Controversy over the provisions of the Treaty on the Application of Environmental Protection remained high in the late 1990s. North American trade interests have tried to weaken a major NAFTA agreement on environmental protection and enforcement. This agreement - one of the few provisions welcomed by environmental groups allows groups and ordinary citizens to criticise Member States for not enforcing their own environmental laws. A three-country environmental cooperation commission is tasked with investigating these allegations and disclosing public reports. "This process is slow, but the embarrassment factor has proven surprisingly high," Business Week noted. Since 2005, the U.S. government has opposed NAFTA revisions. But the Canadian government and many companies in the three countries continue to work to amend this agreement. Economists David Autor, David Dorn and Gordon Hanson weigh the impact of trade with China and Mexico on the U.S. labour market in this 2016 paper [PDF] for the National Bureau of Economic Research. But other economists, including Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Cathleen Cimino-Isaacs of the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE), have pointed out that increased trade is paying off the U.S.
economy. Some jobs are lost because of imports, others are created and consumers benefit greatly from lower prices and often improved product quality. Your 2014 PIIE study on the impact of NAFTA revealed a net loss of about 15,000 jobs per year as a result of the pact - but gains of about $450,000 for each job lost, in the form of higher productivity and lower consumer prices. Many critics of NAFTA saw the agreement as a radical experiment developed by influential multinationals who wanted to increase their profits at the expense of ordinary citizens of the countries concerned. Opposition groups argued that the horizontal rules imposed by nafta could undermine local governments by preventing them from enacting laws or regulations to protect the public interest. Critics also argued that the treaty would lead to a significant deterioration in environmental and health standards, promote privatization and deregulation of essential public services, and supplant family farmers in the signatory countries. Under the agreement, Canada agreed to provide increased access to its dairy market and obtained several concessions in exchange. The USMCA will retain Chapter 19, which Canada relies on to protect it from U.S. trade assistance. It has also avoided a proposed five-year expiration clause, but uses a 16-year delay with a review after six years. On January 29, 2020, President Donald Trump signed the agreement between the United States, Mexico-Canada. Canada has not yet adopted it in its parliamentary body until January 2020.
Mexico was the first country to ratify the agreement in 2019. NAICS has replaced the US Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system, which has allowed companies to be systematically classified in an ever-changing economy. The new system allows for simpler comparability between all North American countries. To ensure the relevance of NAICS, the system will be reviewed every five years. NAFTA has boosted Mexican agricultural exports to the United States, which have tripled since the pact was implemented. Hundreds of thousands of jobs in the automotive industry have also been created in the country and most studies [PDF] have found that the agreement has increased productivity and reduced consumer prices in Mexico.