Search

While it is presented as in the best interest of the general public, the current process of deep integration in North America is in fact pushed by a political coalition of business representatives, government officials, civil society organizations and members of academia. This narrow, selective coalition speaks with one voice and tries to keep other actors outside the process. Generally supported by the federal executives in the three countries, this coalition is driving a process of "evolution by stealth" aimed at streamlining the institutional framework for doing business throughout the continent.Tracking the corporate connections of the top companies in the US, Canada and Mexico we will show that country distinctions are secondary when identifying the actors pushing for deep integration.NAFTA has already largely integrated North American networks of production, investment and distribution, making the economic and political interests of the top business groups in North America converge. One critical outcome of NAFTA has been the progression consolidation of North American business class. This transnational business class is the backbone of support to deep integration beyond economic matters, and it is behind political, social, academic and media proponents of a tightly integrated North America. Borders matter to this group only to the extent they provide competitive advantages to business operations. Otherwise, from this group's perspective, borders may as well disappear. This is precisely what deep integration aims at institutionalizing.From an international political economy perspective, this paper will track some existing connections within the corporate elite in North America; in order to provide evidence of the emergence of a transnational North American business class. It will show how members of this group are interdependent, their interests converging in similar directions. Moreover, it will show there is a great deal of overlap between large business in the three countries, and this situation is constantly accentuated with mergers and acquisitions that increase ownership concentration. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents an article examining a case of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and its impact on the global politics of citizenship and human rights. Origins of NAFTA; Liberalism in the U.S. domestic citizenship regime; Patterns of nation-building and of citizenship regimes in North American countries.

While the melting ice in the Great North seems to suggest possible future development of the North American Arctic in relation to potential new shipping routes, the extraction of oil and natural gas and the growth of tourism; it also brings with it new inconvenient realities for the governments of both Canada and the United States. Both Ottawa and Washington have been forced to confront a growing list of concerns brought about by an increasingly internationalized Arctic. For over forty years now, the United States and Canada have established extensive bilateral cooperation in the region by avoiding the unresolved question of who controls the waters of the Northwest Passage and the Canadian Archipelago. Now with the reality of polar warming this question can no longer be avoided. The paper raises the question of whether the existing character of U.S.-Canadian relations will be significantly altered by the melting of Arctic ice. The North is "different" today and will continue to change in the years to come. Accordingly, it seems to be an appropriate time for the two countries to carefully consider their individual and joint interests in the Arctic as they relate to issues of security, environmental protection, scientific research and social inquiry. It may be an appropriate time to develop a renewed Canadian-U.S. common strategy in the North. Today, the inconvenience brought about by the melting of polar ice might actually form the basis for resolving outstanding issues between the two countries. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

North American economic integration is characterized by deep structural integration. Many North American firms and industries have created complex cross-border production systems that build on regionalization specialization. The cumulative result of cross-border trade and investment is for most practical purposes an integrated economy. This degree of collaboration and complementarity between countries is unprecedented, a new system with levels of integration that often surpass that of the European Union. Building this North American economic system was very much a bottom-up process, driven largely by firms and markets. The flexibility of this process, with little government control, encouraged rapid economic growth and job creation.But we now confront limits to bottom-up growth. Further integration is blocked in some areas, while in others, patterns of interests and government policies create inefficiencies. We can no longer assume that spillover from economic integration will be automatic or efficient. Import tariffs were reduced and eliminated on many commodities, but other barriers continue to impede trade.In critical areas, and not only 9-11 border issues, but transportation infrastructure, energy, migration, trade-dispute resolution, regulatory harmonization and education--new public policy decisions are now required. What is needed, moreover, are not discrete national policies but rather some sort of North American solutions that appropriately reflect North American problems. The paper will look both at alternatives for such policies and at various means of arriving at policy decisions within the North American community. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that an analysis of business-government relationships is essential for understanding processes of “governance” in North America. We demonstrate the instrumental role of “big business” in Canada and Mexico during two important moments in the evolution of North American governance: first, in the negotiation of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA, 1986-1988) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA, 1991-1992); and, second, in the processes leading up to and during the negotiation of “smart borders” following the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001. We argue that the entering into, as well as the very CUFTA/NAFTA and “smart border” negotiations themselves, and their outcomes, are incomprehensible without a proper understanding of the private sector role. We conclude with some reflections on the implications of our analysis for thinking about the theme of this conference; namely, the North-South divide and International Studies. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept, and practice, of environmental justice has multiple meanings. For some, it is purely a distributional question of whether some populations experience more environmental bads, and fewer environmental goods, than others. For others, environment ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2001, the New England Governors and EasternCanadian Premiers (NEG-ECP) adopted North America’sfirst multijuridictional Climate Change Action Plan,even if the US federal government refused to ratifythe Kyoto Protocol in March 2001. Recognizing t ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite its trilateral format, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) has been criticized for reinforcing a “double-bilateral” structure more conducive to deepening Canada-U.S. ties at the expense of a more egalitarian inclusion of ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores cross-border economic development administration in Western Europe and North America. Specifically, we compare local efforts to promote cross-border economic development in two European and one North American region: the Marches, Italy, Luxembourg’s “Grand-Region,” and Michigan’s border with Ontario, Canada. Interviews were conducted with local, regional and central government officials, as well as private sector actors, in the Italian region of the Marche and in the country of Luxembourg in March-April 2006. Stakeholder interviews with local and provincial/state officials are to be conducted during the summer of 2007. We address the following questions, among others: Is cross-border cooperation within regions more extensive as a result of supranational efforts such as the Interreg initiative? Is cross-border cooperation primarily driven by demands from central governments or do subnational governmental units promote this mode of international cooperation? To what extent do common political economies facilitate cross-border cooperation?Our preliminary findings suggest that in both the Marche and in Luxembourg and its “Grand-Region,” cross-border regional cooperation plays a secondary role to national political processes and preferences. Given these findings, we conclude that there may be limits to cross-border cooperation in certain political and institutional contexts. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior to September 11, scholarly discussions concerning multilateral regimes to govern the movement of people among states in North America centered on the desire to facilitate flows. Common macro-economic interests for more open migration among NAFTA countries press for a more Ricardian approach to migration management similar to that utilized for trade and capital flows. Although dialogue regarding migration regimes has been most rigorous in the European Union, strong interests exist among North American countries to craft policy in the EU mold. However, the events of September 11 not only served to table existing plans for multilateral negotiations regarding migration, but also appeared to completely alter the strategic environment. After 9/11, recognition among policy makers in the U.S. and Canada of the close link between migration control and counter-terrorism prompted widespread acceptance of the view that increasing security is a precondition for openness to migration. Yet, as an inherently global phenomenon it would appear that security could be increased not only through new domestic policies, but also through increased multilateral cooperation. Is such cooperation likely in the area of migration and border control in North America, and are NAFTA countries moving toward a more European approach toward migration and border management? Early evidence shows us that although some cooperation has already been initiated, disparity of interests among North American states presents a significant political obstacle to regime formation, as do the logistical challenges facing Canada, the United States, and Mexico. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. National Security structure is outdated and outmoded, and is in need of significant reform. Although this is the case with much of the U.S. interaction vis-à-vis the rest of the world, it is particularly so with its institutional structures deal ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]