Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T18:58:18.895Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trade Agreements, Competition, and the Environment: Gridlock at the Crossroads: Discussion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Emily A. McClain
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Seale and Fairchild cover an ambitious array of issues in their paper on “Trade Agreements, Competition, and the Environment”. Perhaps it is this ambition that leads their discussion to be too generalized in some areas. Their paper is organized into several sections: (1) a review of trade theory and generalizations about resource use (“GATT or NAFTA, Does it matter?”); (2) issues that link trade and environmental policy; (3) observations on shifts in U.S. trade policy behavior; and (4) perspectives on the changes and adjustment facing southern agriculture. I would like to challenge some of their assertions about regional trading blocs, and the environment and resource use.

Type
Invited Papers and Discussions
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , July 1994 , pp. 129 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Forsythe, Kenneth and Neff, Liana. “The U.S. Enterprise for the Americas Initiative: Support for Western Hemisphere Economic and Trade Reform,” Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Agriculture Information Bulletin No. 660, April 1993.Google Scholar
Shane, Mathew D., and Witzke, Harald von. “Public Goods, the Environment, and International Trade,” in The Environment, Government Policies, and International Trade: A Proceedings, Agriculture and Trade Analysis Division, Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Staff Report No. AGES9314, September 1993.Google Scholar