Market Access and Welfare under Free Trade Agreements: Textiles under NAFTA

Cadot, Olivier

doi:10.1093/wber/lhi019

Cited by 34 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Results suggest that they are quite costly, especially in North-South agreements. For example, Cadot et al (2005) find that ROOs halve the gains to Mexico from NAFTA, and Mattoo et al (2002) find similar results for the Africa Opportunity and Growth and Opportunity Act. Cadot & de Melo (2008), in a summary of the literature, note that compliance costs associated with meeting ROO requirements range from 3% to 5% of final product prices, largely offsetting the small preferences allotted in developed countries.…”

Section: Rules Of Originmentioning

confidence: 77%

Regional Trade Agreements

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews the theoretical and the empirical literature on regionalism. The formation of regional trade agreements has been, by far, the most popular form of reciprocal trade liberalization in the past 15 years. The discriminatory character of these agreements has raised three main concerns: that trade diversion would be rampant, because special interest groups would induce governments to form the most distortionary agreements; that broader external trade liberalization would stall or reverse; and that multilateralism could be undermined. Theoretically, all these concerns are legitimate, although there are also several theoretical arguments that oppose them. Empirically, neither widespread trade diversion nor stalled external liberalization has materialized, whereas the undermining of multilateralism has not been properly tested. There are also several aspects of regionalism that have received too little attention from researchers, but which are central to understanding its causes and consequences.

show abstract

Section: Rules Of Originmentioning

confidence: 77%

Regional Trade Agreements

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Results suggest that they are quite costly, especially in North-South agreements. For example, Cadot et al (2005) find that ROO halve the gains to Mexico from NAFTA and Mattoo et al (2002) find similar results for the Africa Opportunity and Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). Cadot and de Melo (2008), in a summary of the literature, note that compliance costs associated with meeting ROO requirements range from 3 to 5 percent of final product prices, largely offsetting the small preferences allotted in developed countries.…”

Section: Rules Of Originmentioning

confidence: 78%

Regional trade agreements

2015

Annual Report 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the theoretical and the empirical literature on regionalism. The formation of regional trade agreements has been, by far, the most popular form of reciprocal trade liberalization in the last fifteen years. The discriminatory character of these agreements has raised three main concerns: that trade diversion would be rampant, because special interest groups would induce governments to form the most distortionary agreements; that broader external trade liberalization would stall or reverse; and that multilateralism could be undermined. Theoretically, all of these concerns are legitimate, although there are also several theoretical arguments that oppose them. Empirically, neither widespread trade diversion nor stalled external liberalization have materialized, while the undermining of multilateralism has not been properly tested. There are also several aspects of regionalism that have received too little attention from researchers, but which are central to understanding its causes and consequences.

show abstract

“…'Rules of origin' which determine where a good comes from or 'export processing zones' have created very similar problems and the large costs involved are well documented (equivalent to a price increase of 12% in the NAFTA case (Cadot et al, 2005)). Taking into account the various production processes capable of generating each of these products would require tariff lines to be defined in terms of 'products times production processes times firms'.…”

Section: More About Implementation Problems: Mind-boggling Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate and trade policies: from mutual destruction to mutual support

Messerlin

2012

World Trade Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is no doubt that trade and climate policies can be mutually destructive. But there are three strong reasons to suggest that they can also be mutually supportive: they have a common problem, common foes, and common friends. Mutual support would be much stronger if the world regimes for these two policies shared a few common principles. The climate community should feel at ease with the broad WTO principles of ‘national treatment’ and ‘most-favoured nation’, and rely on them in building its own treaty and institutions. The trade community should grasp the opportunity to benefit from the better disciplines on adjustment policies that it is hoped the climate community will design.These conclusions should put the many pending problems into a more positive perspective, and persuade negotiators to find pragmatic compromises, as was the case with the GATT. Using this perspective, the paper focuses on a few key issues, such as the definition of carbon border taxes and the reasons to ban carbon tariffs. Other cases of mutual support are examined. For instance, the climate community should not repeat the mistakes of the world trade regime in dealing with the developing and least developed countries.

show abstract

Market Access and Welfare under Free Trade Agreements: Textiles under NAFTA

Cited by 34 publications

References 8 publications

Regional Trade Agreements

Regional Trade Agreements

Regional trade agreements

Climate and trade policies: from mutual destruction to mutual support

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About