Intra‑regional Food Trade in West Africa

1. Unseen markets: A data analysis of intra-regional food trade in West Africa

Abstract

Intra-regional food trade in West Africa has long been underestimated, and limited efforts have been made to accurately assess its size and composition. This has led to misconceptions, and the trade has often been perceived as small exchanges of low value products. Evidence shows, however, that intra-regional trade is substantial in both transaction sizes and total volume. It is expected to expand as urbanisation and population growth drive demand for regionally produced foods.

Compiling data on both recorded and unrecorded trade suggests that its true scale is at least six times higher than official figures, at a value of approximately USD 10 billion annually. Nigeria dominates this trade, with key products including live animals, cereals and processed foods. Notably, unrecorded trade tends to involve staples and items of high nutritional and economic value, like legumes and live animals, which are underrepresented in formal statistics.

Although it is often assumed that the intra-regional food trade is low, one-third of the region’s food exports (excluding cocoa and cashew) are traded in West Africa, and this share rises to almost 60% if estimates of total unrecorded trade flows are included. For six countries in the region, West Africa is the primary export partner, and major food items, like live animals or cassava, are almost exclusively traded in the region. The regional food trade network is dense and spans long distances, with most countries maintaining a wide array of trading partners across the region. Regional giants like Senegal, Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire conduct nearly half of their trade with non-bordering partners.

Missed opportunities: How data gaps and misperceptions skew understanding of West Africa’s food trade

Intra-regional food trade: What does not get counted, does not count

Few economic indicators have faced as long-standing and overwhelming a consensus of gross underestimation as intra-regional trade in Africa. For over three decades, extensive literature has documented the pervasive underreporting of intra-regional trade in official statistics across Africa (Barad, 1990[1]; Bensassi, Jarreau and Mitaritonna, 2018[2]; Odjo, Traoré and Zaki, 2023[3]; Gaarder, Luke and Sommer, 2021[4]).

As early as the 1990s, Foroutan and Pritchett (1993[5]) noted that “the quantity of African UIT [Unrecorded Intra-Africa Trade] is at least equal to, and in certain cases much greater than, the levels of intra-African trade officially recorded by African States.” This finding was echoed decades later by Bouët, Pace and Glauber  (2018[6]) who stated that, in Africa, “the value of informal trade may meet or even exceed the value of formal trade” and by Bouët, Odjo and Zaki (2020[7]) who emphasised that “although many studies aimed at assessing the magnitude of ICBT in Africa are partial (…) they all suggest the importance of unrecorded trade and the figures are large in all surveys.” Despite these longstanding insights, there has been little concerted effort to improve the measurement and analysis of regional trade in Africa, particularly within key regional blocs and for sectors as critical as food.1 Official statistics continue to paint an incomplete picture, which results in skewed evaluations of intra-regional trade flows and their social and economic implications.

This report estimates that actual intra-regional food trade in West Africa could be six times higher than what is captured by current statistics. The findings reveal a dynamic, integrated food market, spanning vast distances and encompassing a wide range of products, several of high economic and nutritional value. Yet, this dynamism and the overall economic significance of intra-regional food trade are often overlooked by policy makers.

The lack of reliable data presents significant policy challenges. Understanding the true scale, composition and implications of intra-regional trade is crucial for effective economic planning. Governments and regional bodies must move beyond narrow approaches focused solely on formalising or suppressing unrecorded trade. Instead, they should seek to incorporate the economic reality of this trade into their policy frameworks, to better support the region’s development objectives.

Misconceptions and biases surrounding unrecorded intra-regional food trade in West Africa

The report provides a clearer picture of the actual food trade flows in the region, both recorded and unrecorded. Unrecorded food trade refers to transactions that are not captured by official statistics: while it often aligns with what is typically referred to as informal trade, it can also involve registered companies trading outside the statistical radar. This approach allows to better appraise the scale and composition of food trade, rather than focusing on questions of legality or informality.

Misconceptions abound on unrecorded food trade in the region, its nature, scale, and importance. These negative views significantly bias the understanding of the sector’s value, resulting in national and regional policies that overlook its vital role in food and nutrition security, and regional agricultural development. This report helps to dispel common myths surrounding unrecorded intra-regional food trade.

Myth 1. Unrecorded regional food trade is conducted only by informal traders evading taxes

The landscape of unrecorded regional food trade is more nuanced than it is often presented. To begin with, informal traders—that is, unregistered business owners—are not the only actors engaging in unrecorded intra-regional food trade. Formal businesses engage in it too, for various reasons, including but not limited to tax evasion.2

First, they are seeking to reduce transaction costs. Both formal and informal traders may “follow the path of least resistance” (UNECA, 2021[8]) and opt for unrecorded trade routes to avoid the significant time and financial costs associated with formal trade3, which often surpass those of informal trade, and may exceed the value of the product being traded (Knaepen and van Seters, 2018[9]). The informal trade process can, paradoxically, prove more consistent and offer more reliable income (UNECA, 2021[8]). Second, traders, especially women, may avoid formal border posts due to safety concerns, including the risk of harassment, extortion and sexual aggression by border officials (Bouët, Odjo and Zaki, 2020[7]). For instance, more than a quarter of cross-border food traders in a recent study on the Cotonou-Niamey corridor reported having witnessed verbal or physical harassment in the last six months, and close to a quarter had been subjected to sexual harassment (World Bank Group, 2020[10]). Third, trading communities with historical kinship span national borders – for example Hausa trading networks in Nigeria, Niger and Benin – growing or purchasing food on one side and transporting it across borders for storage, processing or sale. State borders can be perceived as illegitimate by these transnational communities, leading them to trade outside formal routes. This is especially the case where state presence is weak along vast and porous borders, and where states’ ability to tax and record the flows is limited. In these areas, unrecorded food trade can be the natural state (Bouët, Odjo and Zaki, 2020[7]; Karkare, 2021[11]).

Moreover, unrecorded trade does not always occur through informal border crossings. It can also happen at official border posts. Border officials may have little motivation to record food flows, especially because ECOWAS agricultural goods transactions are not subject to import duties under the ECOWAS Trade Liberalisation Scheme (Gaarder, Luke and Sommer, 2021[4]). They may also deliberately refrain from recording smaller-scale food flows to facilitate the faster movement of taxable goods. Informal arrangements for not recording trade may also serve other objectives, such as intelligence gathering (Karkare, 2021[11])

Myth 2. Unrecorded regional food trade is insignificant

An important misperception characterises unrecorded food trade as small-scale in value, volume and distance (Benjamin, Golub and Mbaye, 2015[12]; UNECA, 2021[8]; World Bank Group, 2020[10]).The evidence available strongly contradicts this view. The total value of unrecorded food trade in the region exceeds recorded volumes by several orders of magnitude. For instance, country surveys show that it is nine times higher in Benin and six times higher in Nigeria. At the regional level, unrecorded food trade is estimated to be four times higher, on average, than recorded trade, meaning that total trade is six times higher than reported in official statistics. It accounts for approximately USD 10 billion annually, equivalent to the value of rice, wheat and palm oil imported from outside the region and 6 times superior to the total amount of food and agriculture aid to the 15 countries in the region.4

Meanwhile, large transactions account for nearly 90% of the total unrecorded food trade volume. Data from ECO-ICBT shows that 78% of intra-regional food trade volume involves 10- to 22-wheel trucks, carrying an average of 35 tonnes, while an additional 9% of transactions use 6- to 8-wheel trucks (17 tonnes). Tricycles, pick-up trucks and other means of transport most often associated with unrecorded food trade only account for 14% of the total transactions. While large transactions can be composed of small-scale trading – small traders pooling volume to aggregate and hire trucks (UNECA, 2021[8]), the data underscores the substantial volume and size of transactions involved in intra-regional food trade.

In addition, unrecorded intra-regional food trade cannot be equated with “border trade”, whereby traders ferry low volumes back and forth across two neighbouring countries to arbitrage prices (Torres and van Seters, 2016[13]). While the literature suggests this form of trade is significant in the region, the study finds that West African countries have food trade relations with a median of 12 partner countries out of a possible 14. Major regional food exporters, like Senegal, Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire, trade respectively 58%, 48% and 39% of their exports total with non-bordering countries, highlighting the importance of long-distance unrecorded food trade in the region.

Myth 3. Unrecorded regional food trade is “survivalist”

Contrary to this perception, the evidence available shows unrecorded intra-regional food trade as a dynamic sector, answering to market signals and consumer demand. It demonstrates market responsiveness, as traders operate across borders and corridors thousands of kilometres long – Dakar-Bamako (1 360 km); Abidjan-Lagos (1 000 km); Niamey-Lome (1 000 km)—to leverage market opportunities presented by growing urban consumption centres.

This trade also involves a wide variety of food products. The study demonstrates that over a hundred different food products can cross a single regional border unrecorded every week. It is also dominated by items with high nutritional and economic value, such as live animals and fish, refuting the assumption that it consists in cheap, subsistence transactions.

By responding to market signals, intra-regional food trade thus plays a crucial role in regional economic integration, with implications in terms of economies of scale, reduced costs, increased market size and price stabilisation.

West Africa’s transforming food systems are catalysing intra-regional food trade

The importance of intra-regional food trade is also set to grow significantly, boosted by ongoing transformations in West Africa’s food systems. Central to this shift is rapid population growth, urbanisation and income growth (Hollinger and Staatz, 2015[14]). Since 1990, the region’s total population has doubled, from 197 million to 395 million in 2020. Urbanisation is accelerating at an even faster rate. The urban population has grown almost fourfold over the same period, from 54 million to 200 million. By 2050, projections indicate that 436 million West Africans will live in cities (OECD/SWAC, 2024[15]).

This demographic shift is altering food systems. Urbanisation is driving a transition from subsistence farming to market-based food sourcing (Hollinger and Staatz, 2015[14]). Currently, over two-thirds of food consumed in West Africa is purchased, with urban areas relying on markets for 90% of their food supply, and rural areas exceeding 50% (Thériault et al., 2024[16]). Intra-regional trade is critical in linking this growing concentration in food production and consumption.

The demand for diverse, high-value foods is also growing, driven by the rising purchasing power and the changing preferences of a growing urban middle class. Unrecorded trade plays a vital role in meeting this demand, often providing a higher share of nutrient-rich foods than recorded trade. For instance, 75% of calories in unrecorded trade come from fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds, cereals and animal proteins, against only 42% for recorded trade.

However, much of these ongoing regional trade dynamics go unreported in national and regional statistics and unaddressed in policy discussions. This significant blind spot undermines effective food and nutrition security, trade and economic development policy making, as well as regional integration efforts. Moreover, the lack of data and evidence on the reality of intra-regional food trade impedes efforts to monitor progress towards targets like the Kampala Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Plan Declaration, which aims to triple intra-African food trade by 2035. Given the advancement of the African Continental Free Trade Area, the importance of high-quality statistics and analytics on intra-regional food trade will also become an increasingly pressing issue in West Africa.

Compiling a comprehensive database on intra-regional food trade in West Africa

Presenting the building blocks of the database

To produce a more complete depiction of intra-regional food trade in West Africa, the study compiled a unified dataset integrating all data available on West Africa’s recorded and unrecorded food trade.5 The recorded food trade data is sourced from the Base pour l’Analyse du Commerce International (BACI) dataset, produced by the Centre d’Etudes Prospectives et d’Informations Internationales (CEPII), and derived from the United Nations Comtrade database (CEPII, 2024[17]). The Comtrade database compiles official trade statistics reported by United Nations member states. However, as Comtrade preserves the original national submissions without modification, discrepancies sometimes arise between the reported export and import figures among trade partners. The BACI dataset applies a mirror flow methodology to address these divergences and reconcile the figures. The BACI dataset covers all West African countries and includes all food products as reported by national statistics (via Comtrade). While BACI serves as a proxy for recorded trade data in this report, it often presents higher estimates than official statistics, due to its methodology of correcting for undervaluation and missing values. BACI’s values were estimated to be on average 40% higher than Comtrade data for ECOWAS intra-regional trade (Bouët et al., 2021[18]). As such, our use of BACI as a proxy for recorded trade serves as a preliminary step in mitigating biases inherent in national statistics.

For unrecorded food trade data, this study relies on two primary sources. The first is data collected through the ECO-ICBT initiative, led by CILSS (CILSS, 2024[19]). This initiative is the only region-wide effort to document unrecorded food trade in West Africa, collecting data from traders at key food loading and unloading hubs on trade volume and value, origin, destination and mode of transportation. It covers all countries in the ECOWAS, except Cabo Verde, and also includes Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger. For this study, the ECO-ICBT data underwent a thorough cleaning and validation process (Annex 1.B).

Additionally, four detailed country-level datasets on unrecorded regional trade, based on surveys conducted by national statistical institutions in Benin (2019, 2022) (INSTAD, 2022[20]) (INSTAD, 2024[21]), Niger (2022) (INS, 2022[22]), Togo (2019) (INSEED, 2019[23]) and the Central Bank of Nigeria (2014) (Central Bank of Nigeria, 2016[24]), have been included. These datasets were also cleaned and processed for use in this analysis (Annex 1.B).

The BACI, ECO-ICBT and country-level survey data were harmonised into a comprehensive dataset on intra-regional food trade, allowing for comparisons at aggregate, country and Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (HS) 4 product level, albeit with acknowledged limitations (Annex 1.B).

Data limitations and implications for estimates on intra-regional food trade

The temporal, country and territorial coverage is partial

While the datasets used to build this study’s unique database significantly improve understanding of intra-regional food trade, they remain partial in terms of temporal, country, territorial and product coverage.

At the temporal and country level, the BACI and ECO-ICBT datasets cover all the years between 2014 and 2022 and all West African countries, except Cabo Verde for the latter dataset. However, the country surveys are only available for four countries (Benin, Niger, Nigeria, Togo) and one year for each country (Nigeria 2014; Togo 2019; Niger 2022), except Benin (2019, 2022). This means there are only 5 out of 126 country-year observations in our combined dataset that incorporate country survey data on unrecorded food trade. This has significant implications: the Benin, Nigeria and Togo country surveys report intra-regional food trade values 3.3 times higher for these countries, on average, than the combined ECO-ICBT and BACI data6 — and 4.6 times higher than official statistics only (Figure 1.1). This suggests that important underestimations of intra-regional food trade remain in the study’s database.

Figure 1.1. Recorded and unrecorded food trade in Nigeria (2014), Benin (2019, 2022) and Togo (2019)

Note: The ratio of country survey to combined ECO-ICBT/BACI data is 7.5:1 for Benin, 2:1 for Nigeria and 0.5:1 for Togo. Source: Authors’ calculations.

At the territorial level, the ECO-ICBT data and, to a lesser extent country surveys, do not cover unrecorded food trade flows exhaustively. The ECO-ICBT data collection method involves administering questionnaires to traders at 115 loading and unloading points in regional markets, primarily concentrated around the Sahelian countries and Ghana and Benin (Bouët et al., 2021[18]) (Map 1.1). However, a quick comparison shows a very uneven distribution of collection points in terms of border length and market size coverage (proxied by population size) (Figure 1.2).7 Additionally, operational constraints such as limited coverage hours (e.g. no night-time operations) and challenges in interviewing all traders at a given site affect the possibility of capturing transactions comprehensively.

Map 1.1. ECO-ICBT data collection points

Note: The figure was created based on the ECO-ICBT information provided by the West African Association for CrossBorder Trade, in Agro-forestry-pastoral and Fisheries Products (WACTAF) and CILSS.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Figure 1.2. Kilometres of West African border per ECO-ICBT data collection point, collection points per country and population per collection point

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Country surveys also have limitations in territorial coverage. While the Nigeria country survey reports figures for food trade that are close to five times higher than official records, it only captures flows observed at 16 border posts. These posts aimed to cover unrecorded trade for 2 500 kilometres of Nigeria’s borders with neighbouring West African countries, namely Benin and Niger. In contrast, the Benin survey draws from 201 posts and the Togo survey from 75 posts. This results in a ratio of approximately 156 km of border per data collection point for Nigeria, compared to 22 km for Togo and 10 km for Benin. This difference, of 15:1 between Benin and Nigeria, highlights the potential magnitude of underreported intra-regional food trade in Nigeria—and the broader region, given Nigeria’s significant role in the regional food trade economy. For instance, if it is conservatively assumed that the data collected by the Central Bank of Nigeria for unrecorded food trade missed half of the actual flows—a plausible scenario given the border coverage rate mentioned above—this would imply that an additional USD 1.7 billion annually is still unaccounted for in the study’s estimates of intra-regional food trade.

The product coverage is partial

An important constraint of the ECO-ICBT data on unrecorded trade is its limited product coverage. ECO-ICBT only collects data on staple, raw products and does not capture trade in processed foods, such as flavour cubes or pastries, nor does it cover the traditional “export crops” like coffee or cocoa. This is an important limitation, since despite common assumptions (Torres and van Seters, 2016[13]), unrecorded food trade in West Africa includes significant volumes of processed food and non-staples. In Nigeria and Benin, country surveys show that beverages, processed foods, oils, fats, sugar and export crops account for approximately 50% (Benin) and 15% (Nigeria) of intra-regional food imports’ value and 20% of exports’ value.

Even within staple food products, ECO-ICBT covers fewer products overall than BACI and country surveys. Overall, ECO-ICBT monitors 4 times fewer food products traded in the region than available in BACI at the HS4 level. In contrast, the Benin and Nigeria country surveys do not have a restricted methodological food product scope, but still record fewer products than the BACI data. They captured, respectively, 69 and 98 HS4 food products, whereas BACI documented 120 and 133 HS4 products for the same countries and time period (Figure 1.3).

Figure 1.3. HS4 food product coverage count, by source and food group for Benin (left) and Nigeria (right)

Note: The data corresponds to the years for which survey data is available, 2019 and 2022 for Benin, and 2014 for Nigeria.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Delving deeper: Reviewing the literature on intra-regional food trade estimates

To provide a measure of the remaining gaps and underestimations in the study’s dataset, the literature was reviewed to identify other point estimates of intra-regional food trade (Annex 1.C). These additional data points indicate that significant underestimations remain in the data. For instance, in Sierra Leone, a 2010 World Food Programme field survey on cross-border trade in palm oil estimated the palm oil trade alone to be 477 times higher than the BACI and ECO-ICBT data for all products (Table 1.1).

 

Table 1.1Ratio of intra-regional food trade quantities as reported in the literature to intra-regional food trade quantities from available data

	2008	2010	2011	2012	2013	2015	2017
Benin					150%
Burkina Faso	1 752%	7%	13%	16%	30%
Côte d'Ivoire				2%	3%
Ghana					0%
Guinea		1%		2%		964%	2%
Liberia		8 014%					3%
Mali	114%	0%		10%	54%
Niger	8 783%	16%	17%	19%	84%	661%
Nigeria					3%
Sierra Leone		47 780%					211%
Togo					1%
Total	98%	7%	4%	2%	11%	47%	3%

Note: Additional details can be found in Annex 1.C.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

A data analysis of the live bovine animal trade, the foremost intra-regional food export, provides more insight into the intra-regional food trade that is not captured in existing regional datasets. The combined BACI and ECO-ICBT data shows annual live bovine exports from Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, respectively, at USD 133 million, USD 110 million and USD 34 million annually between 2014 and 2022. For Mali and Niger, this is around double the value in recorded statistics alone (USD 62 million and USD 17 million respectively), and for Burkina Faso, 66 times the recorded value (USD 2 million). Yet even this remains an underestimate: based on data on herd size, offtake/culling rates, domestic consumption and average price, actual export figures of the three countries are more likely in total to be around USD 1 050 million annually than the USD 277 million reported in the study’s database.8

Revaluing intra-regional food trade in West Africa

Intra-regional food trade is six times higher than reported in official statistics

Providing a better estimate of intra-regional food trade

Based on the compiled data on recorded and unrecorded regional trade flows, food trade among the 15 West African countries is measured at USD 2.5 billion annually, rising to USD 3 billion for the years for which more detailed country survey data is available.

However, as presented above, intra-regional trade measured through the dataset remains significantly undercounted. The magnitude of intra-regional food trade is estimated to be closer to USD 10 billion per year, six times higher than officially reported (Figure 1.4).

Figure 1.4. Intra‑regional food trade in West Africa, 2014‑22

Note: Exports are used as a proxy for intra-regional food trade, given that all intra-regional exports and imports balance out as two sides of the same trade. Country survey data is only available for three countries: Nigeria, Benin and Togo, with only Nigeria and Benin reporting significant values.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

To come up with this estimate, the study relied on Nigeria, Benin and Togo country surveys on unrecorded regional food trade, which provide the best estimates available in the region. The ratios between country surveys and the combined BACI plus ECO-ICBT measurement of intra-regional food trade stand at 0.5:1 for Togo, 2:1 for Nigeria and 7.5:1 for Benin. The average between these three ratios, 3.3, is applied to the combined recorded and ECO-ICBT data available for the other 12 countries in the region, providing a rough proxy for the unrecorded trade that was missed by the combined ECO-ICBT and BACI trade data.

Unrecorded intra-regional food trade: Measuring the hidden part of the iceberg

This approach is broken down by examining country level data. Unrecorded food trade—the invisible part of the “intra-regional food trade iceberg”—is 5 to 7 times larger than reported in official statistics in reference countries with the most detailed data coverage, namely Benin (2019, 2022) and Nigeria (2014). The absence of detailed country surveys in the remaining 13 countries results in much smaller ratios for these economies and biases the regional average downward.9 This bias is apparent when looking at individual countries’ “food trade iceberg”, the ratios of the value of unrecorded and recorded trade over total trade (Figure 1.5). Given the available evidence on the pervasiveness of unrecorded food trade in the region, it should be expected that the proportion of unrecorded trade be similar, for every country, to Nigeria’s and Benin’s. This is not the case. For example, Côte d’Ivoire (15%) and Senegal (7%) have unrecorded food trade shares significantly below the regional average (32%) and unrecorded trade values of just USD 126 million and USD 44 million annually, while much smaller economies like Benin and Togo, with agricultural Gross Domestic Products (GDP) 2.6 times lower on average, report annual unrecorded trade of USD 710 million and USD 107 million, respectively.

Figure 1.5. Intra-regional and country-level food trade icebergs: Recorded trade (orange) and unrecorded trade (grey), 2014-22 average

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Remapping intra-regional food trade patterns in West Africa

Revisiting trading partners: Nigeria leads intra-regional food trade

One of the most striking shortcomings of official trade statistics is their failure to reflect Nigeria’s significance in the region’s food trade dynamics. According to recorded data, Nigeria, which accounts for 63% of ECOWAS GDP and more than half its inhabitants (EBID, 2023[25]) ranks as only the eighth regional food importer and the sixth exporter. This comes across as a major inaccuracy, given the influence of a country’s population and economic size of its share of international trade (Chaney, 2018[26]; Villoria, 2008[27]).

Nigeria is the largest food market for regional trade, and by a considerable margin10, when data on both recorded and unrecorded trade is considered. Nigeria’s average annual intra-regional imports—USD 1 350 million per year—account for nearly two-thirds of the import value of the 14 other West African countries—USD 2 171 million per year (Figure 1.6). The value of even minor Nigerian intra-regional food imports is worth significantly more than in the rest of West Africa. For instance, based on the—underestimated—data available, Nigeria imported USD 3.6 million in bananas from West Africa in 2014. This made bananas Nigeria’s 30th regional food import, yet it was equivalent to 10% of Guinea-Bissau’s and half of Liberia’s total regional food exports for that year. Nigeria is also the main food exporter in West Africa, accounting for 34% of total export volume, followed by Côte d’Ivoire 24% and Benin 24%.11

Figure 1.6. Intra-regional food imports (left) and exports (right) by country, 2014-22 average

Note: The data labels correspond to the share of the total value for regional imports (left) and regional exports (right).

Source: Authors’ calculations.

More than half of Nigeria’s regional food imports are animal proteins (live bovines, live goats). Cereals and legumes, nuts and seeds account for an additional 20% of the total (

Figure 1.7).12 This large import market relies on a remarkably narrow supplier network in West Africa. Niger (56%), Burkina Faso (18%) and Mali (8%) collectively supply 82% of Nigeria’s total West African food imports. Live animal imports from Niger alone constitute over a quarter of Nigeria’s total food imports from the region. Conversely, Nigeria’s exports are heavily concentrated on cereal trade with Niger, accounting for 43% of its total regional food exports.

Figure 1.7. Nigeria intra-regional food imports (left) and exports (right), by partner and food groups, 2014

Note: Based on the 2014 country survey data. The data labels correspond to the share of total value (in percent).

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Revisiting traded products: Live animals, cereals, processed foods, and palm oil dominate

Intra-regional food trade revolves around four main food groups: animal proteins, cereal products, beverages and processed foods and oils, fats, sugar (Figure 1.8). Maize accounts for roughly one-third of the cereal products traded in the region, and palm oil represents three-quarters of the oils, fats and sugar exchanged (Figure 1.9).

Figure 1.8. Intra-regional food trade by product group, 2014-22 average

Note: Exports used as a proxy for intra-regional trade. The data labels correspond to the share of total value.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Figure 1.9. Intra-regional food trade, key products traded for the four main food groups, 2014-22 average

Note: Exports used as a proxy for intra-regional trade. The data labels correspond to the share of total value.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Animal proteins represent the major share of intra-regional food trade, of 30% at USD 714 million annually. This trade is dominated by flows of live bovines, sheep and goats, reflecting the well-documented pattern of trade from the Sahelian to the coastal countries and to Nigeria (Figure 1.10) (Valerio, 2020[28]). However, it also includes fish—mostly frozen, from Senegal, Guinea-Bissau or Liberia to Côte d’Ivoire13—as well as smoked, from coastal countries, including Senegal but also Sierra Leone and Ghana, principally to Burkina Faso and Togo (Ayilu and Nyiawung, 2022[29])

Figure 1.10. Trading flows for live bovine animals, exports (left) and imports (right)

Note: Based on trade flows for 2014 and 2019 to reflect Nigeria and Benin case study data. Flow size is proportional to trade value. Colour corresponds to export destination (export graphs) or import origin (import graphs).

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Oils, fats and sugars come third in overall intra-regional food trade importance, accounting for 19% of total trade (USD 462 million annually). Cooking oils are central to West African consumption patterns and are used as one of the primary sources of fat in the region. Palm oil, in particular, is ubiquitous in sauces that form the basis of several dishes across West Africa (Bricas, Tchamda and Mouton, 2016[30]). Palm oil, together with live bovine animals, is the first intra-regional food export product in value, with 15% of the total (USD 315 million annually). Due to its favourable agro-ecological conditions and strong palm oil industry (Cumunel, 2020[31])14, Côte d’Ivoire is the region’s main exporter, accounting for 53% of total exports and being the main supplier for Burkina Faso, Ghana, Mali, Nigeria, Senegal and Togo (

Figure 1.11).

Figure 1.11. Trading flows for palm oil, exports (left) and imports (right)

Note: Based on trade flows for 2014 and 2019 to reflect Nigeria and Benin case study data. Flow size is proportional to trade value. Colour corresponds to export destination (export graphs) or import origin (import graphs).

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Cereals (13% of total intra-regional food trade, USD 311 million annually) and starchy roots (1%, USD 16 million) represent the backbone of West African diets. Despite the ongoing diversification of diets in the region, cereal products such as millet, sorghum, maize and rice, are consumed nearly every day of the week (Thériault et al., 2024[16]). Along with starchy roots like cassava, yams and sweet potatoes, they are fundamental energy sources, accounting for 30% of the economic value of regional food consumption (Bricas, Tchamda and Mouton, 2016[30]). Cereal trade is dominated by maize: the cereal is produced and consumed throughout the region, and seasonal maize trade forms interlinkages that sustain supply throughout the year. The relationship between Niger and Nigeria shines through (Figure 1.12Figure 1.12), as both countries export to and import from one another, reflecting the vitality of cross-border cereal trading networks. Equally, Benin exports maize to Nigeria, while importing from Togo and Burkina Faso. On the other hand, the low share of intra-regional trade for starchy roots—by and large, cassava—suggests that consumption remains largely localised. However, it should be noted that the 95% of cassava trade in the region is unrecorded, and given inaccuracies in the available unrecorded trade data, it is highly likely that actual trade of the commodity is significantly higher than currently reported.

Figure 1.12. Trading flows for maize, exports (left) and imports (right)

Note: Based on trade flows for 2014 and 2019 to reflect Nigeria and Benin case study data. Flow size is proportional to trade value. Colour corresponds to export destination (export graphs) or import origin (import graphs).

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Processed foods (24% of total intra-regional food trade, USD 572 million annually), as well as legumes, nuts and seeds (6%), highlight the importance of value-added food products and protein-rich crops like peanuts, cowpeas and sesame in regional food trade. The preponderance of these product categories underscores a growing trend in the consumption of processed foods and food-away-from-home sauce ingredients in urban centres, which typically make up 30% to 40% of regional food consumption (Bricas, Tchamda and Mouton, 2016[30]). It also speaks to the rising consumption of sugar and sweets. For instance, households in countries like Senegal and Mali consume them six days per week (Thériault et al., 2024[16]). Vegetables (4%) and fruits (2%) play a less prominent but still crucial role in intra-regional trade, as intra-regional trade flows are critical to sustain nutritious diets, especially during the domestic lean season for certain food items, like tomatoes between Ghana and Burkina Faso. In addition, onion, an important component of diets in several West African countries, ranks 8th in the individual food products mostly traded in the region (

Figure 1.13).

Figure 1.13. Ten food products most traded intra-regionally, 2014-22 average

Note: The data labels correspond to the share of total value.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Intra-regional food trade is characterised by distinct patterns of specialisation

By combining data on trading partners and traded products, the regional food trade specialisation patterns among West African countries can be assessed (Figure 1.14). This specialisation is underpinned by countries’ agro-ecological characteristic and technological capacity developed over time through historical legacies, agricultural policy and domestic consumption preferences, in response to market signals from domestic and regional consumption poles (Badiane, Odjo and Jemaneh, 2014[32]).

Based on the intra-regional trade data, the study identified four food trade specialisation clusters in the region:15

• Cluster 1: Animal protein exports—oil, fats, sugar imports: Burkina Faso, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Sierra Leone mainly export animal proteins (livestock and, in the case of Senegal, Guinea-Bissau and Sierra Leone, mostly fish and crustaceans) and import oils, fats and sugar (palm oil);

• Cluster 2: Oil, fats, sugar exports—cereal, animal protein, processed food imports: Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Togo mostly export oils, fats and sugar (palm oil) and import cereals (e.g. maize), animal proteins and processed foods (e.g. flavour cubes);

• Cluster 3: Cabo Verde, Gambia and Liberia are net importers of multiple food groups;

• Cluster 4: Benin and Nigeria have unique patterns. Nigeria has a cereal exports—animal protein imports dynamic ; Benin is also a strong exporter of cereals (maize, rice re-exports) without any strong intra-regional import, owing to its status as an “entrepôt economy” turned to extra-regional food imports and intra-regional re-exports (Golub, 2012[33]).

Figure 1.14. Annual intra‑regional food trade: Exports (orange) and imports (blue) by food group and country, in log thousand USD, 2014‑22 average

 

Source: Authors’ calculations.

A distorted reflection: How recorded trade statistics misrepresent intra-regional food flows

Official statistics not only underestimate the scale of food trade but also misrepresent the range of food products being traded and the countries involved as exporters and importers. This bias in recorded trade flows significantly distorts our understanding of the economic value of the food trade and results in inaccurate assessments of calorie and nutrient availability in the region. Additionally, it provides a misleading view of which food export sectors are dynamic, where key regional food markets are located, and who the strategic trading partners are.

The regional food flows missing in the recorded data

The product composition of recorded and unrecorded intra-regional food trade, in West Africa, differs significantly. Processed foods, such as flavour cubes, concentrated milk and pasta, account for 32% of the total value of recorded food trade in West Africa. Another 25% is composed of oil, sugar, fats, mostly palm oil. In contrast, unrecorded trade is dominated by raw products and staples such as live animals (40%), cereals (26%), legumes and pulses (6.8%), accounting for 73% of the total volume (Figure 1.15).16

Figure 1.15. Recorded (left) and unrecorded (right) intra-regional food trade product group composition, 2014-22 average

Note: The data circles correspond to the share of total value (in percent).

Source: Authors’ calculations.

There are two distinct sectors in intra-regional food trade: some product categories primarily move through informal channels, while others are predominantly traded through official avenues. This creates a skewed representation of intra-regional food trade in official statistics. For instance, based on the data available, unrecorded food trade accounts for 95% of starchy roots’ value traded within the region, 84% of cereals, 72% of vegetables, 62% of fruits, 52% of animal proteins and 51% of legumes—it is the main channel for 6 out of 10 food groups (Figure 1.16). Conversely, 80% of oils and fats, 73% of beverages and processed foods and 71% of coffee, tea, spices and cocoa trade value is recorded.

Figure 1.16. Intra-regional food trade, by food group and recorded status, 2014-22 average

Note: Export values used as a proxy for intra-regional food trade.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Even larger discrepancies exist at product level, with certain products trade almost completely invisible in official statistics. Of the maize trade, 97% of intra-regional flow value is unrecorded. This is also the case for 96% of millet, 95% of cassava and 88% of cowpea trade. On the other hand, 100% of instant coffee trade value, 96% of frozen fish, 84% of palm oil, 81% of wheat flour and 78% of flavour cubes is recorded (Figure 1.17). Furthermore, while the same share of animal proteins is traded through both channels, the proportion of unrecorded trade value is much higher for live bovines (82%) and lower for frozen fish (4%).

Figure 1.17. Intra-regional food trade, by top food products and recorded status, 2014-22 average

Note: The products listed account for 75% of the value of intra-regional food trade, with the “other” category accounting for 25%.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Among the products most traded through unrecorded channels, rice is the only likely re-export. These patterns suggest that “entrepôt” trade (Golub, 2012[33]; Torres and van Seters, 2016[13])—where food items are imported into the region and then re-exported to neighbouring countries without formal registration—is not at the heart of unrecorded food trade. The bulk of “informal” intra-regional food trade is therefore not a contraband trade, as often perceived, but rather reflects trade driven by regional market opportunities.

Unrecorded trade: Overlooking a critical nutritional and economic resource

The rich nutritional content of foods in the unrecorded food trade

Given the important differences in terms of food product trade flows that are recorded and unrecorded, official statistics significantly misestimate calorie and nutrient flows within the region. Three-quarters of unrecorded trade calories17 consist of staples associated with more balanced diets, such as animal proteins, legumes, nuts and seeds, fruits and vegetables and cereals. In contrast, nearly half of calories for recorded trade are derived from fat, sugar and salt-concentrated products linked to unhealthy diets: palm oil, flavour cubes and other processed foods (Figure 1.18). The disparity is also true for proteins: while the most protein-dense foods18 only account for 15% of recorded trade, they represent 36% of unrecorded trade, due to the prevalence of protein-dense live animals in this trade (Figure 1.19).

Figure 1.18. Calories traded intra-regionally, by food product groups, recorded (left) and unrecorded (right)

Note: Based on 2019-22 export value averages. The unrecorded data does not include country survey values, as quantities were unavailable. The donut chart sizes are proportional to the estimated unrecorded and recorded total calorie flows. Total unrecorded calories were estimated by multiplying calorie values from the ECO-ICBT/BACI data by the average ratio of Benin/Nigeria/Togo country survey trade value to ECO-ICBT/BACI trade data value. It is estimated that as much as 84% of regional traded calories may be missing from official statistics.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Figure 1.19. Traded food product by protein/100g quartiles for recorded (left) and unrecorded (right) trade

Note: Based on 2019-22 averages, ECO-ICBT data only, export values. “Low value” corresponds to quartile 1, “very high value” to quartile 4, which are the lowest and highest protein density, respectively.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

The high economic value of foods in the unrecorded food trade

Unrecorded trade is dominated by foods with higher unit values19 than recorded trade. This is primarily driven by trade of live animals, like bovines and goats, which rank in the third quartile of export unit values— indicating they are among the relatively expensive traded food products (Figure 1.20). Fish (fillets and dried), categorised among the most expensive products (fourth quartile), also constitute 7% of total unrecorded trade. Overall, 33% of unrecorded food trade involves products in the third and fourth-unit value quartile, compared to only 10% for recorded trade. Recorded trade is centred on products in the second quartile, such as palm oil, frozen fish and rice (Figure 1.17). This data contradicts the prevalent assumption that unrecorded food trade is defined by low economic value transactions (Lesser and Moisé-Leeman, 2009[34]; Torres and van Seters, 2016[13])—livestock and fish, for instance, are not cheap food items.

Figure 1.20. Traded food products by unit trade value quartiles for recorded (left) and unrecorded (right) trade

Note: Based on 2019-22 averages, ECO-ICBT data only. “Low trade unit value” corresponds to quartile 1, and “Very high unit value” to quartile 4, which are the lowest and highest trade unit values, respectively.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Unrecorded trade: Missing out on food export sectors, key regional markets, and strategic trading partners

Undervalued food exports sectors: The case of live bovine regional trade

The coverage of intra-regional food trade flows by official statistics varies significantly across countries and commodities. As a result, in some economies, dynamic food export sectors are substantially under-reported or completely absent from national statistics.

This is exemplified by the case of regional exports of live bovine animals. As discussed above, recorded statistics only present a fraction of live bovines exported by the three top regional exporters, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger. For Mali and Niger, the recorded live bovine exports (USD 62 million and USD 17 million, respectively) only account for 21% and 4% of the values estimated for this study—USD 298 million and USD 450 million, respectively (Figure 1.21).20 Unlike what is suggested by official statistics, cattle is likely to be Mali’s second export behind gold (USD 7.2 billion annually), with exports 3 times higher than the country’s trade of heavily subsidised cotton (USD 105 million) (OEC, 2024[35]). Niger, meanwhile, is estimated to export 3 times more cattle than uranium (USD 135 million) (OEC, 2024[36]), and cattle is also its second-largest export after gold (USD 2.5 billion)—far from what is reflected in the USD 17 million figure available in recorded data. For Burkina Faso, recorded exports of live bovine animals (USD 2 million) account for a mere 1% of estimated live bovine exports (USD 250 million).

In certain other West African countries, such as Benin, Côte d’Ivoire and Togo, official records of regional live bovine exports are near, or equal to, 0%—suggesting that cattle are not exported. This is contradicted by the data on unrecorded trade, which shows annual averages respectively of USD 29 million, USD 8 million and USD 7 million—with actual values likely to be significantly higher. Another striking case is Guinea, which, according to official data, had zero live animal exports between 2014 and 2022. The ECO-ICBT data on unrecorded trade data—still significantly under-estimated—measured Guinea’s live bovine exports at USD 23 million annually, that is, about four times the total value of all its recorded regional food exports (USD 6.8 million).

Figure 1.21. Live bovine animal exports by country, recorded, unrecorded and estimated additional trade, 2014-22 average

Note: The percentages on the right represent the share of recorded trade in total trade.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Undervalued regional markets: The example of the tomato trade

On the other hand, under-reporting of large regional food imports in certain countries means that valuable regional food markets are undervalued. One significant example is the regional tomato value chain. Recorded trade statistics show that Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire and Niger are the only West African countries importing fresh tomatoes from the region, for a combined annual value of USD 30 million (Figure 1.22). However, when unrecorded trade data is factored in, the regional tomato market structure changes dramatically. The total market size nearly quadruples, to USD 111 million annually (Figure 1.23). The combined regional import share for Ghana, Niger and Côte d’Ivoire drops to 44%, while “new” importers like Nigeria (32%) and Burkina Faso appear (14%).

Figure 1.22. Fresh tomato imports by country, recorded and unrecorded trade, 2014-22 average

Note: The percentages on the right represent the share of recorded trade in total trade.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Figure 1.23. Regional tomato imports by country, using recorded imports only (left) and including unrecorded imports (right), 2014‑22 average

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Moreover, the unrecorded food trade data still underestimates actual flows, with the “hidden market” for tomatoes being significantly larger than reported in our data. Based on recorded and unrecorded trade data, Ghana’s tomato imports amounted to 1 700 tons in 2022. However, Ghana’s National Tomato Trader and Transport Association reports annual regional imports of 100 000 tons—5 800% higher than in the available data (MoFA and IFPRI, 2020[37]). This would imply that, in 2022, Ghana’s tomato import market alone would amount to USD 196 million, six times more than the total intra-regional tomato import value for the region presented in recorded statistics and three times more than the value adjusted with ECO-ICBT data.

Misperceived trading partners: The examples of Burkina Faso and Nigeria

An important consequence of these “missing markets” is that it becomes impossible for countries to identify their strategic food trade partners, implying missed opportunities for the country’s private sector and misguided trade and development policies for the State.

For example, official statistics suggest that Burkina Faso’s primary regional food export markets are Ghana, Mali and Togo. However, when unrecorded trade data is considered, Nigeria emerges as Burkina Faso’s main export partner by a significant margin, with trade values six times higher than exports to Ghana. Benin and Côte d’Ivoire also move up from the 5th and 6th positions to the 3rd and 4th, respectively (Figure 1.24).

Similarly, Nigeria and Niger are closely connected through long-standing Hausa intra-regional food trade networks (Kuépié, Tenikue and Walther, 2015[38]; Walther, 2015[39]) yet much of this trade is absent from official statistics. According to official data for 2014, Nigeria traded USD 29 million in food with Niger, representing 8% of its total regional exports (Figure 1.25). However, the inclusion of unrecorded trade data shows Niger as Nigeria’s primary food trade partner, accounting for 62% of total trade for that year, with a more realistic—though still undervalued—estimate of USD 1.5 billion.

Figure 1.24. Burkina Faso regional food exports, by partner country, recorded trade data only (left) and recorded combined with unrecorded trade data (right, grey), 2014

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Figure 1.25. Nigeria regional food exports, by partner country, 2014

Source: Authors’ calculations.

The share of intra-regional food trade in West Africa is greater than commonly perceived

Revisiting narratives on low intra-regional food trade in West Africa

The economic importance and scale of intra-regional food trade in West Africa is heavily underappreciated. The literature often cites a low share of intra-regional food trade in West Africa, typically estimated at between 8% and 15% depending on the year, products, and regional scope (Bouët et al., 2021[18]; FAO and AUC, 2021[40]; Fontagné, Mitaritonna and Zheng, 2022[41]; Foroutan and Pritchett, 1993[5]; UNCTAD, 2018[42]). This narrative warrants reconsideration on several counts.

Firstly, as discussed throughout this chapter, intra-regional food trade is largely under-estimated—arguably to a much greater extent than extra-regional food trade, due to the size of unrecorded transactions in the region. This study’s analyses suggest that intra-regional food trade is likely as much as six times higher than currently captured. Based on this estimate, more than a third of West Africa’s food could be traded regionally (38%)21, rather than the 9% figure calculated from reported statistics only.

Secondly, the estimate of intra-regional to total food trade is strongly influenced by the outsized importance of West African cocoa exports and to a lesser extent, cashew nut exports. Combined exports of cocoa products constitute nearly half of the region’s total food exports22 almost all of which are destined to markets outside the region. In addition, 90% of cocoa exports are concentrated in just two countries, Côte d’Ivoire (60%) and Ghana (30%). Equally, cashew nut exports account for 15% of total food exports in the region (half of the exports also originating from Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana). These two commodities disproportionately impact the calculation of intra-regional food trade shares, leading to a skewed perception of the actual scale of food trade activities and opportunities within West Africa.

Third, comparing West Africa’s intra-regional trade share with that of other groupings, such as the European Union, which boasts a 60%-70% intra-regional trade share (Mitaritonna and Traoré, 2017[43]; UNCTAD, 2024[44]), is misleading. The indicator of trade share is highly sensitive to the number of countries in the regional economic community under consideration and the combined size of the grouping’s GDP, in absolute terms and relative to the rest of the world (Bouët, Laborde Debucquet and Traoré, 2022[45]). Whereas West Africa’s main regional economic community, ECOWAS, comprises 12 countries and represents 0.7% of global GDP, the European Union has 27 members and represents 15% of global GDP (ECOWAS, 2024[46]; European Union, 2024[47]; IMF, 2024[48]). This implies that European Union countries have nearly double the potential regional trade partners of ECOWAS countries and a regional economy 20 times larger.

Reassessing intra-regional food trade intensity in West Africa

The region exports one-third of its food internally

Intra-regional food exports constitute a substantial share of total food exports in West Africa (Figure 1.26). Using the observed data available on recorded and unrecorded trade, more than a third of recorded West African food exports—cocoa and cashew nut excluded—are within the region.23 Adjusting this data to reflect that unrecorded trade is still under-valued in the region, it is estimated that the intra-regional food export share is closer to 60%.24 Even regional food imports, that appear largely dominated by extra-regional flows in observed data (e.g. rice, wheat, palm oil) and have an intra-regional share of 16%, are in the range of 30% when factoring in the likely magnitude of unrecorded intra-regional food flows. The total share of non-cocoa, non-cashew intra-regional trade (imports and exports), when adjusted, would stand at 38%.

Figure 1.26. Intra‑regional and extra‑regional food trade in West Africa (non‑cocoa, non‑cashew nuts), with observed data (A) and adjusted with estimated unrecorded trade value (B), 2014‑22 average

Source: Authors’ calculations.

For six countries, West Africa is the main food export partner

For Benin, Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, Mali, Burkina Faso and Nigeria, intra-regional food exports (excluding cocoa and cashew nuts) exceed extra-regional exports (Figure 1.27). In Nigeria, intra-regional food exports are 50% of total food exports (non-cocoa, non-cashew nut). Nigeria’s top food export market globally is Niger, accounting for 25% of its total food exports. Similarly, Benin exports more food to Nigeria (34%) than it does to India (32%), its top two partners.25 Burkina Faso exports 43% of its food to Nigeria, which is more than its cumulative food trade with its top 7 extra-regional partners combined: Singapore, India, Japan, Vietnam, Denmark, France, and the Netherlands.

However, on the import side, extra-regional food trade dominates, ranging from 61% in Mali and Burkina Faso to as high as 99% of total food trade in Cabo Verde (Figure 1.28). Half of the regional food imports originating from outside West Africa are rice (20%), wheat (15%), frozen fish (8.5%) and palm oil (7%).

Figure 1.27. Intra-regional and extra-regional food exports (non-cocoa, non-cashew nuts), by exporting country, 2014-22 average

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Figure 1.28. Intra-regional and extra-regional food imports (non-cocoa, non-cashew nut), by importing country, 2014-22 average

Source: Authors’ calculations.

West Africa’s food trade per partner is three to eight times higher within West Africa than the rest of the world

Although the total value of intra-regional food trade is well below extra-regional trade, the regional market itself is much smaller in terms of partner countries. West African countries trade food with only 14 partners in the region, compared to 211 recorded partners for the rest of the world.26 Calculating the average trade value per recorded partner for intra- and extra-regional food exports and imports shows that West African countries export eight times more and import nearly three times more food per regional partner on average than they do per extra-regional partner (

Figure 1.29

Figure 1.29. Average intra and extra-regional food exports and imports per trading partner, 2014-22 average

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Trade is mostly intra-regional for foods of key food and nutrition security and economic importance

Intra-regional food trade plays a more critical role than extra-regional trade for several key food and nutrition security products. Among the top 20 most exported food products by West African countries, the share of exports within the region is notable(Figure 1.30). Products can be categorised into four groups:

• Products that are mostly, or entirely, exported within the region (50%-100%); but that account for a low to modest share of intra-regional food exports (1%-5%) (green dots). Notable products are maize (99% exported to the region), onions (86%) and sheep (99%).

• Products that are mostly, or entirely, exported within the region (50%-100%) and that account for a modest to large share of regional food exports (5%-20%). Three products fall in that group: live bovine (100% exported to the region), flavour cubes (91%) and palm oil (79%) (orange dots). These three products alone account for 22% of intra-regional food exports.

• Products that are mostly, or entirely, exported outside the region (0%-50%) and that account for a low to modest share of regional food exports (1%-5%) (blue dots). The upper bound contains two interesting products in particular, tomato (41% is traded within the region) and fish fillets (43%).

• Purple dots are products that are mostly, or entirely exported outside the region (0%-50%) and that also account for a modest to high share of regional food exports (5%-20%) (purple dots). Frozen fish is the only product that stands out.

The same analysis is conducted for imports (Figure 1.31). The region mostly or entirely imports internally major staples like maize (50%) and cassava (99%). Live bovines are almost exclusively imported regionally and, with palm oil, dominate intra-regional food imports (15% each). Live animal imports far outcompete extra-regional imports: their intra-regional import value is close to 5 times higher than the value of bovine meat imported from the rest of the world. Another significant import regional food market is for onions. On aggregate, one-third of West Africa’s onion imports are regional. This is however skewed by Senegal, the main importing country (27%), which imports three-quarters of its onions from the Netherlands. Countries like Ghana, Benin, Togo, on the other hand, import respectively three-quarters, two-thirds and half of their onions from Niger.

Figure 1.30. Regional food exports, share exported in West Africa (y axis) and share of intra-regional food trade (x axis), 2014-22 average

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Figure 1.31. Regional food imports, share imported in West Africa (y axis) and share of intra-regional food imports (x axis), 2014-22 average

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Intra-regional food trade as de facto regional integration

The regional food trade network is dense and over long distances

West African countries have food trade relations with multiple countries and over long distances – a de facto form of “regional food integration” (Figure 1.32). Countries trade with a median of 12 partner countries, out of a possible 14. Every West African country, except for Cabo Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia and Gambia, has at least 10 trade partners.27

At the regional level, close to three-quarters of regional food trade value is between neighbouring countries. However, Senegal, Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire, which account for a combined one-third of total regional trade, conduct 58%, 48% and 39% of their regional food trade, respectively, with partners beyond their immediate borders. At the other end of the spectrum, Mali, Benin and Burkina Faso only trade 4%, 14% and 21% respectively, with non-neighbouring countries.

Figure 1.32. Intra-regional food trade network in West Africa

Note: Trade flows between bordering countries in green, non-bordering countries in red, width of the arrow weighted by value of aggregate trade 2014-22. The following percentage of food is traded with bordering countries: Benin, 92%; Burkina Faso, 81%; Cabo Verde, 0%; Côte d’Ivoire, 61%; Gambia, 81%; Ghana, 52%; Guinea, 41%; Guinea-Bissau, 55%; Liberia, 85%; Mali, 93%; Niger, 80%; Nigeria, 83%; Senegal, 42%; Sierra Leone, 14%; Togo, 77%.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

At country level, food trade network density varies

Overall, regional food trade interdependencies are high: however, the network density differs from country to country. The study identified three types of country-level food trade networks in West Africa (Map 1.2).

• Bilateral networks: four countries are characterised by a high concentration of trade flows with one regional partner: Benin (with Nigeria), Gambia (Senegal), Liberia (Côte d’Ivoire) and Cabo Verde (Senegal). Benin and Gambia are the two foremost “entrepôt” economies of the region. They have specialised in food re-exports: traders import food through the two small economies, and then transfer it to the neighbouring country’s market via porous borders, evading the higher transaction costs—e.g. import taxes—of importing directly into Senegal and Nigeria (Golub, 2012[33]; Golub and Mbaye, 2009[49]). While Liberia is not typically referred to as an entrepôt economy, it shows the same profile: a very small economy next to a regional powerhouse, in this case Côte d’Ivoire. Cabo Verde is an unusual case: as a small island economy off the coast of Senegal, it has developed long-standing ties with its continental neighbour.

• Trilateral and quadrilateral networks: four countries have a high concentration of trade flows with two or three regional partners: Mali (with Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire), Niger (Nigeria, Benin), Nigeria (Niger, Benin, Ghana) and Senegal (Mali, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana). The Niger and Nigeria networks correspond to a well-documented trade triangle, powered by cross-border trading communities rooted in the border areas between Benin and Nigeria, Niger and Nigeria, and at the confluence of the three borders, in the Dendi region (Kuépié, Tenikue and Walther, 2015[38]; Walther, 2015[39]).

• The other triangle is that of Mali, Senegal and Côte d’Ivoire. The three countries engage in intense trade of livestock (e.g. Mali to Côte d’Ivoire, Mali to Senegal), smoked and frozen fish (Senegal to Côte d’Ivoire, Côte d’Ivoire to Mali), palm oil (Côte d’Ivoire to Mali, Burkina Faso) (Ayilu and Nyiawung, 2022[29]; Valerio, 2020[28]).

• Multilateral networks: this designates countries that are part of polycentric food trade networks with other West African countries,: Burkina Faso (Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Niger, Mali, Senegal), Côte d’Ivoire (Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Nigeria, Ghana), Ghana (Senegal, Burkina Faso, Niger, Nigeria, Benin, Togo), Guinea (Senegal, Sierra Leone, Mali, Côte d’Ivoire), Guinea-Bissau (Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Togo), Sierra Leone (Senegal, Guinea, Liberia, Côte d’Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana) and Togo (Niger, Burkina Faso, Senegal, Ghana). These seven countries form the largest block in the region and demonstrate the diversity of intra-regional food trade flows in the region.

Map 1.2. Country‑level regional food trade networks

 

Note: Flow width proportional to the logarithmic total food trade value for 2014-22.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Annex 1.A. Intra-regional food trade – scope of analysis

A.1. Geographical scope

The following countries are considered for the definition of intra-regional food trade in West Africa: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo.

A.2. Food products

The following food products have been considered for the BACI (Table A.1), ECO-ICBT (Table A.2) and country survey datasets. As a general rule for all data sources, agricultural products that were not considered foods, tobacco and alcohol were systematically excluded.

Table 1.A. Inclusion status of BACI dataset products, food and agriculture-related HS2 codes

	Inclusion status
01 - Animals; live	Included
02 - Meat and edible meat offal	Included
03 - Fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates	Included
04 - Dairy produce; birds’ eggs; natural honey; edible products of animal origin, not elsewhere specified or included	Included
05 - Animal originated products; not elsewhere specified or included	Not included
06 - Trees and other plants, live; bulbs, roots and the like; cut flowers and ornamental foliage	Not included
07 - Vegetables and certain roots and tubers; edible	Included
08 - Fruit and nuts, edible; peel of citrus fruit or melons**	Included
09 - Coffee, tea, mate and spices	Included
10 - Cereals	Included
11 - Products of the milling industry; malt, starches, inulin, wheat gluten	Included
12 - Oil seeds and oleaginous fruits; miscellaneous grains, seeds and fruit, industrial or medicinal plants; straw and fodder	Included
13 - Lac; gums, resins and other vegetable saps and extracts	Included
14 - Vegetable plaiting materials; vegetable products not elsewhere specified or included	Not included
15 - Animal or vegetable fats and oils and their cleavage products; prepared animal fats; animal or vegetable waxes	Included
16 - Meat, fish or crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic invertebrates; preparations thereof	Included
17 - Sugars and sugar confectionery	Included
18 - Cocoa and cocoa preparations	Included
19 - Preparations of cereals, flour, starch or milk; pastry cooks’ products	Included
20 - Preparations of vegetables, fruit, nuts or other parts of plants	Included
21 - Miscellaneous edible preparations	Included
22 - Beverages, spirits and vinegar***	Water and non-alcoholic beverages only (220110, 220190, 220210, 220290)
23 - Food industries, residues and wastes thereof; prepared animal fodder	Included
24 - Tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes	Not included

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Table 2.A. Inclusion status of food products from the ECO-ICBT database

Category	Product
Animal proteins	Camel, Cattle, Chicken, Chicken Egg, Crabs, Fish (dried), Fish (fresh), Fish (smoked), Goat, Sheep
Cereals	Maize, Maize flour, Millet, Rice, Sorghum
Coffee, tea, spices and cocoa	Cocoa, Coffee, Ginger, Ginger (dried), Pepper/Chilli, Spices
Fruit	Avocado, Banana, Baobab, Cashew nut, Date, Ditakh (tallow), Guava, Guitax, Lemon (fresh), Maad, Mango, Néré seed, Néré powder, Orange, Pineapple, Pistachios, Tamarind, Watermelon
Vegetables	Cabbage, Carrot, Courge, Cucumber, Eggplant, Garlic, Okra, Onion, Sorrel (dried), Tomato
Legumes, nuts and seeds	Cowpea, Groundnut, Groundnut cockle, Palm nut, Sesame seeds, Soyabeans, Tigernut
Oils, fats and sugars	Groundnut oil, Palm oil
Starchy roots	Cassava, Potato, Taro, Yam
Other	Gum Arabic, Groundnut paste, Hibiscus, Sugarcane
Included in the ECO-ICBT database but excluded from the analysis	Ananas seed, Banana seed, Cassava seed, Cotton grains, Cowpea seed, Garlic seed, Ginger seed, Horses, Shea, Shea butter, Moringa seed, Moringa powder, Okra seed, Pepper seed, Bissap seed.
Not included in ECO-ICBT product scope, not in the analysis	Non-food agricultural products, “cash crops” (coffee, tobacco, tea), processed foods.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

A.3. Trade

Where data allows, the analysis considers all food trade flows between countries in the region, recorded and unrecorded, by informal and formal traders, of legitimately produced goods, regardless of tax payment status (Figure A.1).

Figure 1.A.1 Unrecorded intraregional food trade flow chart

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Annex 1.B.  Data overview

1.B. Data sources description

To perform the analysis of intra-regional food trade values and volumes, a unique dataset was built, using the sources as described in Table B.1.

Table 1.B. Unique intra-regional food set data sources

Dataset	Product type	Codification	Years	Collection period	Collection points	Location of collection points	Value type
BACI	Food/non-food	HS6	2007-2022	2007-22	From UN Comtrade, i.e. official trade data	n/a	Imputed
ECO-ICBT	Food	HS4	2010-2022	2010-22	115 in 14 countries	Loading/unloading zones	Imputed
CBN-Nigeria	Food/non-food	-	2013-2014	1 week each month over 12 months	16	Informal border post	Imputed and estimated
ECENE-Benin	Food/non-food	HS4	2018-2020	4 two-week survey periods (1 in 2018, 2 in 2019 and 1 in 2020)	101 to 201	Informal border post	Imputed and estimated
INSEED-Togo	Food/non-food	-	2019	15 days in 2019	75	Informal border post	Imputed and estimated
ANSD - Senegal	Food/non-food	HS2	2010	n/a	n/a	Informal and formal border post	Imputed and estimated
INS-Niger	Food/non-food	HS2	2022	15 days in 2022	4	Informal border post	Imputed and estimated

Note: For the ANSD Senegal and Institut National de la Statistique de Niger (INS-Niger) datasets, the data was extracted from .PDF reports obtained from relevant authorities.

Source: Authors’ calculations.

2.B. Data-processing steps

Data cleaning

The ECO-ICBT dataset was cleaned to remove duplicates and outlier values.

Harmonisation

Non-West Africa country partners and non-food products were filtered out, as per geographical and product scope described above. Diverging country descriptors were harmonised across all datasets (e.g. Cap-Vert, Cabo Verde). Products were matched at the HS4 level across all datasets, and local currency unit values were converted in nominal USD, as presented in Table B.2 below.

Table 2.B. Dataset harmonisation process

	Pre-codification	Codification	Exchange rate source
BACI	n/a	n/a – dataset already coded at HS4 level	n/a – already in USD
ECO-ICBT	Merging of duplicate descriptions into unique identifiers – e.g. bissap and hibiscus merged as hibiscus.	Matching of product descriptors with HS4 codes	n/a – already in USD
CBN-Nigeria	Merging of duplicate descriptions into unique identifiers, e.g., multiple brand names of pasta.	Matching of product descriptors with HS4 codes	Central Bank of Nigeria (Naira/USD)
ECENE-Benin	n/a	n/a – dataset already coded at HS4 level	Banque Centrale des États de l’Afrique de lOuest (BECEAO) (FCFA/USD)
INSEED-Togo	Merging of duplicate descriptions into unique identifiers, e.g. multiple brand names of pasta.	Matching of product descriptors with HS4 codes	BECEAO (FCFA/USD)
ANSD-Senegal	Merging of duplicate descriptions into unique identifiers	Matching of product descriptors with HS4 codes	BECEAO (FCFA/USD)
INS-Niger	Merging of duplicate descriptions into unique identifiers	Matching of product descriptors with HS4 codes.	BECEAO (FCFA/USD)

Source: Authors’ calculations.

Duplicate treatment

To avoid double counting of recorded trade, ECO-ICBT trade flows reported as “formal trade” were filtered out of the dataset.

To avoid double counting of unrecorded trade, duplicates of unrecorded trade flows for the same HS4 product, the same pair of countries and the same year were identified across country surveys and ECO-ICBT datasets. They were tagged as duplicate observations. The highest value of duplicate flows was retained, based on the assumption that it represented a most accurate capture of the actual flow.

Reconciliation of datasets

Cleaned and processed datasets were appended into a unique dataset of intra-regional food trade. A new variable was created to identify the source of each trade flow. The standardised country and product descriptors (at HS4 level), as well as unit value, allowed for a comparison of intra-regional food trade data at the aggregate, country and product level.

Additional variables calculation

The following additional variables were calculated:

 Trade flow caloric, fat, carbohydrate and protein values

The four variables were created to analyse the nutritional patterns of intra-regional food trade. They were computed for BACI and ECO-ICBT, the two datasets that include trade flow quantities, a necessary condition for the variable calculation.

The first step was to match each BACI and ECO-ICBT product in the database with a food product in the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) International Network of Food Data Systems (INFOODS) database for West Africa (FAO, 2020[50]). The INFOODS West Africa database references the caloric and nutritional content, across 38 ingredients, for food products and preparations consumed in the region.

The 639 HS6 level product descriptors in BACI and ECO-ICBT were matched with the INFOODS list of 1 028 food products. A lexical matching algorithm was used to perform the first round of matching. A second round consisted in a manual matching of the remaining BACI and ECO-ICBT descriptors, either because they could not be matched through the algorithm or because the algorithmic matching yielded unsatisfactory results.

Once the matching was finalised, the values for INFOODS products in kcal, fat, carbohydrate and protein per 100 grammes were reconciled with BACI and ECO-ICBT HS6 level products. The values were converted to 1 000 tons. Finally, conversion co-efficients were used to adjust nutritional values for traded food products that did not have a direct quantity match with INFOODS food products (Table B.3).

Table 3.B. List of BACI/ECO-ICBT and INFOODS product matches with conversion coefficients

HS6 descriptor	INFOODS descriptor	Conversion coefficient	Source
Bovine animals: live, other than pure-bred breeding animals	Beef meat, moderately fat, ca. 20% fat, raw	0.60	(Laborde and Deason, 2015[51])
Bovine animals: live, pure-bred breeding animals	Beef meat, moderately fat, ca. 20% fat, raw	0.60	(Laborde and Deason, 2015[51])
Camel	Camel meat, raw	0.62	(Laborde and Deason, 2015[51])
Cattle	Beef meat, moderately fat, ca. 20% fat, raw	0.60	(Laborde and Deason, 2015[51])
Fish: frozen, n.e.c. under heading No. 0303 (excluding fillets, livers, roe and other fish meat under heading No. 0304)	Fish, whole, dried	1.94	(FAO, 2004[52])
Fish: mackerel (scomber scombrus, scomber australasicus, scomber japonicus), frozen (excluding fillets, livers, roes and other fish meat under heading No. 0304)	Fish, whole, dried	1.94	(FAO, 2004[52])
Fish: sardines (sardina pilchardus, sardinops spp.), sardinella (sardinella spp.), brisling or sprats (sprattus sprattus), frozen (excluding fillets, livers, roes and other fish meat under heading No. 0304)	Fish, whole, dried	1.94	(FAO, 2004[52])
Fish: skipjack or stripe-bellied bonito, frozen (excluding fillets, livers, roes and other fish meat under heading No. 0304)	Fish, whole, dried	1.94	(FAO, 2004[52])
Fish: tuna, frozen, n.e.c. in item No. 0303.4 (excluding fillets, livers, roes and other fish meat under heading No. 0304)	Fish, whole, dried	1.94	(FAO, 2004[52])
Goats: live	Goat meat, lean, raw	0.48	(MLA, 2004[53])
Sheep: live	Lamb/mutton meat, moderately fat, ca. 20% fat, raw	0.45	(MLA, 2017[54])

Source: Authors’ calculations.

 Quartile for average import and export unit value

This variable was computed to assess whether intra-regional food trade was biased towards so-called “high value” or “low value” products. In the absence of firm-level price data, trade unit values can be used as a proxy to measure product value ( (Berthou and Emlinger, 2011[55]). Unit values are computed as the ratio of trade values and quantities for a given product.

The import and export unit values were computed at the annual level for each HS4-level product—for instance, the unit import value of maize for 2020 was computed as the total reported value of maize imported for that year, divided by the imported quantity. The annual unit values were then averaged out for the period.

The distribution of average annual unit values for all HS4 products (BACI, ECO-ICBT and country surveys) was then computed, and each product was attributed a value from 1 to 4, whereby 1 is the lowest quartile and 4 the highest. Products in quartiles 1 can be proxied as “low-value”, whereas products in quartile 4 can be proxied as “high-value”.

 Quartile for average caloric, fat, carbohydrate and protein values

The same approach was replicated to assess the distribution of intra-regional food trade over low to high-caloric, fat, carbohydrate and protein value.

The distribution of HS4 products value per 100 grammes for these categories was calculated, and a score of 1 to 4 assigned that reflects their quartile in the distribution. Products in quartile 1 in fat can be considered “low-fat”, whereas products in quartile 4 can be considered as “high-fat”.

3.B. Main limitations

Three main limitations can be outlined:

• Comparability issues: Country surveys focus on one year—except for Benin (two years). Given that they capture higher values and volumes of food trade than ECO-ICBT, this biases indicators towards those years, and towards the countries that are covered by the surveys.

• Use of extrapolated data: Country survey authors have used extrapolating methods to uprate data collected through direct observations during a limited time frame within a year. This differs from the direct observation of BACI and the loading/unloading point surveying of ECO-ICBT. In addition, the data is not extrapolated using the same methodology across country surveys.

• Difference in product scope: in the case of ECO-ICBT, the food product flows that were tracked were restricted to a pre-set list. This is not the case for other datasets. It reduces the cross-data comparability at product level.

Annex 1.C. Literature review of point estimates on intra-regional food trade

The data used to extract point estimates on intra-regional food trade in West Africa is drawn from seven studies and reports that focus on unrecorded food trade across the region. Data points from these studies were extracted and compiled into a database. They were then compared with the data available in our combined ECO-ICBT and BACI dataset. The key sources consulted are summarized below

1. Cross-Border Trade and Food Security in Liberia and Sierra Leone, 2010

The report on cross-border trade and food and nutrition security, conducted by the World Food Programme, FEWSNET and CILSS (Bauer et al., 2010[56]) offers critical insights into trade flows between Liberia and Sierra Leone. This study relies on field observations in nine market towns over one month in both countries, with a specific focus on volumes of palm oil, gari and groundnuts.

2. Trade Data Study Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea, 2012

This study conducted by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) on the cross-border movement of agricultural goods between Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea relies on key informant surveys in 21 major markets in the two countries (Keturakis, 2012[57]). It provides volume estimates of staple food commodities such as maize, millet and sorghum, as well as live animals and onion.

3. Cross-border trade between Sierra Leone and its neighbours, 2018

This report, conducted by the International Growth Centre on Sierra Leone, provides data on cross-border trade in Sierra Leone, drawing on data collected in 12 informal border crossings and 7 formal ones, along with 56 in-depth interviews (IGC, 2018[58]). It offers an assessment of the volume and value of aggregated agricultural goods traded to and from the country.

4. Connecting food staples and input markets in West Africa, 2018

This World Bank report provides useful data points on unrecorded volumes of regionally traded staple commodities in West Africa, in particular cattle, relying on a literature review (Maur and Shepherd, 2018[59]).

5. Assessment of volumes and value of regionally traded staple commodities, 2013

This assessment by USAID remains one of the most detailed studies on unrecorded intra-regional trade in West Africa, drawing from the field data collected through the Agribusiness and Trade Promotion project of USAID from 2008 to 2013 (Josserand, 2013[60]). It quantifies trade volumes and values for key staple commodities like maize, millet, sorghum and rice, as well as live animals.

6. Enhancing the quality of informal cross-border trade in the Economic Community of West African States, 2021

This study on cross-border trade in West Africa was produced by UNECA and contains valuable point estimates on unrecorded food trade flows in the region, notably for livestock and vegetables, drawing from border monitoring of five trade corridors during four months in 2019 (UNECA, 2021[8]).

7. Illuminating informal cross-border trade in processed small pelagic fish in West Africa, 2022

The study by (Ayilu and Nyiawung, 2022[29]) sheds light on the unrecorded cross-border trade of fish in West Africa, a vastly under-researched area. The study uses a combination of trader interviews, market observations and trade-flow analysis to estimate the volume and value of fish traded across borders, particularly between coastal and inland countries.

References

[69] (n.a.) (2021), Framework for boosting intra-African trade in agricultural commodities and services, FAO and AUC, https://doi.org/10.4060/cb3172en.

[64] Aboubacar, D. (2017), Revue des filières bétail/viande et lait et des politiques qui les influencent au Niger, FAO, Rome.

[29] Ayilu, R. and R. Nyiawung (2022), “Illuminating informal cross-border trade in processed small pelagic fish in West Africa”, Maritime Studies, Vol. 21/4, pp. 519-532, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-022-00284-z.

[32] Badiane, O., S. Odjo and S. Jemaneh (2014), “More resilient domestic food markets through regional trade”, in Promoting Agricultural Trade to Enhance Resilience in Africa. RESAKSS Annual Trends and Outlook Report 2013, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington DC.

[1] Barad, R. (1990), “Unrecorded transborder trade and its implications for regional economic integration”, in The Long-Term Perspective Study of Sub-Saharan Africa, Vol.4, Proceeding of a Workshop on Regional Integration and Cooperation, World Bank, Washington DC.

[56] Bauer, J. et al. (2010), Cross-border trade and food security. Liberia. Sierra Leone, WFP, Rome.

[12] Benjamin, N., S. Golub and A. Mbaye (2015), “Informality, Trade Policies and Smuggling in West Africa”, Journal of Borderlands Studies, Vol. 30/3, pp. 381-394, https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2015.1068203.

[2] Bensassi, S., J. Jarreau and C. Mitaritonna (2018), “Regional Integration and Informal Trade in Africa: Evidence from Benin’s Borders”, Journal of African Economies, Vol. 28/1, pp. 89-118, https://doi.org/10.1093/jae/ejy016.

[55] Berthou, A. and C. Emlinger (2011), The Trade Unit Values Database, CEPII, Paris.

[18] Bouët, A. et al. (2021), The ECO-ICBT database of cross-border trade in agricultural products in ECOWAS, CILSS and International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), https://aocta-wacta.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ECO-ICBT_database_En.pdf (accessed on 1 October 2025).

[45] Bouët, A., D. Laborde Debucquet and F. Traoré (2022), Robust Trade Integration Indicators, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.136390.

[7] Bouët, A., S. Odjo and C. Zaki (eds.) (2020), Africa agriculture trade monitor 2020, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, https://doi.org/10.2499/9780896293908.

[6] Bouët, A., K. Pace and J. Glauber (2018), Informal Cross-Border Trade in Africa. How Much? Why? And What Impact?, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington DC.

[30] Bricas, N., C. Tchamda and F. Mouton (2016), L’Afrique à la conquête de son marché alimentaire intérieur. Enseignements de dix ans d’enquêtes auprès des ménages d’Afrique de l’Ouest, au Cameroun et du Tchad, Agence Française de Développement, Paris.

[24] Central Bank of Nigeria (2016), Measuring Informal Cross-Border Trade in Nigeria.

[17] CEPII (2024), “Base d’Analyse du Commerce International. BACI. Dataset.”.

[26] Chaney, T. (2018), “The Gravity Equation in International Trade: An Explanation”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 126/1, pp. 150-177, https://doi.org/10.1086/694292.

[19] CILSS (2024), ECO-ICBT dataset.

[66] CILSS (2024), ECOWAS Informal Cross Border Trade.

[31] Cumunel, M. (2020), “La filière palmier à huile en Côte d’Ivoire : Un condensé des enjeux du développement durable”, Notes, No. 13, Fondation FARM, Paris.

[65] Dembele, M., F. Diallo and H. Gourichon (2014), Analyse des incitations par les prix pour les bovins au Mali 2005-2012, FAO, Rome.

[25] EBID (2023), West African Development Outlook. A mixed bag outlook: Debt distress, flagging growth and declining inflation, EBID, Lomé.

[46] ECOWAS (2024), About ECOWAS, http://www.ecowas.int/about-ecowas/ (accessed on 2 October 2025).

[67] ECOWAS (n.d.), About ECOWAS, http://www.ecowas.int/about-ecowas/ (accessed on 26 November 2024).

[47] European Union (2024), Facts and figures on the European Union economy, https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/key-facts-and-figures/economy_en#:~:text=How%20big%20is%20the%20EU,2021%20was%20%E2%82%AC%2014.5%20trillion (accessed on 1 October 2025).

[68] FAO (2024), FAOSTAT (database), FAO, Rome, https://www.fao.org/faostat/fr/#home (accessed on 26 November 2024).

[50] FAO (2020), FAO/INFOODS Food Composition Table for Western Africa (2019), FAO, Rome.

[52] FAO (2004), Handbook of Fishery Statistical Standards, FAO, https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e07e52b3-3864-480c-988b-11b6f96fcd04/content (accessed on 2 October 2025).

[70] FAO and AUC (2021), Framework for boosting intra-African trade in agricultural commodities and services, AUC, Addis Ababa.

[40] FAO and AUC (2021), Framework for boosting intra-African trade in agricultural commodities and services, AUC, Addis Ababa.

[41] Fontagné, L., C. Mitaritonna and Y. Zheng (2022), “Décollage du commerce intra-africain : l’impératif de croissance économique”, La lettre du CEPII, No. 425, CEPII, Paris.

[5] Foroutan, F. and L. Pritchett (1993), “Intra-Sub-Saharan African Trade: is it too Little?”, Journal of African Economies, Vol. 2/1, pp. 74-104, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jae.a036775.

[4] Gaarder, E., D. Luke and L. Sommer (2021), Towards an estimate of informal cross-border trade in Africa, UNECA, Addis Ababa.

[33] Golub, S. (2012), “Entrepôt Trade and Smuggling in West Africa: Benin, Togo and Nigeria”, The World Economy, Vol. 35/9, pp. 1139-1161, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2012.01469.x.

[49] Golub, S. and A. Mbaye (2009), “National Trade Policies and Smuggling in Africa: The Case of The Gambia and Senegal”, World Development, Vol. 37/3, pp. 595-606, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.08.006.

[71] Gyan, J. and B. Bajan (2022), “Market analysis on cocoa beans export: The case of Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire in West Africa”, Journal of Agribusiness and Rural Development, Vol. 66/4, pp. 375-384, https://doi.org/10.17306/j.jard.2022.01646.

[14] Hollinger, F. and J. Staatz (2015), Agricultural growth in West Africa: Market and policy drivers., FAO, Rome.

[58] IGC (2018), “The Realities of Cross Border Trade Between Sierra Leone and its Neighbours”, Policy Brief, No. 39403, IGC, Oxford.

[48] IMF (2024), GDP, current prices (database), https://shorturl.at/PwW5s (accessed on 26 November 2024).

[22] INS (2022), Enquête sur les flux commerciaux transfrontaliers non-enregistrés.

[23] INSEED (2019), Enquête sur les flux transfrontaliers non-enregistrés au Togo (EFNE-TOGO).

[21] INSTAD (2024), Enquête sur le Commerce Extérieur Non Enregistré. Edition 2022-2023..

[20] INSTAD (2022), Enquête sur le Commerce Extérieur Non Enregistré (ECENE)..

[60] Josserand, H. (2013), Assessment of volumes and value of regionally trade staple commodities, USAID.

[11] Karkare, P. (2021), “A system, not an error: informal cross-border trade in West Africa”, Discussion Papers, No. 300, ECDPM, Brussels.

[57] Keturakis, E. (2012), Trade Data Study - West Africa. Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea., USAID.

[9] Knaepen, H. and J. van Seters (2018), “Lessons from promoting market access for Beninese value chain actors to Nigerian markets”, Discussion Papers, No. 222, ECDPM, Brussels.

[38] Kuépié, M., M. Tenikue and O. Walther (2015), “Social networks and small business performance in West African border regions”, Oxford Development Studies, Vol. 44/2, pp. 202-219, https://doi.org/10.1080/13600818.2015.1082540.

[51] Laborde, D. and L. Deason (2015), Trade and Nutritional Contents, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340914152_Trade_and_Nutritional_Contents (accessed on 2 October 2025).

[34] Lesser, C. and E. Moisé-Leeman (2009), “Informal Cross-Border Trade and Trade Facilitation Reform in Sub-Saharan Africa”, OECD Trade Policy Papers, No. 86, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/225770164564.

[59] Maur, J. and B. Shepherd (2018), Connecting food staples and input markets in West Africa: A Regional Trade Agenda for ECOWAS Countries, World Bank, Washington DC.

[43] Mitaritonna, C. and F. Traoré (2017), “Existing Data to Measure African Trade”, Discussion Paper, No. 1618, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington DC.

[54] MLA (2017), “Sheep assessment manual”.

[53] MLA (2004), Goat assessment manual, Meat and Livestock Australia, https://www.mla.com.au/globalassets/mla-corporate/extensions-training-and-tools/documents/visual-assessment-guide.pdf (accessed on 2 October 2025).

[37] MoFA and IFPRI (2020), “Ghana’s Tomato Market”, MoFA-IFPRI Market Brief, No. 3, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and Ministry of Food and Agriculture of Ghana (MOFA).

[3] Odjo, S., F. Traoré and C. Zaki (2023), Africa Agriculture Trade Monitor 2023, Akademiya2063 and International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington DC and Kigali.

[35] OEC (2024), Mali (MLI) Exports, Imports, and Trade Partners, https://oec.world/en/profile/country/ml (accessed on 26 November 2024).

[36] OEC (2024), Niger (NER) Exports, Imports, and Trade Partners, https://oec.world/en/profile/country/ner (accessed on 26 November 2024).

[72] OECD (2024), Total Official Support for Sustainable Development (database), OECD, https://tossd.online/ (accessed on 24 November 2024).

[15] OECD/SWAC (2024), Africapolis Data, https://shorturl.at/9exAP (accessed on 24 November 2024).

[62] OECD/SWAC (2013), Settlement, Market and Food Security, West African Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264187443-en.

[63] Research Institute (IFPRI), I. (2014), Promoting Agricultural Trade to Enhance Resilience in Africa ReSAKSS Annual Trends and Outlook Report 2013, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, https://doi.org/10.2499/9780896298606.

[61] Staatz, J. and F. Hollinger (2016), “West African Food Systems and Changing Consumer Demands”, West African Papers, No. 4, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b165522b-en.

[16] Thériault, V. et al. (2024), “Diet transformations and changing food environments in the Sahel and West Africa”, West African Papers, No. 45, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/706a05f1-en.

[73] Tondel, F. et al. (2020), “Commerce du riz et développement de la filière riz en Afrique de l’Ouest : Une approche pour des politiques publiques plus cohérentes”, Document de réflexion, No. 283, ECDPM.

[13] Torres, C. and J. van Seters (2016), “Overview of trade and barriers to trade in West Africa: Insights in political economy dynamics”, Discussion Paper, No. 1955, ECDPM.

[44] UNCTAD (2024), Trade structure by partner (database), UNCTAD, https://hbs.unctad.org/trade-structure-by-partner/ (accessed on 24 November 2024).

[42] UNCTAD (2018), Regional Integration and Non-Tariff Measures in the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), UNCTAD.

[8] UNECA (2021), Enhancing the quality of informal cross-border trade in the Economic Community of West African States, UNECA, Addis Ababa.

[28] Valerio, V. (2020), “The structure of livestock trade in West Africa”, West African Papers, No. 29, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f8c71341-en.

[27] Villoria, N. (2008), Estimation of Missing Intra-African Trade, GTAP Research Memoranda, https://doi.org/10.21642/gtap.rm12.

[39] Walther, O. (2015), “Business, Brokers and Borders: The Structure of West African Trade Networks”, The Journal of Development Studies, Vol. 51/5, pp. 603-620, https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2015.1010152.

[10] World Bank Group (2020), Trade Facilitation West Africa Scale Cross-Border Trade Survey, World Bank Group, Washington DC.

Notes

← 1.  Of note are the initiative led by the Permanent Interstate Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS) to track unrecorded intra-regional food trade, ECOWAS-Informal Cross-Border Trade (ECO-ICBT) country surveys carried out by national statistical institutions in Benin, Togo and Nigeria and the Central Bank of Nigeria, and a detailed UNECA study conducted in 2021 (UNECA, 2021[8])

← 2.  “Entrepot” trade is a reality in the region, with traders specialising in importing items in countries where they are not, or weakly taxed, and shipping them informally to countries where they are protected through import duties. This is especially common between Benin and Nigeria; and Gambia and Senegal (Golub, 2012[33])

← 3.  These include border fees and bribes; phytosanitary and sanitary measures, import licences, certificates of origin and a wealth of other documentation, often unstandardised, with rules inconsistently implemented across countries; as well as the costs resulting from poor infrastructure and delays at border posts (e.g. food spoilage, loss of competitiveness) (Lesser and Moisé-Leeman, 2009[34]; UNECA, 2021[8])

← 4.  In 2022, the cumulated extra-regional imports for rice, wheat and palm oil stood at USD 9.8 billion for the 15 West African countries. The cumulated aid for food and agriculture for the same countries was estimated at USD 1.74 billion in 2022 by OECD (2024[72]).

← 5.  Data on West Africa intra-regional food trade in this report refers to the 15 countries that were members of the ECOWAS as of 2024, when the scope for the report was finalised: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo.

← 6.  The ratios of country surveys to recorded food trade, meanwhile, stand at 1:17 (Togo), 6:1 (Nigeria) and 9:1 (Benin) – 1.6 times, 7 times and 26 times greater, respectively, than the 1:3.5 ratio calculated for the region using ECO-ICBT data.

← 7.  In a minority of cases, ECO-ICBT collects data through direct observation at the border: when there is a known important flow that is not well represented in loading/unloading points.

← 8.  Mali’s 2 herd size was estimated at 12 million head in 2022 (FAO, 2024[68]). Assuming an offtake rate of 14% (FAO and ECOWAS, 2017_[21]), a domestic consumption rate of 65% (Aboubacar, 2017[64]) and an average price per head of USD 508 (Dembele, Diallo and Gourichon, 2014[65]), this would yield an annual intra-regional export value of USD 298 million for Mali, 2.7 times the recorded plus ECO-ICBT measurement. In Burkina Faso, the herd size is estimated at 10 million head (FAO, 2024_[20]), which would bring the country’s exports close to USD 300 million, making it double the amount of the recorded plus ECO-ICBT data. Niger’s herd size is estimated to be larger, at 18 million head (FAO, 2024_[20]). Using the same set of assumptions, Niger’s annual cattle exports to the region would be in the USD 450 million range – 13 times higher than what the study’s dataset captures.

← 9.  While complementing the ECO-ICBT and BACI data, the Togo country survey has significantly lower values than Nigeria’s and Benin’s, in relative terms.

← 10.  Nigeria’s data on unrecorded trade is more comprehensive than for other countries, due to the higher coverage of the survey conducted by the Central Bank of Nigeria. It was not possible to leverage similar comprehensive national surveys for total food exports and imports of regional powerhouses like Senegal or Côte d’Ivoire, for instance. Nevertheless, it appears clearly that Nigeria would retain its ranking if, hypothetically, perfect coverage was available for all unrecorded food trade in the region. Indeed, estimates of unrecorded food trade for Nigeria would also increase substantially in that scenario. Even if the currently available survey data covered 50% of unreported flows, an optimistic assumption, the remaining 50% would amount to USD 1.7 billion per year, more than the entire food trade of Togo, Guinea, Gambia, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Cabo Verde.

← 11.  The third place for Benin can be partly attributed to the bias attributable the more comprehensive data available for this country.

← 12.  Using 2014 as a reference year, to reflect the detailed country survey on unrecorded trade conducted for that year in Nigeria.

← 13.  Mauritania is the largest regional exporter of frozen fish (Ayilu and Nyiawung, 2022[29]) but was not included in this report as it was not a member of ECOWAS when the scope was defined in 2024.

← 14.  The production in Côte d’Ivoire is estimated at 450 000 tons per year, spread over 165 000 hectares of smallholder plantations and 75 000 hectares of industrial production, with 40 000 oil palm growers organised into 32 co-operatives.

← 15.  The literature often points to a more schematic bipolar specialisation – Sahelian (livestock, millet, sorghum) and coastal (fruits, vegetables, fish) (Tondel et al., 2020[73]; Badiane, Odjo and Jemaneh, 2014[32]).

← 16.  This reflects, to some extent, the fact that ECO-ICBT does not track “export crops” (coffee, cocoa) and manufactured food products (flavour cubes, concentrated milk). However, the study performed the same analysis using country survey data on unrecorded trade from Benin, Nigeria and Togo, with similar findings, except for a lesser amount of trade in unrecorded animal protein.

← 17.  This analysis is performed with the ECO-ICBT data alone, in the absence of quantities for country survey data.

← 18.  Quartile 4 of protein/100g.

← 19.  Unit values are calculated by dividing the export (or import) value of a product by its export (or import) volume.

← 20.  Recorded trade accounts for 56% (Mali) and 52% (Niger) of the BACI plus ECO-ICBT data.

← 21.  Cocoa and cashew nut excluded.

← 22.  And 70% of total world cocoa exports (Gyan and Bajan, 2022[71]).

← 23.  While many discussions about food trade in West Africa focus on reducing imports from outside the region and improving self-sufficiency, it is also crucial to consider exports. Increasing self-sufficiency is easier to achieve at the regional than the national level, because countries can tap into a wider range of food resources available within the territorial foodsheds that span West Africa national boundaries.

← 24.  We adjust the observed data for intra-regional food exports and imports by multiplying them by a correction factor of 3.3. This factor represents the ratio between the estimated total intra-regional food trade and the observed intra-regional food trade. Extra-regional food trade data (trade with countries outside the region) is left as-is, without adjustment. To estimate the total intra-regional food trade, we have combined data from two sources: BACI (recorded) and ECO-ICBT (unrecorded). We have then scaled this combined data using an average adjustment factor. This factor is based on the ratio of intra-regional food trade observed in more exhaustive country surveys (specifically for Nigeria, Benin, and Togo) over the BACI and ECO-ICBT data for these countries.

← 25.  Benin’s exports to India exclusively consists of cashew nuts. Exports to Nigeria are more balanced between rice (34%), maize (21%), palm oil (13%) and other commodities.

← 26.  There are West African food trade flows with 211 registered partners. Three-quarters of extra-regional food imports are distributed within 25 partner countries, and three-quarters of exports are distributed within 20 partners.

← 27.  The cut-off point for a significant food trade flow is arbitrarily set at USD 1 million in total for the period 2014-2022 – the median value being USD 14.5 million. If this cut-off point is not considered, every country in the region has recorded at least one food trade flow with every other country.