Inquiry into the Motivation for the Creation of Free Trade Zones (MERCOSUR)

Term Paper, 2001
18 Pages

Free online reading

1 Introduction

2 Economic Integration
2.1 Definition
2.2 Phases

3 Rationales for the Creation of Free Trade Zones
3.1 International Trade Theories
3.1.1 Smith's Absolute Advantage
3.1.2 Ricardian Comparative Advantage Model
3.1.3 Heckscher-Ohlin-Model and Stolper-Samuelson Theorem
3.1.4 Krugman Model
3.2 A Change in Mind
3.3 Factors Driving Global Economic Integration
3.4 The International Scenario
3.5 Political Reasons

4.1 Nature
4.2 Institutions
4.3 Effectiveness

5 Conclusion

6 References
6.1 Books
6.2 Web Sites

1 Introduction

“Abolish tariffs and support free trade, then all our workers in every economic sector are going to be brought down to the level of slaves just like Europeans.”1 This statement was made by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War (1860-1865). It indicates that the discourse about free trade versus protectionism has already been controversial about 150 years ago. Regional grouping also existed throughout history. Already in the 16th century customs unions evolved in Europe linking nation states together. Another example is the Pan American Union that was established in 1889/90 that became the Organization of American States in 1948.2

This essay therefore inquires into the motivation for the creation of such regional groupings and the benefits of free trade. Of course there exist many aspects such as social, cultural and historical ones. But this paper concentrates on economic issues.

First of all expressions concerning free trade movements the so-called ‘economic integration’ are defined in order to give a common understanding of the usage of those terms in economics.

Secondly the essay elaborates on rationales for the creation of trade blocs. Consequently international trade theories are explained as a basis for economic integration. Unfortunately ideas can never be applied unless their time has come. Therefore it is stated why international trade theories’ time has come concerning economic philosophy and driving factors in the integration process. Furthermore the international scenario is seen as an influence to the formation of further trade blocs. Last but not least political reasons are given as well to show a spill-over effects of economic integration.

MERCOSUR is chosen as an example to show to which extent the stated rationales might have had an impact on its formation. Furthermore results have been tested against the theoretical outcomes of international trade theories.

While investigating into the subject it became clear to me that there existed as many theories as opinions on this matter. This essay therefore can only be seen as what I think might be true.

2 Economic Integration

A lot of the ongoing discussion about globalization misses to clarify basic economic vocabulary. In order to ensure a common understanding of the expression economic integration and its different levels this essay therefore commences to specify them.

2.1 Definition

Economic integration is “a state of affairs or a process that involves the combination of previously separated economies into larger arrangements“3 or “the process of gradual elimination of economic frontiers.”4 Hence it can be concluded that integration is the cooperation of nations concerning their economic activity while eliminating trade barriers.

2.2 Phases

Economic integration5 can be divided into different phases or levels which are described below.

Free Trade Zone/ Area

„Free trade area, when two or more states eliminate internal barriers to trade - such as tariffs and border restrictions - while keeping their own external tariffs against non-member states.“ Examples for free trade zones are APEC (Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation), EFTA (European Free Trade Association), LAFTA (Latin American Free Trade Association), CARICOM (Caribbean Community), NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and OAU (Organization of the African Unity).6

Costums Union

„When the member states agree to a common external tariff. The rational for the creation of a customs union is to prevent that all of the goods coming from abroad to the free trade area come through the country with the lowest tariffs.“ A current example for a costums union is UDEAO (Union Douanière des Etats de l’ Afrique de l’ Quest).7Common Market

“When the countries agree to remove the barriers to the movement of capital and labor.” At the moment a common market exists in the EU (European Union) and PTA (Preferential Trade Association).8

Economic Union

“[...] occurs when countries agree to coordinate their economic policies such as interest rates, stable exchange rates, common policies on inflation, and ultimately a single currency.”9 Political Union

“[...] occurs when countries agree to common policies in almost every sector, including foreign and defense policy.”10

3 Rationales for the Creation of Free Trade Zones

The main aim for the creation of free trade zones is the achievement of economic synergies. Therefore economic issues are emphasized on.

Firstly international trade theories are discussed. They provide the microeconomic basis for understanding the benefits of free trade between countries.

Secondly it is described why the philosophic movement of neo-liberalism is crucial to the realization of free trade.

Furthermore impacts of the environment on economic integration are observed. There exist certain factors driving the integration process. Moreover the development of the international scenario is considered.

Since all the issues mentioned above cover economic aspec ts the last paragraph explains political synergies that can be achieved as well.

3.1 International Trade Theories

Free trade is advocated throughout economic literature. Over the centuries many models evolved supporting free trade. In the following paragraph Smith`s absolute advantage model is described as the most basic theory for international trade. Ricardo evolves from this theory his comparative advantage model. As an answer to Ricardo Heckscher and Ohlin developed yet a more comprehensive theory explaining trade. This theory in turn is criticized by other economists defining further motives for trade. As an example Krugman's model is discussed in this essay.

3.1.1 Smith's Absolute Advantage

Smith states11 that trade between two countries is beneficial when one country can produce a product at lower costs than the other.

Let us assume that England and Portugal are both producing cloth and wine. In England 9 hours are needed in order to produce one unit of cloth. In Portugal 10 hours are necessary. This means that England has an absolute advantage in the production of cloth. On the other hand workers in Portugal need 8 hours for the production of one unit of wine while in England 12 hours are required. Therefore Portugal has an absolute advantage in producing wine. Hence it is beneficial for England to specialize in the production of cloth and trade it for wine. The same applies for Portugal visa versa.

It can thus be concluded that the absolute advantage is a productive advantage.

3.1.2 Ricardian Comparative Advantage Model

David Ricardo (1772-1823) inspired by Smith’s idea of the absolute advantage developed the comparative advantage model. Unlike in Smith’s model a country is better off to specialize where its opportunity cost are lowest but not absolute costs. Opportunity costs can be described as the amount of an alternative one has to give up in order to produce something else.12

In table 1 an example for this theory is given. Consider Robinson Crusoe collects 10 coconuts in an hour and catches 1 fish in the same time. His friend Friday on the other hand is able to catch 2 fish in an hour or to collect 30 coconuts. In this case Friday has an absolute advantage doing both activities. But Robinson Crusoe has a comparative advantage in catching fish. In one hour he can either obtain 10 coconuts or 1 fish. Robinson could trade 1 fish for 15 coconuts from Friday since his friends can either get 1 fish or 15 coconuts in the same time. Oppositely Friday has a comparative advantage in collecting coconuts. In the time he needs for gathering 15 coconuts he could only catch 1 fish. If he traded his 15 coconuts with Robinson Crusoe this would result in 1 ½ fish for him. In the end when both specialize in the activity they have a comparative advantage in the exchange for one fish would be between 10 and 15 coconuts in order to be beneficial for both. This allows them to consume more. Hence their welfare increases.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

The same applies to trade between nations.

To put it into a nutshell the comparative advantage is the existence of the differentiation of relative labor requirements per commodity.13

3.1.3 Heckscher-Ohlin-Model and Stolper-Samuelson Theorem

In the Heckscher-Ohlin-Model from 1919/33 trade is driven by distinctive factor endowments between countries.

The knowledge of the underlying assumptions to this model is crucial for understanding it:14 · There are two countries, two homogeneous goods, and two homogeneous factors of production with fixed initial levels. Each country has a different factor endowment

- Technology is identical in both countries, e. g. they have the same production functions or in other words the capital labor ratio is fixed.

- Production is characterized by constant returns to scale. · The two commodities have different factor intensities. · Tastes and preferences in both countries are the same. · Perfect competition exists in both countries.

- Factors are perfectly mobile within each country but not between countries. · Transportation costs do not exist.

- There are no policies restricting the movements of goods between countries or influencing market forces.

The model states that “a country will export the commodity that uses relatively intensively its relatively abundant factor of production, and it will import the good that uses relatively intensively its relatively scarce factor of production.”15

Consider two countries Australia and Japan. Australia’s abundant factor is land and Japan’s capital. Both produce wool and steel. For the production of wool the factor land is used relatively intensively, and for the production of steel more capital is needed than land. According to Heckscher and Ohlin when trading with each other Australia would specialize in the production of wool and Japan in the production of steel. In Figure 1 this correlation is shown.

Australia’s and Japan’s production possibility frontiers (PPFs) can be seen. That is “a curve that shows the different combination of two goods or services that can be produced in a full- employment and full-production economy in which the available resources and technology are constant.”16 In this case the two goods are wool and steel. The different factor endowment is indicated by the shape of the PPF curves. Furthermore each country has its own price ratio for wool and steel. Since under autarky no trade occurs a country has to consume what it produces. The consumption is pointed out by indifference curves, that is “a curve that shows the different combinations of two products that give the consumer the same utility or satisfaction”.17 When trade is introduced into this model a common price ratio for both countries the terms of trade develops. Japan and Australia trade at point T. Austalia produces at wA and sA. The difference between wT and wA is exported to Japan. On the other hand the difference between sA and sT is imported from Japan. Since the amount of wool given up in exports is relatively smaller than the amount of steel imported Australia is better off under free trade. This is also expressed by the indifference curve at point T. It has shifted to the right, that means consumption and therefore welfare has increased. The same is true for Japan. The Heckscher-Ohlin Model therefore states a win-win situation for countries committed to free trade.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

In 1941 Stolper and Samuelson investigated further into results of this model. They found that as a result of trade factor prices between countries equalize.

In our example this can be explained as follows. As already states Australia specializes in the production of wool, increasing its output of this good. Therefore the demand for the factor used relatively intensively for its production land increases. As demand increases so does the price. Hence owners of land see their incomes rise. On the other hand the demand for capital declines while the production of steel is decreasing. Therefore returns to capital fall and at the same token the income of the owners of capital.18

Since the assumptions of the Heckscher-Ohlin-model are very tight economists developed other trade theories relaxing them.

3.1.4 Krugman Model

Unlike the Heckscher-Ohlin assumptions of constant returns to scale and perfect competition the Krugman Model (1979) supposes monopolistic competition, economies of scale and labor as the only factor of production.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2 shows the Krugman model. The upward-sloping PP curve verifies that as per capita consumption increases so does the price of the good. This is so because per capita consumption is an indicator of the welfare in a country. Hence as per capita consumption increases demand becomes less elastic and the price for a good increases as well. The downward-sloping ZZ curve indicates that profits in the long run are zero. This is a result of the monopolistic competition where there exist many firms with easy entry and exit but at the same token brand loyalty through product differentiation. Therefore in the beginning firms can realize a high profit. But as new entrants compete in the same market prices are forced down and lead to zero profits. With the introduction of international trade into this model companies can exploit economies of scale due to a bigger market and therefore lower prices indicated through the shift of the ZZ curve to Z’Z’. As per capita consumption falls total consumption increases from c to c’ and real wages (the inverse of P/W) increase from p/w to p/w’. Hence consumers are better off and welfare in turn has increased.19

3.2 A Change in Mind

If 20economists already know for centuries that free trade is beneficial for a society why is it not applied fully yet?

The basis for the ongoing globalization is a change in mind of society concerning liberal ideas, the so-called neo-liberal approach. It expresses the tendency of changes from social welfare systems into market societies.

Neo-liberalism has its origins in economic liberalism which considers the role of government the nightwatchman over society. Its purpose solemnly is to provide public goods such as law, order, sound money, the regulation of markets and protection from invasion. Therefore politics are only seen as a need to develop social institutions.

Neoclassical liberal economics pursue these theories further into developing “models of how resources can be allocated and used efficiently to promote the maximization of utility of individuals.”21 Furthermore it is emphasized that only competitive markets can survive and enhance welfare by causing spill-over effects. The aim of politics should be to remove barriers to the free play of market forces.

Throughout history mankind experienced that the free play of market forces was accompanied by an unjust distribution of income causing social misery in broad parts of society. This eventually lead to the industrial revolution in 1848. Therefore trade unions and social parties developed improving the social situation. This eventually resulted in the existence of the welfare states of the West.

As already mentioned above mind sets started changing again in the 1980th and 90th leading to neo-liberalism that went back to its roots: liberal economics. Neo-liberal economists consider the financial crisis of the state a prove of inefficiency of state capitalism. Hence greater freedom of market forces and reductions in social provisions are promoted. Unlike liberal economists they regard oligopolistic companies such as institutional investors or capitalist states to be driving globalization instead of autonomous individuals. An institutionalization of this theory is the World Trade Organization which was established in 1995.

These ideas are furthermore expressed in the “neo-liberal constitutionalist principles”22 according to Gill where politics should not influence economic policy-making, secure private property rights and practice sound macroeconomic policies.

To put it into a nutshell neo-liberalism is the revival of classical liberalism. Government has to ensure the functioning of market forces by eliminating monopolistic tendencies23.

3.3 Factors Driving Global Economic Integration

Another important24 aspect of the expansion of economic integration around the world are certain factors whose development has supported this process. According to Mussa those are improvements in technology of transportation and communication, tastes of individuals and societies, and public policies.

The improvement of technology has lowered transportation costs for goods, services and factors of production. For example air cargo has become the most effective and fastest way of transporting goods internationally. Another crucial change has happened in communication through information technologies increasing speed and forcing down costs. Hence potential buyers and sellers can interact more easily on the world market. Furthermore the transfer of useful knowledge and technology has become increasingly simple. This is so important because in many cases it is not the movement of the actual goods which make trade beneficial but the concept of something. For example Marco Polo brought the idea of a noodle to Italy. It was not necessary to transport it all the way across the continent. It has also been proven that societies that cut themselves of the knowledge transfer of technological development tend to stagnate. A good example is the economic situation in Spain from 1939 till 1951 during the Franco Era. Franco ruled the country under autarky resulting in severe social problems like hunger and misery.25

Furthermore consumers around the world are undergoing a convergence of tastes and preferences. Of course this is only possible due to experience which again is based on cheaper ways of transportation and communication. Consumers enjoy the advantages of opportunities provided by declining costs due to economies of scale as already explained by the Krugman model.

Public policies in turn have also significantly influenced economic integration. Generally they can either create a slow down in international trade by imposing artificial trade barriers such as tariffs, quotas, subsidies or non-tariff barriers as licensing and standards26, or support trade by enhancing the infrastructure of a country, relaxing migration policies or requirements for imports. Mussa states that artificially imposed barriers to trade have declined by 80 to 90 percent since World War II.

3.4 The International Scenario

The formation of trade blocs is occuring worldwide. In economic terms those trade blocks are considered large countries that have the ability to establish an optimum tariff. In figures 3 and 4 the optimum tariff is shown. In figure 4 two countries’ offer curves OCI and OCII can be seen. They indicate a country’s willingness to trade for a specific value of the terms of trade (ToT) which is the price of exports divided by the price of imports. Where the offer curves of the two countries meet they trade at the given ToT at this point. Country I imports the quantity of y1 and exports x1.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Now if one country is a big country (or in our case a free trade block) it can change the price for a commodity on the world market for example by levying a tariff on the imported good Y. It therefore decreasing its willingness to trade as indicated by the shift of OCI to OCI’ the ToT shift to ToT’. The change from x1 to x2 which indicates the reduced export of good X is proportionally less than the loss of the imported good Y indicated by the distance between y1 and y2. Hence by increasing the terms of trade a country also increases its consumption and therefore welfare. For country II the contrary is true. It has to give up relatively more of its imports than it exports. Therefore this country is worse off - and that is why the optimum tariff argument is also called “beggar-my-neighbor-policy.”

But again this theory underlies crucial assumptions which are that the country imposing the tariff has to be large, the other country has to remain passive and offer curves have to be known.27

Borchert states another rationale for the evolvement of trading blocs. Generally he agrees that free trade between countries maximizes welfare. But a liberalization of trade on a

worldwide basis is politically not possible. It is therefore suggested to build trading blocks on a geographical or cultural basis instead due to reasons of simplicity. Otherwise a union or agreement could only be reached on the smallest instance and not result in benefits.28

3.5 Political Reasons

Even though economic reasons are the driving force for integration political ideas can be applied as well. International cooperation is needed in matter of drugs, terrorism, ethnic conflicts, refugees, environmental protection and collective safety.29

Furthermore members of trading blocs often prioritize national security concerns which in turn leads to further liberalization of their markets.30


4.1 Nature

The basis31 for MERCOSUR is the Treaty of Asunción which was signed by the Presidents of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay in March 1991. The protocol of Ouro Preto signed in December 1994 approved the intentions of the member countries. It furthermore implied that by the 31th of December in 1994 the “Mercado Comun del Sur” (Common Market of the South) was to be established. MERCOSUR originally was a free trade area among its member countries. Since 1st January 1995 it evolved into a costums union which will be in full effect apart from 1st January 2006.32

MERCOSUR pursues the following aims. The free movements of good, services and factors of production such as capital and labor has to be established. Furthermore it implies common macroeconomic and sectorial policies of the member states including the verification of a Common External Tariff (CET) towards third parties. Another crucial aspect to MERCOSUR is the need for legislative support in order to nourish economic integration.

4.2 Institutions

the following political bodies were set up covering presidential, ministerial and technical levels in order to succeed in establishing MERCOSUR.

While the Council of the Common Market (CMC) is the political body of the organization executive tasks are fulfilled by the Common Market Group (GMC). The applications of the instruments of the common commercial policies are controled by the Trade Commission of MERCOSUR (CCM). The Joint Parliamentary Commission (CPC) is responsible for the

representation of the Parliaments of MERCOSUR’s members and the Social and Economic Advisory Forum (FCES) for its economic and social sectors. All those organizations are operationally supported by the Administrative Secretariat of MERCOSUR (SAM).

4.3 Effectiveness

In comparison to the EU with a market of 37433 million inhabitants MERCOSUR belongs to the big trade blocs with 200 million people. It furthermore has evolved into the most important regional organization in Southern America. The Gross National Product of 715 billion US dollars makes up 54 per cent of the entire continent.34 In this sense MERCOSUR is a “big country” on the world market concerning the optimum tariff argument.

The presidents of the member countries of MERCOSUR launched a trade liberalization program which has been realized continuously. All tariffs between the member countries had to be abolished. Its effectiveness can be seen in the following chart. Intra-regional trade has increased by 334 per cent from 1991 to 1996.35

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

If this increase in trade has resulted in an increase in welfare as indicated in all international theories becomes clear by observing the Gross Domestic Product per Capita. In figure 6 it can be seen that GDP per capita increased by 18 per cent from 1991 to 2000 in all MERCOSUR member countries.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

MERCOSUR is also accepted by third parties. Chile is an associated member since October 1996 and Bolivia since May 1997. Cuba intents to establish a treaty about easing tariffs. Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, Venezuela and Mexico are interested in becoming members of MERCOSUR. Moreover since May 1992 an agreement on political, economic and cultural cooperation with the EU exists.36 Furthermore MERCOSUR engages in a very ambitious undertaking: in the creation of the Free Trade Area for the Americas (FTAA). Its purpose is to form a free trade zone between NAFTA and MERCOSUR.37

The main problem is the different level of development among the member countries as indicated in table 2 by GDP per Capita. Even though Brazil is perceived the beneficiary of the trade bloc38 the data shows that Argentina’s and Uruguay’s improvements in their standard of living is the double of Brazil’s increase. On the other hand Paraguay has not benefited at all from the integration process.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

To sum it up: generally the integration process has been effective but the benefits are not shared by all member countries.

5 Conclusion

Already in 1936 Maynard Keynes stated that “the ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical man, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually slaves of some defunct economist.”39

To me it became clear that mainly economic reasons are driving the development of the formation of trade blocs worldwide. It is argued that free trade is beneficial, hence the welfare of countries increases. A crucial influence to the realization of free trade is neo-liberalism that supports the trust in the free play of market forces. As a result public policies have changed establishing the legislative framework that enables countries to fully exploit the advantages of free trade. Furthermore technology and e-business are easing and accelerating the pace of economic integration by cutting transportation and transaction costs.

MERCOSUR was established relatively late with its foundation in 1991 and can rather be understood as a reaction to the development in the international scenario than an idea of its own. Political achievements seem to be merely a spill-over effect and not an intentional aim. The current economic development in South America looks promising when looking at indicators like GDP per capita. But weather this increase in welfare is used to enhance human development as well as economic progress is questionable. In my opinion an increase in welfare can only be called so when a just income distribution is achieved.

Further more it can be questioned weather trade blocs are that beneficial after all. By excluding third parties synergies can not be realized by trading with those ones. It can also be argued that countries in trading blocs have always exchanged goods and services due to their geographic location.

In the end what the reader of this essay believes depends on his or her view of the world: weather he or she trusts in the free play of market forces or the necessity of the interference of the state. This in turn is influenced by the current economic opinion. Neo-liberalism therefore in my opinion is a mere fashion. Just like protectionism was when Abraham Lincoln ruled the United States of America.

To put it into a nutshell to me the development of economic integration is an outcome of the faith in international trade theories supported by neo-liberalism.

6 References

6.1 Books

- Swann, D (1996) Europeon Economic Integration: The Common Market, European Union and beyond. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar

- Borchert, Manfred (1997) Außenwirtschaftslehre: Theorie und Politik. 5th edition. Gabler

- Prior, Heather (2000) Script for Australian Economics (at the University of Canberra, Australia)

- Appleyard, Dennis R. and Field Alfred J. Jr. (1998) International Economics. 3rd edition. The McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.

- Applegate, Craig (2000) Unit Outline for International Economics (at the University of Canberra, Australia)

- Jackson, John; McIver, Ron; McConnel, Campbell and Brue, Stanley (1998)

Marcoeconomics. 5th edition. The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

- Maenning, Wolfgang and Wilfing, Bernd (1998) Außenwirtschaft: Theorie und Politik. Verlag Franz Vahlen GmbH

- Mankiw, Nicholas Gregory (1999) Grundzüge der Volkrswirtschaftslehre. Schäffer- Poeschel Verlag Stuttgart

- Gabler Wirtschaftslexikon (1997). 14th edition. Gabler

- Martin, Hans-Peter und Schumann, Harald (keine Angabe) Die Globalisierungsfalle - Der

Angriff auf Demokratie und Wohlstand. Rowohlt Verlag GmbH

- Nohlen, Dieter und Hildenbrand, Andreas (1992) Spanien - Wirtschaft, Gesellschaft,

Politik. Leske + Budrich Obladen

- Molle, W. (1991) The Economics of European Integration. Aldershot

- Stubbs, Richard and Underhill, Geoffrey R. D. (2000) Political Economy and the Changing Global Order. 2nd edition. Oxford University Press

6.2 Web Sites

- The Concept (October 2000)

- What is Mercosur (October 2000)

- What we want to know, need to ask and should learn about Merocsur (October 2000)

- Erdkunde Online, Internationale Organisationen - Mercosur (November 2000) erdkunde-

- Mussa, Michael (August 25, 2000) Factors Driving Global Economic Integration

- World Trends, Dangers & Policy Issues (October 2000)

- Uni Münster (November 2000) www.uni-

- Recent Economic Trends, Economic Policies and Outlook for Region 1 Countries (November 2000)

- Seade, Jesus (November 2000) The Relationship between Regional Economic Blocs and the World Trade Organization


1 Martin/ Schumann p. 137

2 Seade (2000) p.2

3 Swann (1996) p. 3

4 Molle (1991) p. 5

5 p. 2/3

6 Borchert (1997) p. 519-23

7 ebit

8 ebit

9 Borchert (1997) p. 519-23

10 ebit

11 Mankiw (1999) p. 58

12 Prior (2000) “The Case for Free Trade”

13 Appleyard, Field (1998) p. 33-4

14 Appleyard, Field (1998) p. 128

15 ebit p. 134

16 Jackson, McIver, McConnel, Brue (1998) p. GL:22

17 Jackson, McIver, McConnel, Brue (1998) p. GL:12

18 ebit p. 134-9

19 Appleyard/ Field (1998) p. 187-91

20 Stubbs/ Richard (2000) p. 48 - 59

21 ebit p. 50

22 ebit p. 56

23 Galer (1997) p.2444

24 Michael Mussa (2000)

25 Nohlen/ Hildenbrand (1992) p. 26

26 Jackson/ McIver/McConnell/Brue (1998) p. 35:1-4

27 Appleyard/Field (1998) p. 302-5

28 Borchert (1997) p. 514

29 p. 6

30 p. 1







37 Appleyard/ Field (1998) p. 374


39 Jackson/ McIver/ McConnel/ Brue (1998) p. 1:3

18 of 18 pages


Inquiry into the Motivation for the Creation of Free Trade Zones (MERCOSUR)
University of Applied Sciences Hof
Catalog Number
File size
515 KB
Inquiry, Motivation, Creation, Free, Trade, Zones
Quote paper
Susanne Schneider (Author), 2001, Inquiry into the Motivation for the Creation of Free Trade Zones (MERCOSUR), Munich, GRIN Verlag,


  • No comments yet.
Read the ebook
Title: Inquiry into the Motivation for the Creation of Free Trade Zones (MERCOSUR)

Upload papers

Your term paper / thesis:

- Publication as eBook and book
- High royalties for the sales
- Completely free - with ISBN
- It only takes five minutes
- Every paper finds readers

Publish now - it's free