IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/994.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Textiles and apparel in NAFTA : a case of constrained liberalization

Author

Listed:
  • Bannister, Geoffrey
  • Low, Patrick

Abstract

The authors examine the changes that Mexico's textile and clothing industry is likely to face under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). They compare pre-NAFTA and probable post-NAFTA scenarios for Mexican exports. The U.S. clothing and textile industry is likely to remain among the most protected of U.S. industries, so this is essentially a comparison of two protectionist situations, not of protection and free trade. The authors trace how current quota and tariff restrictions on U.S. imports from Mexico will be replaced by rules of origin designed to protect U.S. industry. Mexican textile and clothing exports will enjoy greater access to the U.S. market if most inputs originate in North America. Under the triple transformation requirements, for example, a cotton shirt would have to be made in the NAFTA region from yarn and fabric of NAFTA origin. Mexican compliance with this rule would not prove onerous. Proximity and long-standing production-sharing arrangements have made Mexico heavily dependent on U.S. inputs. Roughly 53 percent of Mexican textile and apparel exports to the United States fall under production-sharing programs, with an average 69 percent of value added of U.S. origin. Only 15 percent of input requirements for the other 47 percent of trade is imported into Mexico - only 8 percent from non-NAFTA countries. What about future trade? The authors estimate that these Mexican exports to the United States will increase only modestly - partly because of the low level of protection already associated with production-sharing arrangements. Rules oforigin under the NAFTA are small. How much investment from outside North America will be attracted to Mexico under stringent input-sourcing requirements is open to question. The competitiveness of Mexico's apparel industry in non-NAFTA markets will depend to some extent on the international competitiveness of the U.S. textile industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Bannister, Geoffrey & Low, Patrick, 1992. "Textiles and apparel in NAFTA : a case of constrained liberalization," Policy Research Working Paper Series 994, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:994
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1992/10/01/000009265_3961003100003/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. W. Sawyer & Richard Sprinkle, 1989. "Alternative empirical estimates of trade creation and trade diversion: A comparison of the Baldwin-Murray and Verdoorn models," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 125(1), pages 61-73, March.
    2. Vousden,Neil, 1990. "The Economics of Trade Protection," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521346696, October.
    3. Laird, Samuel & Yeats, Alexander J., 1990. "Two sources of bias in standard partial equilibrium trade models," Policy Research Working Paper Series 374, The World Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bannister, Geoffrey J., 1993. "Rent-sharing in the multi-fibre arrangement : the case of Mexico," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1191, The World Bank.
    2. Geoffrey Bannister, 1994. "Rent sharing in the multi-fibre arrangement: The case of Mexico," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 130(4), pages 800-827, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dipankar Purkayastha, 1999. "Patriarchal Monopoly and Economic Development," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 61-78.
    2. Denise Eby Konan & Keith E. Maskus, 2012. "Preferential Trade and Welfare with Differentiated Products," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(5), pages 884-892, November.
    3. Kym Anderson & Johan Swinnen, 2008. "Distortions to Agricultural Incentives in Europe's Transition Economies," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6502.
    4. Lilyan E. Fulginiti & Richard K. Perrin, 1995. "An Allais Measure of Production Sector Waste Due to Quotas," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(4), pages 865-874.
    5. Coxhead, Ian A., 1997. "Induced innovation and land degradation in developing country agriculture," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 41(3), pages 1-28.
    6. Langhammer, Rolf J. & Hiemenz, Ulrich, 1990. "Regional integration among developing countries: opportunities, obstacles and options," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 416, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    7. Kym Anderson & James Giesecke & Ernesto Valenzuela, 2010. "How would global trade liberalization affect rural and regional incomes in Australia?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(4), pages 389-406, October.
    8. Richard Damania & Per G. Fredriksson & Thomas Osang, 2005. "Polluters and Collective Action: Theory and Evidence," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(1), pages 167-185, July.
    9. David Karemera & Won W. Koo, 1994. "Trade Creation And Diversion Effects Of The U.S.‐Canadian Free Trade Agreement," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 12(1), pages 12-23, January.
    10. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Grossmann, Volker & Kohler, Wilhelm, 2012. "Migration, International Trade and Capital Formation: Cause or Effect?," IZA Discussion Papers 6975, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Kym Anderson & Peter Lloyd & Donald Maclaren, 2007. "Distortions to Agricultural Incentives in Australia Since World War II," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 83(263), pages 461-482, December.
    12. Kozloff, Keith & Runge, C. Ford, 1991. "International Trade In The Food Sector And Environmental Quality, Health, And Safety: A Survey Of Policy Issues," Staff Papers 13325, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    13. repec:phd:pjdevt:jpd_1995_vol__xxii_no__1-e is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Anderson, Kym & Brückner, Markus, 2011. "Price Distortions and Economic Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa," CEPR Discussion Papers 8530, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. teixeira, Erly Cardoso, 1998. "Impact of the Uruguay Round Agreement and Mercosul on the Brazilian Economy," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 52(3), July.
    16. Kym Anderson & Gordon Rausser & Johan Swinnen, 2013. "Political Economy of Public Policies: Insights from Distortions to Agricultural and Food Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(2), pages 423-477, June.
    17. Zhen Miao & John C. Beghin & Helen H. Jensen, 2013. "Accounting For Product Substitution In The Analysis Of Food Taxes Targeting Obesity," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(11), pages 1318-1343, November.
    18. John Christopher Beghin, 2017. "Nontariff Barriers," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 1, pages 3-11, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Hanaa Kheir-El-Din & Sherine El-Shawarby, 2000. "Trade and Foreign Exchange Regime in Egypt," Working Papers 2034, Economic Research Forum, revised 11 Sep 2000.
    20. Anderson, Kym & Kurzweil, Marianne & Martin, William J. & Sandri, Damiano & Valenzuela, Ernesto, 2008. "Methodology for Measuring Distortions to Agricultural Incentives," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 48326, World Bank.
    21. Philippidis, G. & Hubbard, L. J., 2001. "The economic cost of the CAP revisited," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 375-385, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:994. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.