Harvard professors reactions yesterday to the House approval of the North American Free Trade Agreement varied from ringing endorsement to scathing disdain.

NAFTA, which will consolidate the United States, Canada and Mexico into the world's largest trading bloc, passed by a vote of 234-200.

Professors contacted last night agreed that the immediate consequences of the treaty will be minimal, and mostly symbolic, in the U.S.

"The impact is going to be very small in terms of the direct effect on jobs," said Donald R. Davis, assistant professor of economics.

Associate Professor of Government Lisa L. Martin agreed saying, "I think the treaty will not have very large economic effects in the U.S."

Professors said the imminent approval of the treaty was a giant political step forward for the U.S.

"The biggest effect is that it will improve the U.S. bargaining position in other international trade associations," Martin said. "It shows the President is able and willing to get Congress to ratify trade negotiations."

Davis said the treaty's value may be symbolic as well as economic.

"The signal it sends is that we do want to be integrated into the world economy," said Davis. "We do want an open trading system."

"This opens up the possibilities for concluding the Uruguay Round Treaty and also possibly for moving toward new trade negotiations like the Far East," he said.

The ongoing Uruguay Round of General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Treaty would lower trade barriers throughout the world, but most importantly, between the U.S. and the European Community, according to Davis. Clinton met yesterday with the leaders of 15 Asian nations to discuss possible trade agreements.

But Barker Professor of Economics Stephen Marglin said he believes the treaty will provide American investors with additional financial opportunities.

"The main purpose is to open Mexico to American investment," he said.

Marglin added that NAFTA's main effect is "to put international guarantees on American investment in Mexico, and make it more effective for our corporations to go to Mexico to set up shop."

While professors said NAFTA opened up investment opportunities and increased bargaining power, they said White House concessions to gain support in the House significantly weaken the treaty's impact.