Search

Since its beginning the 1980s, the globalized model of economic development in Mexico has generated paradoxical results. On the positive side, Mexico attained a privileged position among the mayor economies of the world by becoming the 13th largest exporter and the 12th main importer, while simultaneously turning into a high-ranking recipient of foreign direct investment. These positive results deeply diverge with the mediocre performance in economic growth and the high levels of unemployment, informality and poverty. In this paper we argue that these paradoxical results are the consequence of structural disequilibrium caused by the reorientation of production towards export-based global value chains, which did not contribute to the development of an integrated industrial sector with forward and backward linkages between foreign and local firms. The flows of trade and investment that were stimulated by the North American Free Trade Agreement (nafta) did not promote economic growth in Mexico because of structural weaknesses that derived from an exporting sector where foreign firms limited the value-added produced by local firms, and created an inelastic supply of imported inputs. Hence, the export-led model became a development strategy that weakened the capacity for the consolidation of a strong and dynamic internal market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents an extended model that includes Thirlwall's simple rule. Growth in Mexico fell from an annual average of 6.76% in 1961-1981 to 2.95% in the 1982-2004 period. Net lows of capital, rents and transfers promote and stabilize the economy, but devaluation does not improve growth. Income growth rates and income elasticities between Mexico and the United States have become equal, which prevents convergence of per capita income. Mexico must design and implement an industrial policy if it wants to increase its rate of growth and face the fall of oil reserves and the changes in US immigration policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper has the purpose of showing that after the first years of North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) operations, Mexico's northern border states have been benefited differentially by improving their economic integration to United States and Canada, conducting to a distinct ranking of productive capabilities within this region. It is shown that after this restructuring process, winners are not necessarily those entities with prior best economic performance. Particularly, considering the employment growth Baja California, appears as the great winner and Sonora as the loser. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]