Globalization and the Border: Trade, Labor, Migration, and Agricultural Production in Mexico (original) (raw)

Abstract

The debate over immigration policy in the United States has reached a crescendo in recent years, with particular concern over illegal workers and their impact on social well-being in this country. Yet in the prevailing analysis of this issue, the relationship between immigration and contemporary international trade policy is often overlooked. In particular, few commentators recognize or understand that a significant part of the surge in illegal labor from Mexico-the source of the majority of undocumented workers in the United States-stems from reforms that Mexico undertook in cooperation with the United States to liberalize trade flows across the Mexico-United States border. This Article seeks to elucidate that relationship by focusing on a particular example: agricultural production in Mexico, especially the production of corn, the staple crop of Mexican farmers. Since 1994, the following interrelationship between international trade rules, labor, and migration has unfolded across the Mexico-United States border: first, corn imports have surged into Mexico from the United States under import policy reforms brought about by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and related economic liberalizations in Mexico; and, second, displaced agricultural labor has migrated out of rural Mexico into Mexican cities, maquiladoras, and, not infrequently, the United States. This Article recounts the particulars of NAFTA-induced corn import surges from the U.S. across the border to Mexico delving into the specifics within the broader context of liberalization. Part I describes the background of macroeconomic reform in Mexico; Part H discusses that reform in the context of labor relations in Mexico; Part III describes the impact of these transformative forces on labor migration; Part IV illustrates the cumulative effect of these events on local maize production; and Part V concludes the Article by summarizing the general and specific dynamics at play in liberalization and production across the Mexico-U.S. border, with associated effects on cross-border migration. * Chantal Thomas, Professor of Law, Cornell Law School. I am indebted to Dan Badelescu for alerting me to this important case study. Special thanks to Professors Michael Malloy and Ruth Jones, and their colleagues at McGeorge School of Law, for inviting me to take part in their Annual Distinguished Speaker Series. A version of this paper was presented at the conference, "Mapping Social Regionalism," convened by McGill University Faculty of Law and the Centre de Recherche Interuniversitaire sur le Mondialisation et le Travail (CRIMT); that paper has been published as "Migration and Social Regionalism: Labour Migration as an

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (27)

  1. See GARY C. HUFBAUER & JEFFREY J. SCHoT-r, NAFTA REVISITED: ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES 79 (2005).
  2. See ARTURO ZARATE-RUIz, A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF THE NAFrA DEBATE 23-25 (2000).
  3. Katherine V.W. Stone, Flexibilization, Globalization, and Privatization: Three Challenges to Labour Rights in Our Time, 44 OSGOODE HALL L.J. 77, 79 (2006) (defining flexibilization as "changing work practices by which firms no longer use internal labour markets or implicitly promise employees lifetime job security, but rather seek flexible employment relations that permit them to increase or diminish their workforce, and reassign and redeploy employees with ease.").
  4. Enrique de la Garza Toledo, NAFTA, Manufactura y Trabajo en Mexico, Monograph Presented to General Assembly of the Latin American Council of Social Sciences (CLASCO) in Guadalajara, Mex. 19, 21 (Nov. 21-24, 2001), available at http://docencia.izt.uam.mx/egt/congresos/nafmantrab.pdf (on file with the McGeorge Law Review) ("[D]esde 1988 se
  5. See., e.g., Laura Ho, Catherine Powell & Leti Volpp, (Dis)Assembling Rights of Women Workers Along the Global Assembly Line: Human Rights and the Garment Industry, 31 HARV. C.R.-C.L. L. REV. 383 (1996);
  6. see also Maria A. Plumtree, Maquiladoras and Women Workers: The Marginalization of Women in Mexico as a Means to Economic Development, 6 Sw. J. L. & TRADE AM. 177 (1999);
  7. Grace C. Spencer, Her 83. See U.S. NAT'L ADMIN. OFFICE, U.S. DEP'T OF LABOR, NAO: NAALC SUBMISSION 940001 AND 940002 (1994), http://www.dol.gov/ilab/media/reports/nao/940001.htm (on file with the McGeorge Law Review) (describing a submission (940001) by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) alleging that Honeywell fired workers in Mexico who expressed an interest in joining an independent union and a submission (No. 940002) by United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers (UE) alleging that a General Electric subsidiary in Mexico interfered with workers' attempts to organize an independent union);
  8. U.S. NAT'L ADMIN.
  9. OFFICE, U.S. DEP'T OF LABOR, PUBLIC REPORT OF REVIEW OF NAO SUBMISSION No. 940003 (1994), http://www.dol.gov/ilab/media/reports/nao/PUBREP940003.htm (on file with the McGeorge Law Review) (describing a submission by human rights and workers' rights organizations filed against Sony alleging that Sony's operations in Mexico repeatedly interfered with an internal union dispute and a union delegate election);
  10. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Status of Submissions Under the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC), http:llwww.dol.govlilablprogramslnaolstatus.htm#iia3 (last visited Sept. 24, 2007) (on file with the McGeorge Law Review) (explaining that UE filed U.S. NAO Submission 940004 against a General Electric subsidiary in Mexico and later withdrew the submission before the review was complete).
  11. See U.S. Nat'l Admin. Office, U.S. Dep't of Labor, The Ministerial Consultations Agreement, Submission 94003, available at http://www.dol.gov/ilab/medialreports/nao/minagreemt940003.htm (last visited Oct. 4, 2010) (on file with the McGeorge Law Review).
  12. Nicole L. Grimm, The North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation and Its Effects on Women Working in the Maquiladoras, 48 AM. U.L. REV. 179, 212-13 (1998). In these cases the NAO did not recommend further action because workers had accepted severance pay packages, which in the view of the NAO Report precluded further action under NAALC. Id.
  13. See United States Department of Labor, Status of Submissions under the NAALC (Mar. 2010) http://www.dol.gov/ilab/programs/nao/status.htm#iial5 (on file with the McGeorge Law Review) (providing a complete list of submissions).
  14. See id.; see also Jeffrey Sachs et al., The Collapse of the Mexican Peso: What Have We Learned?, 11 ECON. POL'Y 13 (1996).
  15. Susan Fleck & Constance Sorrentino, Employment and Unemployment in Mexico's Labor Force, MONTHLY LAB. REV., Nov. 1994, at 3, 17 tbl.4, available at http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1994/1 1/art1full.pdf. 92. See Philip Martin, Mexico-U.S. Migration, in NAFTA REVISITED: ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES 441, 454 (Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jeffrey J. Schott eds., 2005) ("The number of maquiladoras and their employment increased sharply after several peso devaluations and reached a peak of 1.3 million in 2000. 93. The Secretary-General, Report of the Secretary-General on International Migration and Development, 31 tbl.3, delivered to the General Assembly, U.N. Doc. A/60/871 (May 18, 2006).
  16. INT'L ORG. FOR MIGRATION, WORLD MIGRATION 2005: COSTS AND BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION 393-94 (2005).
  17. Steven A. Camarota & Nora McArdle, Where Immigrants Live: An Examination of State Residency of the Foreign Born by Country of Origin in 1990 and 2000, BACKGROUNDER, Sept. 2003, at 1, http://www.cis.org/articles/2003/back1203.pdf (on file with the McGeorge Law Review).
  18. MICHAEL HOEFER, NANCY RYTINA & CHRISTOPHER CAMPBELL, U.S. DEP'T OF HOMELAND SEC., ESTIMATES OF THE UNAUTHORIZED IMMIGRANT POPULATION RESIDING IN THE UNITED STATES: JANUARY 2005, at 1 (2006), http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ILL PE-2005.pdf (on file with the McGeorge Law Review).
  19. See, e.g., Victor Davis Hanson, Mexifornia, Five Years Later, CITY JOURNAL, Winter 2007, http://www.city-joumal.org/html/17-1.mexiformia.html (on file with the McGeorge Law Review).
  20. Robert A. Mundell, International Trade and Factor Mobility, 47 AM. ECON. REV. 321 (1957); see also Maurice Schiff, Substitution in Markusen's Classic Trade and Factor Movement Complementarily Models 1 n.1 (Aug. 1, 2006) (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3974) available at http://ssm.com/abstract=923281 (on file with the McGeorge Law Review) (observing the uses of the theory in debates around NAFTA; "[a]s the then President of Mexico Salinas said during the NAFTA negotiations: "We want to export goods, not people.").
  21. James R. Markusen, Factor Movements and Commodity Trade as Complements, 14 J. INT'L ECON. 341 (1983).
  22. Under NAFTA, the government was to replace its previous import quota system with a tariff-rate quota system: that is, rather than imposing an absolute ban on imports above a certain number, the imports above that number would instead be allowed but subject to a tariff. NAFTA, supra note 27, annex 302.2(1)(d), 32 I.L.M. at 310.
  23. Alejandro Nadal & Timothy A. Wise, The Environmental Costs of Agricultural Trade Liberalization: Mexico-U.S. Maize Trade Under NAFTA 6 (Working Group on Dev. and Env't in the Ams., Discussion Paper No. 4, June 2004), http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/rp/DP04NadalWiseJuly04.pdf (on file with the McGeorge Law Review).
  24. Id. at 26.
  25. Gisele Henriques & Raj Patel, Interhemispheric Resource Center Americas Program Special Report: NAFTA, Corn, and Mexico's Agricultural Trade Liberalization, AMERICAS POLICY PROGRAM 3, available at http://americas.irc-online.org/pdf/reports/O402nafta.pdf. 113. Nadal & Wise, supra note 110, at 26.
  26. Pesos lost half of their value against the dollar between 1994 and 1996: from 3.4 pesos/dollar to 7.6 pesos/dollar. WORLD BANK, WORLD DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS (2009).
  27. ORG. FOR ECON. CO-OPERATION & DEV. (OECD), PLACED-BASED POLICIES FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT: THE MICRO-REGIONS STRATEGY, MEXICO 7 (Case Study) (2003), http://www.oecd.org/ dataoecd/62/7/34857346.pdf (on file with the McGeorge Law Review).