The Environment and U.S.-Mexico Agricultural Trade

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) had a profound impact on corn trade between the United States and Mexico. Negotiated tariff reductions and the Mexican government's decision not to charge some tariffs to which it was entitled resulted in a doubling of US corn exports to Mexico. This paper examines the environmental implications of this change on both sides of the border.

2000

Summary: This study explores the environmental impacts of the changes in the US-Mexico corn trade under NAFTA. Since 1994, US corn exports to Mexico have increased by about 2 million tons per year - roughly 1% of US production, or 10% of Mexico's consumption. In the US, the increase in exports brings economic and social benefits, but also increases in

2003

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) had a profound impact on corn trade between the United States and Mexico. Negotiated tariff reductions and the Mexican government's decision not to charge some tariffs to which it was entitled resulted in a doubling of US corn exports to Mexico. This paper examines the environmental implications of this change on both sides of the border. For the US, increased exports to Mexico due to trade liberalization represent one percent of total US production and should therefore be considered responsible for one percent of the environmental impacts of corn production. These are considerable, including: high chemical use; water pollution due to runoff; unsustainable water use for irrigation; the expansion of genetically modified corn; soil erosion; and biodiversity loss. Trends in these areas are presented. For Mexico, the principal potential environmental impact of the loss of a significant share of its domestic corn market to the US is the...

Development, 2004

The Working Group on Development and Environment in the Americas, founded in 2004, brings together economic researchers from several countries in the Americas who have carried out empirical studies of the social and environmental impacts of economic liberalization. The Working Group's goal is to contribute empirical research and policy analysis to the ongoing policy debates on national economic development strategies and international trade. The Working Group held its inaugural meeting in Brasilia, March 29-30, 2004. This paper is one of eight written for the Brasilia meetings. They are the basis for "Globalization and the Environment: Lessons from the Americas," a policy report published by the Heinrich Böll Foundation in July 2004. The Policy Report and Discussion Papers produced by the Working Group can be found on the Web at: http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/WorkingGroup.htm Alejandro Nadal is a professor of economics at El Colegio de México, in Mexico City, where he coordinates the Science, Technology and Development Program. He has published extensively in the economics of technical change and innovation, agriculture and environment, as well as economic theory. He is the author of The Environmental and Social Impacts of Economic Liberalization on Corn Production in Mexico.

Ecological Economics, 1994

The prospect of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has alarmed environmentally concerned professionals and citizens because of potential for exacerbated environmental destruction in each country. The concern in the trade and business community is that provisions for environmental protection would hobble the trade agreement and could effectively negate the positive economic benefits. The purpose of this paper is to consider the various environmental and economic implications of NAFTA and suggest policies that should allow for both a functional NAFTA and environmental protection. This paper summarizes the various potential environmental impacts along with existing free-trade mechanisms for environmental protection. It evaluates the rationale for a transition from current free-trade doctrines to those of sustainable free trade. Also recommended are several suggestions including the creation of a companion North American Environmental Protection Treaty (NAEPT). This treaty would contain trade-related policies beneficial to the environment, but inappropriate to a trade agreement. It would include short-term expansion of GATT articles for protection of the environment, and longer-term transformation of GATT into a General Agreement on Trade and the Environment (GATE). A form of countervailing duties called recompensing duties, and a form of Pigovian tax called a retributice environmental impact (REI) tax designed to ease adverse social, economic and environmental impacts during the transitional period of upward harmonization of standards are proposed. Specific recommendations for NAFTA, NAEPT and GATE are provided.

Agricultural Economics, 1997

This paper analyzes linkages between growth, trade and the environment in Mexican agriculture with an empirical economy-wide model. The investigation considers trade liberalization, environmental policy reform, and their coordination. The analysis decomposes the change in pollution emission induced by changes in the sectoral composition of production, effects of technology on emission intensity, and aggregate scale effects. Outward orientation alone induces a contraction of aggregate agricultural output, but promotes growth and pollution in some agricultural sectors. Overall, free trade does not induce wholesale specialization in dirty agricultural activities. Environmental taxes on pollution emitted in agricultural sectors have a moderate negative impact on agricultural output, except for the tax on water-borne toxic chemicals. More liberal trade combined with targeted effluent taxes can achieve significant environmental mitigation and efficiency gains, but with the implication of a contraction of most agricultural sectors. © 1997 Elsevier Science B.V.

American Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2006

The scope of this study was to analyze the implementation of the environmental policy and the way Mexico has integrated the environmental aspects into a North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). We are aware of the fact that many environmental costs do not necessarily reflect the environmental damage. Environmental costs are often defined by determining either the willingness of the users to pay for the damages or for admittance of claims for damage. Since everyone has the right to a clean and thriving natural environment it is the policy maker who determines the basis of admittance of the most correct means to determine environmental costs in order to reduce the damages. Methodologically, we analyzed the existence and implementation of environmental policy. Instead of looking at the tradeoff between trade related incentives and environmental considerations, we analyzed how trade-offs changes under free trade effects the policy issues. When compared the countries environmental policy and the NAFTA stipulations we found that Mexico has a well-defined environmental policy but less integrated in the free trade agreement. The decision makers have increased the concessions of consumption of fixed capital as a means to increase gains from trade. This has lead to increased environmental damage, natural resource depletion and environmental costs.

2003

NAFTA and internal agricultural reform in Mexico Ever since negotiations for a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) got under way, its effect on the Mexican maize sector and the conservation of maize diversity has been a subject of debate. Our purpose in this paper is to look back at this debate and compare the facts and the forecasts. We review the commitment to liberalize the North American maize market, the actual policies undertaken to this effect, and the evolution of maize output, imports and consumption in Mexico. Then, we address two associated threats to in situ conservation of maize in Mexico: the extinction of subsistence maize agriculture and the spread of maize transgenes in maize's center of diversity. It is hard to distinguish the effects of NAFTA from those of concurrent internal reforms and those attributable to the macroeconomic instability experienced in Mexico from 1994 to 1996. Government involvement in the grain (staple) sector characterized Mexican development policy from the mid '30s to the early '90s, but this came to an end this last decade. Since the dismantling of Conasupo in 1999, government involvement in the sector is reduced to retail sale of maize through the Diconsa network, the allocation of maize imports, and the Kilo-por-kilo program. NAFTA scheduled an end to barriers to Canadian and American maize exports. While maize seed imports were completely liberalized in 1994, other maize was subject to gradual liberalization ending in 2008. One of the most important internal reforms was the dismantling of Conasupo and its disappearance in 1999. Its closing put an end to guaranteed producer prices and abolished government purchases and commercialization of both domestic and imported maize. In 1991, Aserca was created to take the place of direct government involvement through Conasupo. Aserca operates an "indifference price" program where producers sell their crops to industry at the international price, and the government pays them the difference with an accorded price. Three years after the establishment of Aserca, Procampo was created as a transitional program: it is scheduled to conclude in 2008, when free trade is achieved. Procampo consists of decoupled (i.e., area-dependent and unlinked to productivity) income transfer to landowners. The transfers remains if the beneficiaries turn into alternative crops. Alliance for the Countryside (Alianza para el Campo) is another program created to increase agricultural output, capitalize producers, and promote agricultural efficiency through crop substitution. Another fundamental reform was that of Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution, designed to grant property rights to the ejidal sector. The reform put an end to land distribution and the ban on the ejidal-land market. Promotion of the land market was meant to help capitalize agricultural activities by giving peasants access to the privatecredit market and allowing private investment in agriculture. Curtailment of government involvement in agriculture was also accompanied by the disappearance of state-owned companies linked to this sector. Finally, along with agricultural policy changes a social program (Solidaridad, Progresa or Contigo) was created to assist the rural poor. Macroeconomic models of liberalization consistently predicted a sharp increase in maize imports and a sizable reduction of the Mexican maize sector. Maize imports have increased following NAFTA but, surprisingly, domestic maize production has also increased-particularly in rain-fed maize areas, where the area grown in maize has

Frontera Norte, 2017

With the recent announcement of agreement on supplemental environmental accords by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, it now appears NAFTA may indeed become part of the trinational environmental management regime. As the United States Congress moves to authorize NAFTA'S Implementation, it is fruitful to ask what it means for the future of environmental management along the Mexico-United States border. While speculative, the answer may be sought in the text of the NAFTA agreement. Including the supplemental accords, its fit to the extant environmental regime for the border area, and the capacity of that regime to accommodate environmental trends now in place in the region. The remainder of this essay analyzes each of these elements as they shape an answer to the stated question.