By Mackenzie White | Ivey Research Office | June 17, 2025
Faculty Spotlight: Dr. Nouri Najjar on Free Trade, U.S. Legislative Voting, and the Future of Environmental Policy
In today’s fast-changing world, where environmental concerns and global trade are more connected than ever, Dr. Nouri Najjar’s latest research brings some much-needed clarity to a big question: How does international trade shape decisions around environmental policy? After years of digging into this topic, Najjar has found that the answer lies at the intersection of economics, politics, and public opinion, while highlighting a topic that’s more important than ever.
His newest paper, titled “Free Trade and the Formation of Environmental Policy: Evidence from U.S. Legislative Votes,” dives deep into how trade liberalization, specifically the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), reshaped U.S. congressional voting behaviour on environmental issues. But to fully understand the significance of this work, it’s important to understand the academic path that brought him to this research as an Assistant Professor in the Business, Economics, and Public Policy, & Sustainability Area Groups.
An Evolving Research Journey
“This paper is actually an offshoot of a broader research agenda I’ve been working on for about seven or eight years now,” Najjar explains. “My core focus has been to understand how trade and globalization influence environmental quality, especially through the lens of firms and industries.”
Originally, Najjar didn’t plan to follow in his mentors’ footsteps. “As a PhD student, I actually tried to avoid the trade-and-environment field because my supervisors were already doing so much work in it,” he laughs. “But I ended up getting pulled into it anyway, [not because of them but] because the real-world connections are just impossible to ignore.”
In fact, he notes that any time economists or policymakers talk about balancing environmental goals with economic growth, trade almost inevitably enters the conversation. “Whether it’s about carbon emissions, industrial policy, or clean energy, trade is never far from the discussion,” he says.
From Theory to Policy: The Question Behind the Paper
The central question of whether increased trade liberalization influences the formation of environmental policy emerged naturally from the gaps that Najjar noticed in both the literature and public discourse.
“There’s a hypothesis that’s floated around for a while: that when trade barriers come down, governments might either weaken environmental policy to become more ‘competitive’ or strengthen it to meet global standards,” he says. “But there was surprisingly little direct evidence of how trade actually affects the policy process, particularly in terms of legislative decision-making.”
That realization launched a multi-year inquiry into the political behaviour of U.S. legislators. Najjar and his co-authors focused on a measurable, narrow slice of policymaking: how members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted on environmental bills and amendments before and after NAFTA’s implementation.
Narrowing the Scope for Clarity
One of the biggest challenges of the project was conceptual, by defining what “policy formation” means in the messy, unpredictable world of politics. “You’re trying to get into the minds of policymakers,” he says. “What motivates them? What incentives drive their decisions?”
To address this, the researchers zeroed in on congressional votes, which provided a concrete and transparent measure of policy positioning. “Voting records are public, and you can clearly interpret what it means when someone votes for or against an environmental bill,” Najjar explains.
The result was a methodologically rigorous study that examined how congressional representatives shifted their environmental voting behaviour based on how exposed their districts were to import competition following NAFTA.
A Surprising (and Partisan) Outcome
What the researchers found was both compelling and concerning. “Districts that were more exposed to competition from Mexico became less supportive of environmental protections after NAFTA,” says Najjar. “And almost all of that change was driven by Republican representatives.”
He breaks it down into two effects. First, there was a shift in the composition of Congress: voters in affected districts dismissed Democrats and elected Republicans, who generally score lower on environmental protection metrics. Second, Republican incumbents themselves became less pro-environmental in their voting behaviour.
“That second part was unexpected,” Najjar admits. “We didn’t anticipate that continuing legislators would also shift their stance so significantly. It suggests that political ideology and responsiveness to constituents' economic concerns were both playing a role.”
To better understand voter behaviour, the team examined large-scale voter surveys from the 1990s. They found that voters in high-import districts also became less environmentally focused, particularly those who identified as Republicans or Independents. “That really reinforced our interpretation that these changes were deeply tied to partisan identity and perceptions of trade’s impact,” he adds.
The Missing “Mirror Effect”
Perhaps more surprising than the partisan split was what didn’t show up in the data. “When countries liberalize trade, it’s a two-way street. Just as American firms face more competition, they also gain better access to foreign markets,” Najjar explains.
Logically, one might expect that districts benefiting from increased exports would become more supportive of environmental policy, as their economic concerns lessen. But the study found no such “mirror effect.” Instead, increased trade competition led to weaker support for environmental regulation and greater export opportunities didn’t lead to any pro-environmental shift, therefore resulting in a net negative impact overall.
Implications for Business and Policy
While the study is rooted in political economy, the insight is relevant across sectors. For businesses, understanding the broader context of regulatory shifts is critical.
“Policy and regulation are key external factors that influence business success,” Najjar points out. “For firms that are heavily regulated, especially in environmental terms, knowing how global events like trade agreements shape policy formation can be a big strategic advantage.”
Moreover, for industry associations and trade groups, the research offers foresight into how political landscapes might evolve in response to economic shocks. “If a new free trade agreement is signed, it might not just affect tariffs; it could also signal changes in environmental regulation, depending on the political response” he explains.
Broader Public Relevance
Najjar believes the research also has value for the public. “We often wonder why certain policies get proposed or passed that don’t align with our values,” he says. “This paper helps illuminate the indirect pathways through which issues like trade influence policy areas that seem unrelated on the surface, like the environment.”
He advocates for greater policy literacy among voters. “In a world flooded with conflicting information and political messaging, understanding these connections can help people make more informed choices at the ballot box,” he adds.
From Research on Paper to Real-World Impact
Although Najjar’s work typically doesn’t result in immediate business implementation, its influence is felt in policymaking circles. Years ago, he co-developed a novel idea for a carbon footprint tax to protect domestic industries while still taxing carbon emissions. This approach gained attention in Europe and even sparked interest from the Norwegian Environment Ministry.
“That’s a good example of how academic work can influence broader policy discussions, even if you can’t point to a single law that got passed,” he says. “The idea becomes part of the policymaker’s toolkit.”
Interdisciplinary Efforts for Real Change
Najjar is also involved with the Canadian Climate Policy Partnership, an interdisciplinary group of researchers and practitioners working to document and coordinate climate policies across the country. “In Canada, environmental policy is incredibly fragmented: federal, provincial, and even municipal levels all have different approaches,” he explains.
The group’s goal is to map the full landscape of climate policies, classify them by mechanism and target, and promote greater coherence and stability across jurisdictions, especially as political leadership changes.
“This type of collaboration is essential,” he says. “If we want to make meaningful progress, we need to understand the full picture, not just the federal level or the theoretical models.”
Personal Motivation and Long-Term Vision
When asked what motivates him, Najjar doesn’t point to any single person or event. Instead, his drive comes from a dual commitment to environmental protection and economic well-being.
“I care about both, and I think we need to find ways to pursue them together rather than seeing them as mutually exclusive,” he says. “When I see companies making genuine efforts to reduce their environmental impact or when I see us falling short on climate goals, those outcomes push me to keep going.”
For example, Najjar is working with Brandon Schaufele and PhD Student Adrian Guerin on another project, The Surprising Static and Dynamic Effects of Oil and Gas Flaring on Agriculture. Together, they all aim to further investigate how flaring impacts agricultural outcomes in both the short and long run. Najjar looks forward to sharing the insights from all this research with the academic community to advance understanding of environmental impacts on development.
As for legacy, Najjar is modest. “I’m still early in my career, so I’m not thinking in those terms yet,” he says with a smile. “But if I can contribute in a meaningful way to how we think about and design environmental policy, particularly in the context of a globalized economy, then I’ll consider that a success.”
Shaping Policy, Power, and the Planet: A Vision for Change
In an era where economic pressures and environmental urgency often seem to pull in opposite directions, Najjar’s research offers a bridge between the two. His work doesn’t just examine what policies exist, but also asks why they exist, how they are shaped, and who ultimately influences them.
As globalization continues to evolve and political landscapes shift, understanding these dynamics will be essential; not just for policymakers and economists, but for voters, business leaders, and anyone concerned with the health of our planet and economy. Thanks to scholars like Najjar, that understanding is a little clearer.