In reality, however, completely free trade in agri-
culture may not be a reasonable expectation. The
stalemate in the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade (GATT) does not bode well for complete
relaxation of all trade measures affecting agriculture.
Recent public statements by GOM officials indicate
a strong desire to be self-sufficient in com produc-
tion. Similar statements have been made about assur-
ing protection for dry bean producers. Further, it
seems unlikely that any nation will be willing to
relinquish control over food safety, plant health, and
animal health issues. The harmonization of ρhy-
tosanitary and sanitary measures with Mexico may
prove especially difficult. Past experience indicates
that the tendency for both countries has been to
institute protective measures first, then find scientific
evidence to support their claims. It seems unlikely
that NAFTA could reverse this trend, at least not in
the near term.
Finally, much of the literature supports the conten-
tion that passage of a NAFTA will occur sooner,
rather than later. Segarra reminds us that while
NAFTA may be inevitable, it may not be as easy to
sell politically in the United States as it once was. If
this is so, why? First, the U.S. administration was
surprised by the amount of opposition expressed
toward favorable passage of the “fast track” author-
ity. U.S. environmental and labor interests voiced
strong opposition to NAFTA, even though or per-
haps because neither area was explicitly going to be
addressed in the negotiations. Before Congress
would agree to the fast track, it required for the first
time that the executive branch submit an environ-
mental and labor plan indicating how these sensitive
issues would be considered in NAFTA. Opposition
from U.S. winter fruit and vegetable producers has
continued to increase as the negotiations have pro-
gressed. At issue now is the length of time during
which protective “snapback” duties would remain in
place. The transition issue appears to be almost as
politically important in the United States as in Mex-
ico. Further support for Segarra’s assertion is found
in the likely action by the United States to effectively
stall the negotiations until after the November 1992
election. This strategy would leave a six month “win-
dow of opportunity” during which the agreement
could be completed (December 1992-May 1993).
Since the “fast track” expires in June 1993, it will
become increasingly important that progress be
made early if the NAFTA is to be considered under
current authority. To confound NAFTA with fast
track renewal would Certainlyjeopardize successful
completion of NAFTA. Despite the possible political
fallout over the issue, Congress is still expected to
approve NAFTA. Its approval may simply require
more political “backscratching” than previously
thought necessary.
In summary, Mexico is faced with a demographic
dilemma which is pressing the need to secure a
NAFTA and stimulate economic growth. To make an
agreement salable at home and to minimize the
effects of displacing farm labor, Mexico must de-
velop an effective transition and compensation
mechanism accounting for the duality of Mexican
agriculture, especially the fragile “ejido” land tenure
system. To counter the adversarial trade relation-
ships which have developed throughout the world,
NAFTA will likely set the pattern for additional
economic integration throughout the Western Hemi-
sphere. The importance of Mexico’s developing as a
strong potential market for U.S. agriculture is linked
to Mexico’s ability to manage external debt and
orchestrate an effective means of assuring broad-
based income growth throughout the economy. Also
related is the importance that NAFTA could have in
assuring foreign investors of a stable, secure eco-
nomic and political environment. Once thought to be
on a true “fast track” for approval, NAFTA has
experienced more opposition than expected. Without
a doubt there will be a NAFTA, but it probably will
not take effect before early 1994.
REFERENCES
Drucker, Peter F. The New Realities. New York: Harper and Row, 1989.
Haslag, Joseph H., Thomas B. Fomby, and D.J. Slottje. “A Study of the Relationships Between Economic
Growth and Inequality: The Case of Mexico.” Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, May 1988.
Hinojosa, Raul, and Sherman Robinson. “Alternative Scenarios of US-Mexico Integration: A Computable
General Equilibrium Approach.” Giannini Foundation Working Paper No. 609, University of California,
Berkeley, April 1991.
57