Abstract

This paper summarizes the arguments and counterarguments within the scientific discussion on the issue of institutional capital and its implications on trade and environmentally sustainable development under NAFTA (North America Free Trade Agreement). The main purpose of the research is conducting a critical analysis the implications in terms of the relationship between cooperation, conflict and institutional capital, as well as their interactions with trade–marketing and environmentally sustainable development policy making under the framework of NAFTA. Systematization literary sources and approaches for solving the problem of whether the North American Free Trade Agreement should continue to operate despite the challenges and the institutional capital capacity built by the country members indicates that the renegotiation process should incorporate the institutional capital already developed. The relevance of the decision of this scientific problem is that created institutional capital has critical effects on trade, marketing and environmentally sustainable development. Investigation of the topic in the paper is carried out in the following logical sequence based on literature review aimed to create a relationship between the analytical variables in order to obtain a research construct. Methodological tools of the research methods were reviewing 24 years of research on the implementation of NAFTA. The object of research is the chosen countries, of United States, Canada and Mexico, because namely they have created the NAFTA The paper presents the results of an empirical analysis of the implications in terms of cooperation and conflict relationships as institutional capital and their interactions with trade-marketing and environmentally sustainable development policy making which showed that the research model proposed and used to analyze is useful as a research construct. The research empirically confirms and theoretically proves that although the existence of NAFTA is severely questioned, its institutional capital has positive effects on the implications of trade-marketing, however, environmentally sustainable development proves to be conflictive and highly contentious, although some positive effects are developing. The results of the research can be useful for the renegotiations processes of individual firms, industries, economic sectors and countries under NAFTA.

Keywords: environment, institutional capital, marketing, NAFTA, trade, sustainable development.

JEL Classification: B52, D02, E02, F18, F13, F51, F53, F55, F64.

Cite as: Vargas-Hernández, J. G., Orozco-Quijano, E. P., Virchez, J. (2018). Critical Analysis On Institutional Capital On Trade And Environmentally Sustainable Development Under NAFTA. SocioEconomic Challenges, 4(2), 21-31. DOI: http://doi.org/10.21272/sec.2(4).21-31.2018

References

1. Ahrens, J. and Jünemann, P. (2009). Adaptive efficiency and pragmatic flexibility: characteristics of institutional change in capitalism, Chinese-style. Unpublished Paper [online], available at http://www.centralasiaproject.de/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid= 32&&Itemid=7.
2. Ahsan, S. M. (2003). Institutional Capital and Poverty: A Transition Economy Perspective, in A. Shorrocks and R. van der Hoeven, Eds. Perspectives on poverty and growth. United nations University Press.
3. Ashby, C. & Carney, D. (1999). Sustainable livelihoods: lessons from early experience. London, UK, Department for International Development. Cited by Warner, 2000.
4. Besharov, M.L. and Smith, W.K. (2014) Multiple Institutional Logics in Organizations: Explaining Their Varied Na- ture and Implications. Academy of Management Review, 39, 364-381. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0431
5. Bossier, S. (2003). Desarrollo territorial y descentralización. Lima.
6. Bourdieu, P. (1972), Esquisse d’une théorie de la pratique. Genève: Droz, (new edition in Paris: Seuil, coll. Points Essais, 2000, 429 pages).
7. Bruell, L. (2005). Institutional Capital: Building Post-Communist Government Performance. University Press of America, Lanham.
8. Brunell, L. (2005). Institutional Capital: Building Post-Communist Government Performance. University Press of America.
9. Cámara de Diputados (2003). Compilación de leyes para el campo, México, El campo no aguanta más (2002), ‘Seis propuestas para la salvación y revaloriza- ción del campo mexicano’, mimeo (12 organizations signing), November.
10. Chen, Z.W. (2008). Why Hard-Working Chinese People Are Not Wealthy. CITIC Press, Beijing.
11. de Janvry, A., Sadoulet, E., and de Anda, G. G. (1995). NAFTA and Mexico’s maize producers. World Development 23:1349–62. Johnson, D. G. (1975). World agriculture, commodity policy, and price variability.
12. Eakin, H., Perales, H., Appendini, K., and Sweeney, S. (2014). Selling maize in Mexico: The persistence of peasant farming in an era of global markets. Development and Change, 45, 133–155.
13. Eggertsson, Thrainn. (1990). Economic Behavior and Institutions. Cambridge, Cambridge University.
14. Evans, B. et al. (2006), Governing local sustainability, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 49(6), 849-867.
15. Finnemore, M. & Sikkink, K. (2007). International Norm Dynamics and Political Change, 52 INT’L ORG.
16. Gao, Y., Gao, S. and Zhou, Y. (2015). Picturing Firms’ Institutional Capital-Based Radical Innovation under China’s Institutional Voids. Journal of Business Research, 68, 1166-1175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.011
17. Garrabé, M. (2008). Note sur l‘existence du capital institutionnel, Unpublished Paper, Workshop University of Montpellier 1 and Sherbrook University, June, 23-24, 2008, 24 p. http://www.michel-garrabe.com.
18. Garrabé, M. (2007). Economie sociale et développement, Programme MED-TEMPUS, 220 pages, http://www.formder.iamm.fr.
19. Harland, D. (1987). Some international dimensions of consumer policy and law. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 29, 451-467.
20. Harris, R.G. (1984). AppUed General Equilibrium Analysis of Small Open Economies with Scale Economies and Imperfect Competition. American Economic Review, 74, 1016-1032.
21. Harrison, G. W. Rutherford, T. F. and Tarr, D. G. (1995). Quantifying the Uruguay Round. In Martin, W. and Winters, L. A. (eds). The Uruguay Round and Developing Economies, World Bank discussion paper, 307.
22. Hertel, T. W. (1994). The Procompetitive Effects of Trade Policy Reform in a Small Open Economy. Journal of International Economics, 36, 391-411.
23. Hodgson, G. M. (2006). What are institutions? Journal of Economic Issues. 40(1), 1-25.
24. Hoff, K. and Sen, A. (2005). The Kin System as a Poverty Trap? World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 3575.
25. Hudec, R. (1999). New WTO Dispute Settlement Procedure: An Overview of the First Three Years. Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, 8(1), 1–53.
26. Industry Canada, Agropur’s Profile (2005). Canadian company capabilities [online]. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/app/ccc/search/navigate.do?language=eng&portal=1&estblmntNo=131336240000&profile=complete Profile.
27. Jinnah, S. (2010). Overlap Management in the World Trade Organization: Secretariat Inouence on Trade-Environment Politics. Global Environmental Politics, 10(2).
28. Kaji, G. S. (1998). Institutions in Development: the Country, Research, and Operational Challenges. In Picciotto, R. and Weisner, E. (eds.) Evaluation and Development: The Institutional Dimension. World Bank, Washington, D.C., pp. 3-6.
29. Klabbers, J. (2013). Unity, Diversity, Accountability: The Ambivalent Concept of International Organisation, Melbourne Journal of International Law, 149, p. 152.
30. Lan, H.L. and Pi, S.L. (2011). On Strategic Choices of Chinese Corporation under Dual-Condition of Economic Globalization and Market Fragmentation. Journal of Management, 8, 1107-1114.
31. Lin, N. (2005). Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. Century Press, Shanghai.
32. Long, Y.A. (2013). An Empirical Study of the Effect of Non-Market Factors on China’s Overseas Direct Investment. International Economics and Trade Research, 7(8).
33. Loureau, R. (1972). L’Analyse Institutionnelle. Paris, Les Editions de Minuit, (Arguments), 298 pages.
34. Lu, Y., Zhou, L., Bruton, G. and Li, W. (2010). Capabilities as a Mediator Linking Resources and the International Performance of Entrepreneurial Firms in an Emerging Economy. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 419-436. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.73.
35. Mamoon, D. (2007). Good Institutions and Fair Trade: A Road Map to Local and Global Social Harmony, Working Paper No. 450, Institute of Social Studies, The Netherlands.
36. Martin, X. (2014). Institutional Advantage. Global Strategy Journal, 4, 55-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-5805.2013.01072.x.
37. Martinez, R.J. and Dacin, M.T. (1999). Efficiency Motives and Normative Forces: Combining Transactions Costs and Institutional Logic. Journal of Management, 25, 75-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500104.
38. Merciai, P. (1986). Consumer protection and the United Nations. Journal of World Trade Law, 20, 206-231.
39. Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977) Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/226550.
40. Micklitz, H. W. (2000). International Regulation on Health, Safety, and the Environment – Trends and Challenges. Journal of Consumer Policy, 23, 3-24.
41. NAAEC (1993). North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation, Sept. 14, 1993, 32 I.L.M. 1480, reprinted in The Nafta Supplemental Agreements (United States Government Printing Office ed., 1993) [hereinafter NAAEC].
42. North, D. (1995). Instituciones, cambio institucional y desempeño económico. México, Fondo de Cultura Económica.
43. North, D. (1995). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44. North, D. (1991). Institutions, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97-112.
45. North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, 159 pages.
46. North, D. C. (1981). Structure and Change in Economic History. New York and London, W.W. Norton.
47. Platje, J. (2008a). Institutional capital as a factor of sustainable development ‐ the importance of an institutional equilibrium, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 14(2), 144-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/1392-8619.2008.14.144-150.
48. Rodriguez Diaz, A. J. (2012). Transferring knowledge in Quebec–Mexico partnerships: the case of the dairy industry. J. Technol. Transf., 37, 631–647. DOI 10.1007/s10961-010-9197-0
49. Rothwell, R., & Zegveld, W. (1985). The process of technological innovation: Patterns and influences. In Reindustrialization and technology (Chap. 2, pp. 47–82). Harlow, England: M.E. Sharpe Inc. 282.
50. Scott, W.R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks.
51. Shi, M.F. and Ke, W.G. (2000). Institutional Economics. Commercial Press, Beijing.
52. Strang, D. & Meyer (1993). Institutional Conditions for Diffusion, Theory and Sociology, 22(4), 87.
53. Trebilcock, M. (1996). What Makes Poor Countries Poor? The Role of Institutional Capital in Economic Development, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series, http://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/oplwec/1149.html.
54. Trujillo, E. (2013). A dialogical approach to trade and environment. Journal of International Economic Law, 16(3), 535-585. doi:10.1093/jiel/jg;t019.
55. Vicencio Meza, J. A. (2009). Capital Institucional y Desarrollo Económico: Una aproximación a la relación normativa-conductual en comunidades extranjeras. Empresarios Judíos en Chile. 1930-1970. Seminario de Grado Licenciado en Historia “Reglas, capacidades y redes en el desempeño económico De familias judías en Chile: 1930-2009” Universidad de Chile Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades Departamento de Ciencias Históricas.
56. UN (2002). UN Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, South Africa, Aug. 2002, available at http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/documents/131302_wssd_report_reissued.pdf.
57. Veeman, M. (2017). Keynote address. North American Trade Policy for Agriculture and Forestry: Can Economics Trump Politics? Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 65, 43–68. DOI: 10.1111/cjag.12135.
58. Weiler, J. (2001). The Role of Lawyers and the Ethos of Diplomats: Reoections on the International and External Legitimacy of WTO Dispute Settlement. Journal of World Trade, 35(2), 191–207.
59. Wiggins, S., Keilbach, N., Preibisch, K., Proctor, S., Herrejón, G. R., and Muñoz, G. R. (2002). Discussion — Agricultural policy reform and rural livelihoods in central Mexico. Journal of Development Studies, 38, 179–202.
60. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York, Free Press.
61. Yang, Z. and Su, C. (2014). Institutional Theory in Business Marketing: A Conceptual Framework and Future Directions. Industrial Marketing Management, 43, 721-725. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.04.001.
62. Yang, F. and Wang, H.S. (1997). Social Research Methods. Peking University Press, Beijing.
63. Zhang, J.W. and Wang, Y.J. (2010). Evaluation and Future Prospects for Competitive Advantage and Evolution. Foreign Economics and Management, 3, 1-10.
64. Zenou, Y. (2009). Urban Labor Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.