According to a 2018 Sierra Club report, Canada`s NAFTA and Paris Agreement commitments have been met. The Paris commitments were voluntary and NAFTA was mandatory.  Agriculture, in particular, has seen a boost. Canada is the largest importer of U.S. agricultural products, and Canadian agricultural trade with the United States has more than tripled since 1994, as has Canada`s overall agricultural exports to NAFTA partners. There is broad agreement among economists that NAFTA has benefited North American economies. Regional trade increased sharply in the first two decades of the treaty, from some $290 billion in 1993 to more than $1.1 trillion in 2016. Cross-border investment has also increased and U.S. direct investment (FDI) in Mexico has increased from $15 billion to more than $100 billion during this period. But experts also say it has proved difficult to highlight the direct impact of the agreement from other factors, including rapid technological change and expanded trade with countries such as China.
In the meantime, discussions continue on the impact of NAFTA on employment and wages. Some workers and industries have faced painful disruptions due to the loss of market share due to increased competition, while others have benefited from the new market opportunities that have been created. It is clear that NAFTA continues to improve political views on globalization and free trade in general. Opposition to NAFTA has intensified, making it much more politically difficult to adopt other similar free trade agreements. This became clear in the summer of 2005, when the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) stopped in Congress because of a lack of support. Two journalists, Dawn Gilbertson and Jonathan J. Higuera, who wrote in the Arizona Republic on the tenth anniversary of NAFTA, summed it up this way: “The reality of NAFTA at 10 years old is this: a story of winners and losers, divided largely by the workplace and what we do.” The same goes for the impact of NAFTA on small businesses. For some, it was an opportunity to grow and for others it was a challenge. In addition, many economists argue that recent U.S. production problems have little to do with NAFTA and say that domestic production was under pressure decades before the contract.