2003). Latin American Politics and Society,45(4), 1-32. This article explores the role of environmental concerns in free trade areas made up entirely of developing countries. It surveys the environmental institutions of Mercosur, the Common Market of South America, and its member states. It also presents a case study of the recently terminated negotiations over a regional environmental legal instrument as an example of collective environmental decisionmaking. The article concludes that all the environmental components of the agreement are weak, and have even been downgraded in recent years. Economic determinants offree trade agreements, Baier, S. L., & Bergstrand, J. H. (2004). Journal of international Economics,64(1), 29-63. The purpose of this study is to provide the first systematic empirical analysis of the economic determinants of the formation of free trade agreements (FTAs) and of the likelihood of FTAs between pairs of countries using a qualitative choice model. The paper develops this econometric model based upon a general equilibrium model of world trade with two factors of production, two monopolistically-competitive product markets, and explicit intercontinental and intracontinental transportation costs among multiple countries on multiple continents. Hemispheric Integration and the Politics of Regionalism: TheFree TradeArea of theAmericas(FTAA), Bruner, C. M. (2002).U. Miami Inter-Am. L. Rev.,33, 1. This article examines negotiations toward a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). It seeks to discern what key negotiating parties want out of such an agreement, and the means through which they have sought to achieve their disparate goals. The article argues that while potential gains from trade in the Western Hemisphere would be of great consequence, the long-term significance of an FTAA would be its precedential value for future trade negotiations at all levels – in domestic, bilateral, regional, and multilateral fora. Labor standards and theFree TradeArea of theAmericas, Elliott, K. (2003). Free TradeArea of theAmericas(FTAA), Stump, C. (1995).J. Int’l L. & Prac.,4, 153. Liberalization in the western hemisphere: New challenges in the design of afree trade agreement, Wonnacott, P., & Wonnacott, R. J. (1995). The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,6(2), 107-119. This paper deals with problems that countries encounter when they enter into overlapping free trade associations, with special reference to the Americas. The paper discusses four closely related issues: (1) inefficiencies caused by overlapping free trade areas; that is, by a hub-and-spoke system; (2) rules of origin; (3) the comparative merits of free trade associations (FTAs) and customs unions (CUs); and (4) the NAFTA rule of accession.