Did Nafta Help Mexico? An Update After 23 Years

Abstract

This note compares the performance of the Mexican economy with that of the rest of the region over 23 years, since NAFTA took effect, based on the available economic and social indicators. Among the results, it finds that Mexico ranks 15th out of 20 Latin American countries in growth of real GDP per person, the most basic economic measure of living standards; Mexico’s poverty rate in 2014 was higher than the poverty rate of 1994; and real wages (inflation-adjusted) were almost the same in 2014 as in 1994. It also notes that if NAFTA had been successful in restoring Mexico’s pre-1980 growth rate —when developmentalist economic policies were the norm— Mexico today would be a high-income country, with income per person comparable to Western European countries. If not for Mexico’s long-term economic failure, including the 23 years since NAFTA, it is unlikely that immigration from Mexico would have become a major political issue in the United States, since relatively few Mexicans would seek to cross the border.

Explaining the Immigrant Health Advantage: Self-selection and Protection in Health-Related Factors Among Five Major National-Origin Immigrant Groups in the United States

“…Stronger border enforcement and weaker economic conditions are associated with higher (educational) self-selection in unauthorized crossings (Orrenius and Zavodny 2005; Villarreal 2014). Over the last two decades, the U.S. government has ramped up its allocation of resources to police the border and deport undocumented migrants (Massey and Riosmena 2010; Villarreal 2014), while the Mexican economy has had an irregular and overall middling performance (Weisbrot et al 2014). Thus, despite the fact that contemporary Mexican migration is fueled by network processes that may otherwise reduce selectivity (Lindstrom and López-Ramírez 2010), it may still be positively selected in terms of health.…”

Climate Migration at the Height and End of the Great Mexican Emigration Era

“…The country's primary sectors were liberalized in the 1990s, including a reduction of public support (in the form of both subsidies and credit availability, see de Janvry, Sadoulet, and de Anda ) for small‐scale primary sector market activities and a gradual but complete opening of domestic agricultural markets under the North American Free Trade Agreement (Zepeda, Wise, and Gallagher ). Not surprising, these structural shifts weakened local rural livelihoods, not only increasing vulnerability to climatic stress but also marginalizing rural Mexicans (Nevins ; Weisbrot, Lefebvre, and Sammut ).…”

Donald Trump: A Critical Theory-Perspective on Authoritarian Capitalism

“…The Zapatista rebels assessed "that NAFTA will not bring them benefits, but 'a death sentence'" (Marcos 2002, xxv). Mexico's socio-economic situation has not really improved through NAFTA: In the period from 1994-2013, Mexico's GDP increased on average by only 0.9 percent per year (Weisbrot, Lefebvre and Sammut 2014). Mexico's poverty rate was in 2012 52.3% and in 1994 52.4%, so the country stayed extremely poor during NAFTA's first twenty years (ibid.).…”