A partnership with academia

Building knowledge for trade and development

Vi Digital Library - Text Preview

African Continental Free Trade Area: Developing and Strengthening Regional Value Chains

Discussion paper by Dairon, Emily/UNCTAD, 2016

Download original document (English)

The paper, African Continental Free Trade Area, subtitled 'Developing and strengthening regional value chains in agricultural commodities and processed food products', comes after the African Union Assembly decided in an assembly in 2012 to boost intra-African trade and to fast track the Continental Free Trade Area (CFTA). The study aims to provide an analysis on requisite policies and measures needed for fostering the development and strengthening of regional supply and value chains in agricultural commodities and processed foods. Its aim is to contribute to the setting up and strengthening of regional agro-foods supply chains.

U N I T E D N AT I O N S C O N F E R E N C E O N T R A D E A N D D E V E L O P M E N T


AFRICAN CONTINENTAL FREE TRADE AREA:
Developing and strengthening


Regional Value Chains in Agricultural
Commodities and Processed Food Products






UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT
















AFRICAN CONTINENTAL FREE TRADE AREA:
Developing And Strengthening


Regional Value Chains In Agricultural
Commodities And Processed Food Products








































New York and Geneva, 2016














Note


The material contained in this publication may be freely quoted or reprinted but acknowledgement is


requested, together with a reference to the document number. A copy of the publication containing


the quotation or reprint should be sent to the UNCTAD Secretariat, at: Palais de Nations, 1211,


Geneva 10, Switzerland.


The designations employed and the presentation of the material do not imply the expression of any


position whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Secretariat concerning the legal status of any


country, territory, city area, or its authorities, or concerning the delimitations of its frontiers and


boundaries, or regarding its economic system or degree of development.


The views expressed in this publication reflect solely the views of the author.


This is an unedited publication




Acknowledgements


This study was prepared for UNCTAD by Ms. Emilie Dairon under the framework of a Development


Account Project 1213 AR on "Strengthening Capacities of African Countries in Boosting Intra-African


Trade". It was supervised by Mr. Bonapas Onguglo, Senior Economic Affairs Officer, UNCTAD, and


Mr. Ahmed Mutkhar, Economic Affairs Officer, UNCTAD. It was also reviewed by Mr. Joseph Kodzo


Banini, consultant with UNCTAD.




















UNCTAD/WEB/DITC/2016/4


United Nations Publication


Copyright©United Nations, 2016


All rights reserved




II


Table of contents




Table of contents ............................................................................................................................................. II


INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1


A: Background…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1


B: Focus on regional value chains in agricultural commodities and processed food products……… 1


C: Continental mechanisms linked to agriculture development…………………………………………… 2


D: Experience in regional free trade areas impacting agriculture………………………………….. ……...2


E: Objectives and methodology of the report………………………………………………………………… 2


CHAPTER 1……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4


LITERATURE REVIEW OF REGIONAL VALUE CHAINS IN AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES AND
PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS IN AFRICA……………………………………………………………………… 4


A: SOME KEY NOTIONS……………………………………………………………………………………… 4


1. Defining the value chain concept ......................................................................................................... 4


2. Key notions in the value chain approach ............................................................................................. 4


3. Applications at the regional level ......................................................................................................... 5


4. Limitations of the value chain concept ................................................................................................ 8


B: LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………………………………………………………………….. 8


1. The value chain approaches ................................................................................................................ 8


2. Value chains in Africa ......................................................................................................................... 10


3. Database: ITC Trade Map .................................................................................................................. 11


4. Websites ............................................................................................................................................ 11


5. Continental integration in Africa......................................................................................................... 11


CHAPTER 2…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12


EXISTING AGRICULTURAL REGIONAL VALUE CHAINS IN AFRICA…………………………………………. 12


A: METHODOLOGY AND SELECTION OF SECTORS…………………………………………………… 12


1. Outline of the value chain analysis .................................................................................................... 12


2. Existing value chains ......................................................................................................................... 14


B: AGRICULTURE IN AFRICA: OVERVIEW OF THE VALUE CHAIN…………………………………… 17


1. Macroeconomic profile ...................................................................................................................... 17


2. Gross mapping of the agricultural value chain .................................................................................. 18


3. Competitiveness ................................................................................................................................ 19


4. Investment and finance ...................................................................................................................... 22


5. Market access.................................................................................................................................... 24


6. Regional business environment ......................................................................................................... 26


7. Summary of the main features of agriculture and regional trade in Africa ........................................ 28


C: OVERVIEW OF THE VALUE CHAINS OF COMMODITIES HIGHLIGHTED BY THE ABUJA FOOD
SUMMIT…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 30


1. Macroeconomic indicators ................................................................................................................ 30


2: Socioeconomic indicators ................................................................................................................. 34




III


3: Elements about the mapping of the chains ....................................................................................... 34


4: Competitiveness ................................................................................................................................ 35


SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. 36


CHAPTER 3…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 38


ESTABLISHING NEW REGIONAL VALUE CHAINS TO ENHANCE VALUE ADDED IN AGRICULTURAL
COMMODITIES AND PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS: SOME KEY ELEMENTS………………………….. 38


A: PRIORITIZATION: METHODOLOGIES…………………………………………………………………….38


B: BUILDING A PRIORITISATION SHEET FOR AGRICULTURAL RVCs………………………………… 43


1. Economic criteria ............................................................................................................................... 43


2. Social criteria ..................................................................................................................................... 44


3. Environmental criteria ........................................................................................................................ 44


4. Regional integration criteria ............................................................................................................... 44


5. Criteria and their respective weight ................................................................................................... 44


C: SELECTION OF PROMISING COMMODITIES FOR RVCS……………………………………………. 45


1. The tea value chain: an existing RVC with growth potential at the regional and global levels……. 49


2. Competitiveness…………………………………………………………………………………………… 50


3. Potential to develop VA in the tea RVC…………………………………………………………………… 51


4. The potato value chain: a promising RVC with food security benefits……………………………… 52


5.Competitiveness………………………………………………………………………………………………53


6. Potential to develop VA in the potato RVC………………………………………………………………. 54


SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 55


CHAPTER 4…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 56


RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOSTERING AND ESTABLISHING REGIONAL VALUE CHAINS IN
AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES AND PROCESSED FOOD FOR AFRICA…………………………………... 56


1. Interventions at the “macro” level ...................................................................................................... 56


2. Interventions impacting competitiveness .......................................................................................... 57


3. Access to facilities and information ................................................................................................... 57


4. Investment and funding ..................................................................................................................... 57


5. Market access.................................................................................................................................... 58


6. Business environment........................................................................................................................ 58


7. The role of international organizations ............................................................................................... 58


REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 60


Notes………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 63






IV


List of tables




Table 1: Countries and geographic regions, income groups, AU-recognized REC, UN classification, and


other inter-governmental organizations in Africa ............................................................................... 6


Table 2: Recap of the main features of principal VC methodologies ............................................................ 10


Table 3: Outline of the analysis of the agricultural sector ............................................................................. 13


Table 4: Overview of intra-African and worldwide trade flows for the nine (9) Abuja commodities .............. 15


Table 5: List of the first ten agricultural products exported by Africa ........................................................... 18


Table 6: List of the first ten agricultural products exported by Africa to Africa ............................................. 18


Table 7: List of research centres and institutes on agriculture ..................................................................... 21


Table 8: A sample of market information systems in agriculture in Africa ................................................... 22


Table 9: Sample of regional-scale partnerships ........................................................................................... 23


Table 10: Average tariffs on agricultural products applied by the first ten African importers of agricultural


products ........................................................................................................................................ 24


Table 11 : Some sector associations ............................................................................................................ 26


Table 12: A list of sector-specific bodies ...................................................................................................... 26


Table 13: A list of some farmers’ associations .............................................................................................. 27


Table 14: A sample of other actors working on agriculture ......................................................................... 27


Table 15 : Parliamentarians’ associations and regional Parliaments interested in the development of


agriculture in Africa ....................................................................................................................... 28


Table 16: A summary of the agriculture sector in Africa ............................................................................... 29


Table 17 :Supplying countries to African markets for the nine continental commodities ............................. 31


Table 18: Export value per country for the nine continental commodities ................................................... 32


Table 19: Importing markets sourcing the nine continental commodities from African suppliers ................ 33


Table 20 Main priority criteria for the identification of value chains to be developed ................................... 39


Table 21: Main priority criteria for the identification of value chains to be developed .................................. 42


Table 22: Proposal for a customized assessment sheet to prioritize agricultural RVCs ............................... 43


Table 23: Proposed weighted assessment sheet to prioritize agricultural RVCs.......................................... 45


Table 24: Assessment of priority commodities for the development of VA-oriented RVCs ......................... 47


Table 25:Tariff applied to tea exports from the 3 main African suppliers by their top 5 African markets ..... 50


Table 26: tariffs applied by Morocco for the product 090240 ....................................................................... 51




Table of figures


Figure 1 NTMs faced by Burkina Faso and Kenya’s exporters (percentage) ................................................ 25


Figure 2: main outputs of the meat value chain in Eastern Africa (in percentage of exports) ....................... 34


Figure 3: Differences in processing green and black tea leaves ................................................................... 50


Figure 4 : basic representation of the potato value chain in West Africa ...................................................... 53










V


List of abbreviations and acronyms




ACP African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States


AFD French Agency for Development


AIDA Action Plan for Accelerated Industrial Development of Africa


AU African union


CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Program


CFC Common Fund for Commodities


CFTA Continental Free Trade Area


CGIAR Global Agricultural Research Partnership


COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa


DRC Democratic Republic of Congo


EAC East African Community


EU European Union


FAO Food and Agriculture Organization


FDI Foreign Direct Investment


FTA Free Trade Agreement


GDP Gross Domestic Product


GVC Global Value Chain


HS Harmonized System


ITC International Trade Centre


KTDA Kenya Tea Development Agency


LDC Least Developed Countries


LLDC Landlocked Developing Countries


MDG Millennium Development Goals


NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development


OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development


R&D Research and Development


REC Regional Economic Communities


ReSAKSS Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System


ROPPA Réseau des Organisations Paysannes et de Producteurs de l'Afrique de l'Ouest


RVC Regional Value Chain


SADC Southern African Development Community


SSA Sub-Saharan Africa


SIDS Small Islands Developing States


SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary


TNC Transnational Corporations


UN United Nations


UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development


UNECA United Nations Economic Commission for Africa


USD United States Dollars


VA Value Added


VC Value Chain


VCA Value Chain Analysis


WB World Bank


WTO World Trade Organization





INTRODUCTION


A: Background


The African Union Assembly decided in 2012 during its 18th Ordinary Session to boost intra-African trade
and to fast track the Continental Free Trade Area (CFTA). This CFTA is expected to boost intra-African


trade expansion, stimulate sustained economic growth and foster inclusive development. The CFTA is
more than a free trade agreement. It is perceived as a platform that would facilitate a process of inclusive
structural transformation of African countries, contributing to meeting Africa's 2063 Vision. In this process,


the CFTA would also help Africa to make progress in implementing the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable
Development Goals.


The present study aims to enhance knowledge among policy-makers, experts and private sector on


requisite policies and measures for fostering the development and strengthening of regional supply and
value chains in agricultural commodities and processed food products. This would contribute to the
development of intra-African trade in agricultural and food products including through the setting up and


strengthening of regional agro-food supply chains.




B: Focus on regional value chains in agricultural commodities and processed food products


The focus on regional value chains in agricultural commodities and processed food products comes at a
crossroads between different focus of the development community positively impacting the role of
agriculture in the African economy. Agriculture has been highlighted as an effective means to fight


poverty1. This is particularly noticeable in 2014, which was observed as the International Year of Family
Farming by the UN2. It is also celebrated as the Year of Agriculture and Food Security by the African
Union. For the regional organization, it is the opportunity to emphasize the central role of agriculture in


Africa’s economic growth3.


Such renewed focus comes with an increased awareness of the benefits and drawbacks of the sector for
the development of Africa. If agriculture is a unique vector for development, as an economic activity, as a
livelihood and as a provider of environmental services4, the heavy dependence of many African countries


to a restricted number of agricultural commodities and products5 has to be taken into account. For many
decades, African countries had been planning to diversify from commodities; now they have come again at
the centre of economic preoccupations, because of their socio-economic importance, illustrated inter alia


by the relevance of the sector for food security.


Nonetheless, according to regional institutions, Africa’s agriculture is characterized by low input, low


output and low value added, and ample opportunities exist for increased value addition in agriculture and
regional trade in Africa6. This is one of the reasons why agriculture and agri-food products are considered
under the prism of linkages development and upgrading, and against the paradigm of value chain


development. It is expected that, by moving up the value chain and developing backward and forward
linkages to the commodity sector, African countries can maximize direct and indirect effects, such as job
creation, environmental sustainability and social progress7.


The value chain concept has gained significant interest in the recent years, and is now broadly used as a
synonym of sector analysis and development8. The notion of “Global Value Chains” – GVC – has recently
served as a focus of some flagship events and publications in the trade and development community,
being the core issue of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and World


Trade Organization (WTO) Aid for Trade Review in 20139, and the central topic of the World Investment
Report of UNCTAD that same year10. However, for an improved and accelerated continental development,
it is now largely accepted that developing regional value chains for strategic agricultural commodities is


essential 11 . Developing regional value chains could exploit scale economies, lower production and
marketing costs, and help removing non-tariff barriers12 . As most countries export primary commodities,
some of them selling packaged and processed goods and other involved in marketing and branding13,


there seems to be room to develop synergies and ultimately stimulate intra-African trade.


The subject of agricultural regional value chains in Africa is thus at the turning point of the renewed focus
on agriculture, the concept of value chains and the relevance of the regional approach. Furthermore, it is


backed up by the existence of continental frameworks supporting agri-food development.







2






C: Continental mechanisms linked to agriculture development


Many regional frameworks exist on regional coordination in agriculture and development in Africa. In 2003,


member States of the African Union committed to the Maputo Declaration. They pledged to engage 10%
of their national budgets to agriculture and reach a 6% annual agricultural growth by 200814. In the
aftermath of the meeting, the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Program (CAADP) was


created. It is a programme of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and it provides a
vehicle for implementing the Maputo commitments through country-owned agricultural development
programs involving multiple stakeholders (i.e. technical experts, farmer organizations, agribusiness


companies, and governments)15. In December 2013, forty countries were involved in the programme16.


In 2006, the African Union Abuja Food Security Summit validated the selection of twelve commodities,
identified as vital for enhancing food production at continental and sub-regional levels17. In 2007, the


Conference of African Ministers of Industry endorsed the Action Plan for Accelerated Industrial
Development of Africa (AIDA). The Plan and its strategy for implementation adopted in 2008 has an impact
on agriculture, as it recognizes the scope for increased participation by Africa in commodity-based GVCs
and proposes tracks for improvement18. In 2012, the African Union Summit decided to fast track the


establishment of the CFTA by the indicative date of 2017, which would include liberalizing trade in
agriculture and commodities. These visionary and policy documents set the scene for the underlying focus
of the influence of the CFTA on the development of agriculture in Africa.




D: Experience in regional free trade areas impacting agriculture


Intra-regional trade flows among African countries remain low: between 6 and 12% according to sources.
When narrowing the focus on the sub-Saharan Africa agricultural market, figures amount from 1 to 6%19.
For the African Union, one of the main reasons lies in the slow progress by the Regional Economic
Communities (RECs) in becoming customs unions20. In this regard, the experience gained by the Common


Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the East African Community (EAC) and the Southern
African Development Community (SADC) is particularly interesting. They set up a Tripartite Free Trade
Agreement (FTA) which could pave the way for an Africa-wide elimination of trade barriers. Since


agriculture represents a large share of the three REC’s GDP, the experience can be of particular relevance
to assess the impact of a regional free trade area on agricultural commodities and processed goods, with
the objective of scaling it up to the continental level.


E: Objectives and methodology of the report


The report aims at presenting key modalities for fostering or adding value in regional supply chains in
agricultural commodities and processed food products, in relation to helping to establish the CFTA and


boosting intra-African trade. The target audience is African policy-makers, experts of the African Union
Commission, the regional economic communities and AU member States. It is intended to propose
guidelines on establishing regional value chains in agricultural commodities and processed food products.


The focus of this report is as follows:


- To provide a literature review on the many methodologies on value chain analysis and
development, particularly in the sector of agri-food products and in the African region, recapping
the definitions of the concepts used in the value chain paradigm (Chapter 1)


- To give an overview of the regional agriculture value chains of specific commodities existing at the
regional level, including mapping, presentation of actors and focus on special issues such as
trade barriers (Chapter 2)


- To suggest methods for prioritization of regional agricultural value chains to be further developed,
and to test this approach with the analysis of two priority commodities, the potential development
of regional value chains in these sectors, with a view on value addition (Chapter 3)


- To draw conclusions and policy recommendations for fostering and establishing regional value
chains in agricultural commodities and processed food products in Africa (Conclusion chapter).


The report is based on analysis of existing documentation (including books, reports, best practices, etc.)


and consultation of trade databases. The study was made out of secondary data review. No “fresh” data –
e.g. through interviews of stakeholders – was collected for this assignment. Furthermore, the fixed length
of the report (forty pages plus annexes) contained the scope. The study cannot be considered as an




3


exhaustive value chain analysis of determined agricultural sectors in Africa. It is aimed at examining the


concept of regional value chains, applied to agricultural commodities in Africa, for policy-makers willing to
quickly grasp the issues at stake and to understand the main features of value chain prioritization.




4


CHAPTER 1


LITERATURE REVIEW OF REGIONAL VALUE CHAINS IN AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES AND


PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS IN AFRICA


Prior to entering into a recapitulation of publications, reports and other documents concerning value


chains in agriculture, it is helpful to provide a brief review of the concepts considered in this study and
their relative importance in recent economic analysis.




A: SOME KEY NOTIONS


1. Defining the value chain concept


The recent growing interest for “chains” and the multiplication of publications on the matter highlights the


need for this study to set up a clear definition of the kind of chains that it will be scrutinize. Indeed, the
literature often talks about productive chains, value chains, marketing chains, supply chains, distribution
chains21, without giving the boundaries existing between these different approaches. It appears that in the


end, all these concepts tend to describe the same reality.


A value chain can be defined as the full range of activities which are required to bring a product or a service


from conception to delivery to final consumer and final disposal after use through different phases of


production22. It therefore includes primary production, transformation, marketing and final consumption.


A value chain does not necessarily mean that activities are constrained within one country. The trends in


global economy from the 1960’s, with globalization leading to an increasing fragmentation of production
processes, has led to an international dispersion of production activities that have seen the emergence of
borderless production systems23. When at least two countries are involved into production networks, this


characterises a global value chain24 (GVC).When placing the scope on agriculture, an agricultural value
chain can be defined as the set of actors and activities that bring a basic agricultural product from the field


to final consumption, and add value at each stage of the production process25. Here lies a fundamental


difference between the value chain concept and other well-known notion: a value chain focuses on how
value is created and added along the way, while a supply chain, for instance, highlights logistics and
procedures in order to maximize efficiency26. The ultimate goal of a value chain would be to analyse and


understand how incremental value can be created and distributed in the different segments of a
production chain, involving different actors and, in the case of a transnational chain, different countries.
Thus, the concept of value chain brings along other notions such as value addition, participation, linkages,


competitive advantage, and upgrading.




2. Key notions in the value chain approach


When considering transnational chains, value can be added at the domestic level or in another country.


Foreign value added measures the share of inputs that have been produced in other countries, and which
does not add to the country’s GDP. Domestic value added is the part of exports created in-country,
contributing to its GDP27. The role that countries or regions play in international production networks is


called GVC participation. Even if it is often considered by policy-makers as less important than domestic
value added, it is a useful indicator of how the exports of a country are integrated in the global economy.


It is underlying in the value chain approach that the concept of value chain is all about relations,
interactions and links. Here the notion of linkages is useful, as it is broadly used in the value chain


literature. Linkages can be defined as proactive approaches to connect producers (often it is implied that
they are smallholders) to consumers28.


The notion of competitive advantage is first a concept to use at company level. The competitive advantage


can be defined as the elements a company uses to provide customers with a product of equivalent value
compared with competitors, but a lower cost (strategy of cost reduction) or for which customers are willing
to pay a higher price (strategy of differentiation)29. At country level, the competitive advantage in a given


commodity is a result of interrelationships among activities involved in the production and delivery of the
product30.




5


Such concepts are useful when coming to the end objective of a value chain: the allocation of incremental


value all along the process. In the end, analysing a value chain is made to achieve a desirable
development outcome. It will allow identifying gaps, shortages and actors experiencing difficulties; all of
these leading to a less important domestic value added, and to a lesser contribution to GDP. It will


eventually segment the chain and highlight the most sustainable segments, where most countries want to
stay because they generate higher value added. This process is called upgrading31, or moving up.
Countries want to move up in the value chain, because capturing value added can mean gains for


producers (wages), for asset owners (return on investment), for consumers (better quality), and for
governments (tax revenues).


Upgrading relies on the combination of several factors: a policy component (trade policies to improve
productivity and quality); and a “progressive” component (testing the approach by selling final products


with higher value added to developing countries, before trying to comply with Northern markets’
requirements)32. This is where the regional approach in value chains can be of particular interest.




3. Applications at the regional level


(a) Regional value chains in agriculture


Recent GVC research has identified the growing importance of value chains organized at the regional,
rather than global, level33. Value chains are qualified as regional when their activities are spread beyond


national borders34, in the same region or, in the case of Africa, in the same continent. Regional value
chains (RVC) can cover two realities:


- when production is regional, and intended for regional consumption
- When production is regional, and supplies global markets35.


The latter is quite close to the global value chain concept.


In recent literature, despite their being relatively less numerous than global value chains, regional value


chains have been praised as the source of many benefits, especially for least developed and developing
countries. In agricultural commodities, they build on the competitive advantages offered by two or more
countries in a given agro-economic zone. Thus they could compensate the drawbacks of raw products


(perishability, bulkiness, quality variability and seasonality) 36 . They could enhance productivity and
competitiveness, inter alia, by fostering innovation and allowing economies of scale37. Then, they could


help countries to expand markets, through investment (considered as more viable at regional level38) and
regain power towards transnational corporations (TNC), which coordinate most of the GVC and are said to
be involved in 80% of global trade39. Ultimately, they could lead to an increase in value added, thereby
resulting in a growth of GDP. In a continent like Africa, benefitting from a great variety of conditions and


geographic basins, having unified regional governance with the African Union, it becomes particularly
relevant to analyse the mechanisms to stimulate the establishment of RVC.


(b) Current situation in the African region


Africa is composed of 54 countries. The Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System
(ReSAKSS)40 provides a convenient classification of countries, according to income groups (mineral-rich


countries (LI-1), countries with more favourable agricultural conditions (LI-2), countries with less favourable
agricultural conditions (LI-3), and middle-income countries (MI)) and Regional Economic Communities, 8 of
them being recognized by the African Union41. Africa can also be divided into five geographic regions:


Central, Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western.


There are other distinctions qualifying African countries, and potentially giving them special benefits or
programmes, such as the UN-led classification of Least Developed Countries (LDC), Landlocked
Developing Countries (LLDC) and Small Islands Developing States (SIDS)42.


The following table recapitulates the different memberships, geographical and policy classifications of the
54 countries of the African continent.





6


Table 1: Countries and geographic regions, income groups, AU-recognized REC, UN classification, and other inter-governmental organizations in Africa







7




Source: Author, adapted from ReSAKSS and UNOHRLLS.




8


This table shows the existing mechanisms and inter-relations between countries of the continent, and
highlights the potential of setting up the CFTA. Realizing the potential of intra-African trade requires
overcoming a number of challenges43, including overlapping memberships44; but if the continent could


eliminate barriers and constraints to regional trade, by setting up real RVCs, regional markets might be
instrumental in exploiting economies of scale and in selling the intermediate and final goods that have
value added locally and regionally.




4. Limitations of the value chain concept


The value chain approach is broadly accepted by the development community as an approach to
promoting development. It is the cornerstone of this study. Yet it has certain limitations. Hence it is useful
to keep in mind that developing value chains is not the only way to boost trade, development and


productive capacities in a given country or region.


One major limitation of the value chain approach concerns its methodology: it is said to be quite donor and
agency-led, with few tools to foster ownership. It is linked to another drawback, which is the lack of


unification of the concept: for instance, UN agencies – which are strong promoters of the concept – do not
have clear and unique definitions of the various notions, which would be largely communicated internally
or with partner institutions45. No international task force is working on VC46, to develop a coherent set of


concepts to be used by the development community and allow effective comparisons. As a result, there
are different methodologies to analyse a value chain or prioritize sectors47.


Another disadvantage lies in the fact that a value chain analysis is a snapshot48 of a certain sector, at a
given time; and it cannot capture the variation of one sector overtime. It is sector-specific and does not


take into account, to a certain extent, the influences that other segments of the economy can have over
the chain. Furthermore, to prepare a fully-fledged value chain analysis, the authors need time, relevant and
up-to-date documentation, field visits and sustained contacts with all the chain stakeholders, including


with government authorities. These features are often incompatible with the work of the development
agencies, constrained with time and financial limits. Therefore, many times agencies commissioning VC
analysis often find that such analyses cannot be used as a guide to make informed decisions49.




B: LITERATURE REVIEW


To prepare this study, a number of publications have been consulted. They can be classified into several
categories:


- General literature about the value chain approach and its methodologies, including in the
agricultural sector;


- Value chains in Africa; and
- Continental integration in Africa.


The most important are briefly described below50.




1. The value chain approaches


M4P (2008) Making Value Chains Work Better for the Poor: A Toolbook for Practitioners of Value Chain


Analysis, Version 3. Making Markets Work Better for the Poor (M4P) Project, UK Department for


International Development (DFID). Agricultural Development International. Phnom Penh.


The M4P tool book is a useful and practical guide, clearly written and with a number of figures and tables
to facilitate the understanding of sometimes complex economic concepts, aimed at clarifying the main


concepts of the value chain approach and providing clear tools to undertake an analysis of determined
value chains. It has a determined pro-poor bias, oriented towards smallholders but mainly towards
analysing the contribution to value chains of the poorest actors. It places a strong focus on stakeholders


and governance mechanisms.





9




ITC (2008). Sector Analysis for Value Chain Development. Geneva, June.


The International Trade Centre (ITC) methodology is addressed to national consultants assigned to collect


data for a value chain analysis. Thus it gives pertinent indications on the sort of information needed to
prepare a comprehensive report. It also provides a structure for value chain analysis, and illustrates with
examples the economic indicators that should be included in such a report.




Springer-Heinze, Andreas and Eiligmann, Alfons (2009). Value links: training seminar.


The ValueLinks methodology is used by the German Development Agency (GIZ). The ValueLinks
manual provides definition of the main concepts and details the main tools for value chain analysis,
especially on mapping, segmenting, chain design, partnerships and impact. It describes the


mechanisms of chain governance as well.




UNIDO (2009). Agro-value chain analysis and development. The UNIDO Approach. A staff working paper.


Vienna.


The working paper provides a hands-on approach to agricultural value chain. It gives to policy-makers and
value chain practitioners' quick tools for the prioritization of agricultural sectors, including assessment


score sheets. It considers the various components of sustainable development, including the impact of
value chain development on poverty reduction and employment in rural areas. It provides figures on
agricultural development and examples on value chain prioritization.




Webber, C. Martin (2010). Agriculture and Rural Development: Building Competitiveness in Africa's


Agriculture: A Guide to Value Chain Concepts and Applications. World Bank Publications. Washington DC


The report gives a progressive and comprehensive overview of key concepts of the value chain. It gives a
methodology with tools essential to value chain analysis, development and upgrading. Furthermore, it
gives pertinent indications, steps and case studies to design prioritization methods for value chain


interventions. It provides concrete cases on agricultural sectors in different countries to illustrate the value
chain tools.




UNCTAD (2013). World Investment Report. Geneva.


The UNCTAD report focuses on Global Value Chains and provides data on international trade. Its interest
for this study lies in its review of crucial concepts – value added, GVC participation, etc. – and its analysis
of the allocation of incremental value added following policy interventions and economic interactions.




OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid For Trade 2013: Connecting to value chains.


The background report of the this AidForTrade review is mainly based on a large survey addressed to
trade partners: policy-makers, entrepreneurs, etc. As a result, it highlights concerns and preoccupations of


different stakeholders facing the many challenges of developing value chains in all sectors. It thus gives a
reliable image of the reality of value chains today.




FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains – Guiding principles. Rome.


This publication focus on food sectors and designs a hands-on and convenient method to choose and
develop value chains. It functions as a cycle, with three stages and ten steps – guiding principles, based
on sustainable development. All the interactions and segments of value chains are covered: economic,
social and environmental impacts, systems, governance and market orientation, vision, upgrading


mechanisms, scale and multilateral interventions.







10




Table 2: Recap of the main features of principal VC methodologies


Source: Author, based on: M4P (2008) Making Value Chains Work Better for the Poor: A Toolbook for
Practitioners of Value Chain Analysis, Version 3. Making Markets Work Better for the Poor (M4P) Project,


UK Department for International Development (DFID). Agricultural Development International. Phnom Penh;


ITC (2008). Sector Analysis for Value Chain Development. Geneva, June; Springer-Heinze, Andreas and
Eiligmann, Alfons (2009). Value links: training seminar; Webber, C. Martin (2010). Agriculture and Rural


Development : Building Competitiveness in Africa's Agriculture : A Guide to Value Chain Concepts and


Applications. World Bank Publications. Washington DC; FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value
chains – Guiding principles. Rome.




2. Value chains in Africa


Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009. Developing
African Agriculture Through Regional Value Chains. Addis Ababa.


The Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) and AU annual report in 2009, fully develops the concepts of
agricultural value chains in Africa. It puts into perspective the different steps of regional integration in


agriculture, such as the Abuja Food Security Summit (2006). It analyses the different gaps that countries
have to face to develop RVCs, like tariff, trade facilitation and ICT low coverage. It reviews major
constraints to VC development and provides a number of relevant policy recommendations.


Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain Initiatives in ACP regions. Technical Centre
for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU).


The CTA (Technical Centre for Agriculture and Rural Cooperation between African, Caribbean and Pacific
Countries (ACP) and the European Union (EU)) provides many reports on agriculture development. This


report provides an overview of the state of the art on value chain development, including the limitations of
the VCA approach, and it evaluates the situation in each of the main geographical regions. It provides
indications on policy orientations by the regional economic communities, data on intra-regional trade, and


policy recommendations differentiated for each area. It if of interest for all the stakeholders directly and
indirectly involved in VC development – Parliamentarians, research institutes, business associations.


Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executives briefs


The CTA publishes these briefs focussing on one sector and analysing the most recent trends and figures.
Even if they are not in principle region-specific, the analysis of a region depends on the sectors; for
instance, the brief on the tea sector is oriented towards eastern Africa and the role of Kenya and


neighbouring countries.






Name Institution Date Sector-


specific


Region-


specific


Providing


methodological


tools


Case


studies


Making Value Chains Work Better for the


Poor


M4P,


DFID


2008 No No Yes No


Sector Analysis for Value Chain


Development


ITC 2008 No No Yes No


Value Links GIZ 2008 No No Yes No


Agro-value chain analysis and development UNIDO 2009 Yes No Yes Yes


Agriculture and Rural Development :


Building Competitiveness in Africa's


Agriculture : A Guide to Value Chain


Concepts and Applications


WB 2010 Yes Yes Yes Yes


Developing sustainable food value chains –


Guiding principles


FAO 2014 Yes No Yes Yes




11


3. Database: ITC Trade Map


Trade Map is a database developed by ITC to provide users with indicators and data of export
performance. It aims at facilitating strategic market research, reveal comparative and competitive
advantage and enabling identification of products with potential. It is based on trade data communicated


by countries. It uses the Harmonized System (HS), the international product classification protocol used by
customs officials which serves as a foundation for the international import and export classification
systems. The consequence is that the correspondence is not total between the agricultural products


chosen by policy-makers and the results in Trade Map (HS codes often more specific, or sometimes
overlapping). Furthermore, trade data are never complete, mirror data is sometimes used, and the
phenomenon of double counting (countries counting re-exports in export statistics, though only domestic
VA contributes to GDP) cannot be avoided.




4. Websites
The ReSAKSS website, along with 8 AU-recognized REC websites, are instrumental in giving policy


background, trends and figures. However, sometimes, they are not the most up-to-date.




5. Continental integration in Africa
African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade.


Issues Affecting Intra-African Trade, Proposed Action Plan for boosting Intra-African Trade and Framework


for the fast tracking of a Continental Free Trade Area. Addis Ababa.


The report comes back on the different steps to set up a CFTA, including since the Abuja Treaty in 1991,


and draws on the experience of the Tripartite Free Trade Area to formulate policy recommendations. It
highlights the roles and responsibilities of the African REC in the slow process of the CFTA establishment.
It details the functions of the different bodies proposed to monitor the CFTA implementation, such as the


High Level African Trade Committee or the African Business Council.


Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013. Making the


Most of Africa’s Commodities: Industrializing for Growth, Jobs and Economic Transformation. Addis
Ababa.


The annual report 2013, insists on the creation of forward and backward linkages between developing,
commodity-exporting countries. It provides agricultural case studies (cocoa, coffee) and illustrates the


barriers to trade with national examples. It presents regional initiatives on commodities, derived from the
twelve products selected in 2006 by the Abuja Summit. It gives strong justification to the establishment of
the CFTA.


Economic Commission for Africa, African Union and African Development Bank (2012). Assessing Regional


Integration in Africa (ARIA V): Towards an African Continental Free Trade Area. Addis Ababa.


The ARIA V publication gives the case for the establishment of the CFTA, in terms of economic impact,
movements of goods, current initiatives of the REC and regional financial integration. It analyses the
implications of the CFTA, its potential gains and losses, while raising awareness on the possible


inequalities in the distribution of these gains.


As a conclusion, it has to be noted that the literature specific to regional value chains in agriculture and
processed food – especially when it comes to developing “new” value chains” – in Africa is scarce. The


field of agricultural RVC in Africa is vast, every publishing entity (international or regional organizations,
technical cooperation bodies, etc.) has its own focus. Information has to be collected from different
sources, policy reports, technical briefs, etc., and is sometimes hard to compare.





12


CHAPTER 2


EXISTING AGRICULTURAL REGIONAL VALUE CHAINS IN AFRICA


This chapter presents the existing value chains in agricultural commodities and processed food products.
As the scope is large, it will be narrowed based on the priorities identified by the African regional


institutions. The chapter starts, firstly, with an introduction on the methodology and the selected value
chains; secondly, some main elements for the value chain analysis of agriculture in Africa are discussed;
and finally, a review is provided of the structures of the value chain in the selected sectors.




A: METHODOLOGY AND SELECTION OF SECTORS


1. Outline of the value chain analysis


In most of the cases, an exhaustive value chain analysis for a given sector requires the constitution of a
team to collect first-hand information, organize field visits and interviews, gather the relevant literature and


set up a plan to prepare the report. It is a work of several months and the result – often amounting to more
than 100 pages – has to be discussed with the concerned stakeholders, to draw conclusions and policy
interventions. The requests for value chain analysis addressed to international organizations are submitted
by member States, partner institutions or donor agencies51, but they are generally broadly accepted and


backed-up by the stakeholders at the national level (if the VC is national).


Preparing a proper value chain analysis for each regional value chain existing on the African continent
would not have been possible in this report. Nonetheless, the value chain approach as defined in the first


chapter has been followed in its main features. Based on the main methodologies presented in the first
chapter52 and on the requirements, a framework for the value chain overview has been defined.









13


Table 3: Outline of the analysis of the agricultural sector






Source: Author




Macroeconomic profile


Macroeconomic indicators


Contribution to GDP


Export value / market value


Export destinations


Value added


Socioeconomic indicators


Workforce including number of smallholders


% of women in total workforce


Level of skills of labour force and management


Mapping


Type of products sold


Segments


Surface


Issues (seasonality, environmental risks)


Competitiveness


Production costs


Productivity


Labour costs


Exchange rates


Access to facilities


Existing infrastructure (roads, etc.)


Energy supply


Access to technology / research / innovation / information


Investment


Domestic investment


FDI


Incentives to investors


Market access


Tariffs


Non-tariff measures


Certification and standards


Trade facilitation


Business environment


Business actors


Competition framework


Intellectual property




14


The table above shows a perfect image of information that would be required in order to present a fully-
fledged value chain analysis. The following parts of the study will display information corresponding to
most of the sections of the table; in some occasions, secondary data could not be obtained.


2. Existing value chains


In Africa, agriculture accounts for approximately 25% of GDP and more or less 70% of the labour force53,
depending on various sources. The sector could be worth 313 billion USD in 201354. Regional value chains


exist in the sense that demand exist in some African countries that can be satisfied by supply existing in


other African countries.


In 2006 during the African Union Food Security Summit in Abuja, twelve commodities were recognized as


vital for enhancing food production at continental and sub regional levels55. Nine of them were considered


as continental. They are:


ƒ Rice
ƒ Legumes
ƒ Maize
ƒ Cotton
ƒ Palm oil
ƒ Beef
ƒ Dairy
ƒ Poultry
ƒ Fisheries.


Three of them were considered as regional. They are:


ƒ Cassava
ƒ Sorghum
ƒ Millet.


The table below provides data on trade in the nine continental commodities in terms of intra-African trade
and global trade covering both exports and imports. It shows the existence of exchanges (supply and


demand) and potential for growth in intra-African trade. As the commodities selected by the Abuja Summit
cover often a bunch of different products, the collection of data was made out of specific Harmonized
System (HS) codes at four or two digits56.











15


Table 4: Overview of intra-African and worldwide trade flows for the nine (9) Abuja commodities


Abuja commodities Rice Legumes Maize Cotton Oil palm Beef/ livestock Dairy Poultry Fisheries




HS code in Trade


Map


1006


Rice


07 Edible


vegetables and


certain roots


and tubers


1005


Maize - Corn


52 1511


Palm oil & its


fraction


0202


Meat of bovine


animals, frozen


04 Dairy


products,


eggs, honey,


edible animal


product nes


0207Meat &


edible offal of


poultry meat


03Fish, crustaceans,


molluscs, aquatic


invertebrates nes


Exports to Africa 249765 465,219 495,053 239,679 198,598 87,750 626,866 88,026 704,450


Export to World


(total)


409416 3, 008,684 983,009 2, 103,184 240,235 145,507 1, 064,977 91,266 3, 967,569


Imports from Africa 250,271 438,975 429,820 207,677 215,976 77,770 601,235 73,692 766,395


Imports from world


(total)


5, 166,860 2, 134,713 4, 361,271 425133 3, 744,034 1, 540,749 5, 442,940 2, 158,434 3, 571,313




African exporters to


Africa


South Africa,
Egypt,
Uganda,
Tanzania,
Botswana,
Rwanda,
Benin, Liberia,
Côte d'Ivoire,
Malawi


South Africa,
Zambia,
Uganda,
Morocco,
Tanzania,
Burkina Faso,
Rwanda, Benin,
Kenya, Malawi


South Africa,
Zambia,
Uganda,
Morocco,
Tanzania,
Burkina,
Rwanda, Kenya,
Benin, Malawi


Zimbabwe,
Zambia, Burkina
Faso, Benin,
Sudan,
Mozambique,
South Africa,
Malawi, Togo,
Swaziland


Côte d'Ivoire,
Togo, Uganda,
Kenya, Ghana,
South Africa,
DRC, Congo,
Benin, Egypt


Botswana,
South Africa,
Namibia, Kenya,
Zambia,
Uganda,
Rwanda,
Malawi,
Senegal,
Burundi


South Africa,
Egypt,
Tunisia,
Morocco,
Senegal,
Uganda,
Rwanda,
Togo, Kenya


South Africa,
Namibia, Tunisia,
Malawi, Ghana,
Morocco, Kenya,
Uganda Zambia,
Seychelles


Namibia, Senegal,
South Africa,
Seychelles, Morocco,
Guinea Bissau,
Ghana, Mauritania,
Mozambique,


Zimbabwe




African importers


from Africa


Libya, DRC,
Zimbabwe,
Botswana,
Swaziland,
Senegal,
Sudan,
Nigeria,
Morocco,
Kenya


Libya,
Botswana,
Algeria, Angola,
Namibia, South
Africa, Lesotho,
Mozambique,
Sudan,
Zimbabwe


Zimbabwe,
Namibia,
Botswana,
Tanzania,
Kenya,
Swaziland,
Malawi,
Lesotho,
Mozambique,
Rwanda


South Africa,
Mauritius,
Egypt, Lesotho,
Morocco,
Algeria,
Zimbabwe,
Tunisia,
Swaziland,
Kenya


Senegal, Niger,
Rwanda,
Zambia, DRC,
Tanzania,
Ghana,
Burundi,
Burkina Faso,
Zimbabwe


South Africa,
Angola,
Mozambique,
Nigeria,
Lesotho,
Tanzania, DRC,
Swaziland,
Egypt, Zambia


Libya,
Botswana,
Namibia,
Angola,
Zimbabwe,
Mozambique,
DRC,
Swaziland,
Lesotho,
Kenya


Lesotho, DRC
Namibia,
Botswana,
Zimbabwe,
Mozambique, ,
Swaziland, Libya,
Angola, Malawi


DRC, South Africa,
Mozambique, Côte
d'Ivoire, Mauritius,
Angola, Zambia,
Cameroon, Benin,
Togo




African exporters


to world


Egypt, South
Africa,
Uganda, Niger,
Tanzania,
Botswana,
Rwanda,
Benin, Liberia,
Côte d'Ivoire


Egypt,
Morocco,
Kenya, South
Africa, Ethiopia,
Tanzania,
Tunisia,
Senegal,
Ghana,
Madagascar


South Africa,
Zambia,
Uganda,
Morocco,
Tanzania,
Burkina,
Rwanda, Kenya,
Benin, Malawi


Burkina Faso,
Mali, Benin,
Côte d'Ivoire,
Egypt,
Tanzania,
Mozambique,
Zimbabwe,
Zambia


Cameroon,


Côted'Ivoire,
Togo, Uganda,
Ghana, Kenya,
Niger, Egypt,
South Africa,
DRC, Congo


Botswana,
Namibia, South
Africa,
Swaziland,
Kenya, Senegal,
Zambia,
Uganda, Egypt


Egypt, South
Africa,
Morocco,
Tunisia,
Senegal,
Uganda,
Rwanda,
Togo, Kenya,
Ghana


South Africa,
Namibia, Tunisia,
Malawi, Morocco,
Egypt, Ghana,
Kenya, Uganda,
Zambia


Morocco, Namibia,
South Africa, Uganda,
Mauritania, Senegal,
Seychelles, Tunisia,
Tanzania, ,
Madagascar




16


African importers


from world


South Africa,
Benin,
Senegal, Côte
d'Ivoire,
Cameroon,
Ghana,
Mozambique,
Kenya, Niger,
Madagascar


Egypt, Algeria,
South Africa,
Angola, Libya,
Sudan,
Morocco,
Senegal, Kenya,
Côte d'Ivoire


Egypt, Algeria,
Morocco,
Tunisia, Libya,
Zimbabwe,
Namibia,
Botswana,
Nigeria, Senegal


Egypt, South
Africa,
Morocco,
Mauritius,
Tunisia,
Lesotho,
Algeria,
Zimbabwe,
Swaziland,
Ethiopia, Kenya


Egypt, South
Africa, Djibouti,
Angola, Ghana,
Uganda,
Kenya,
Tanzania,
Nigeria, Algeria


Egypt, Angola,
Algeria, South
Africa, Libya,
Morocco,
Gabon, Congo,
Ghana,
Equatorial
Guinea


Algeria,
Egypt,
Nigeria, Libya,
Morocco,
Angola, South
Africa, Ghana,
Sudan,
Mauritius


Angola, South
Africa, Benin,
Ghana, Libya,
Egypt, DRC,
Gabon, Congo,
Equatorial Guinea


Nigeria, Egypt,
Mauritius, South
Africa, Côte d'Ivoire,
Cameroon, DRC,
Morocco, Angola,
Seychelles




Source: Trade Map, accessed on 27 November 2014













17


It also presents the first ten African suppliers or importers for each commodity. For the beef sector, many
HS codes were potentially matching. In order to keep the same criteria than the other sectors (one single
HS code), the HS code corresponding to frozen beef has been chosen, as it was the most important in


terms of value. Units are in thousands of US dollars (USD).


The following remarks can be highlighted:


- 10 countries out of 54 never appear in the importers or suppliers of commodities. It can be an
indication of the size or structure of their economy (resource-based or service-oriented), or of


their lesser participation in commodity GVCs. They are: Cape Verde, Central African Republic,


Chad, Comoros, Eritrea, Gambia, Guinea, Sao Tomé and Principe, Sierra Leone and Somalia;


and
- There is continental demand in all of these sectors, and a continental supply base exists.


Therefore, it is logical that these sectors are analysed as regional value chains.




B: AGRICULTURE IN AFRICA: OVERVIEW OF THE VALUE CHAIN


1. Macroeconomic profile


(a) Macroeconomic indicators


Figures vary from one report to another, but remain in the same gross proportion. In terms of contribution
to GDP, agriculture is said to be worth 25% in most countries57. It can amount to 35% in some countries
and great variations are seen in the different RECs: for instance in SADC, the share of agriculture in


countries’ GDP is between 4 to 27%58. The share of total agricultural GDP per region is as follows: 36.4%
for Western Africa, 5.3% for Central Africa, 23.6% for Eastern Africa, 26.7% for Northern Africa and 8% for
Southern Africa59.


As for export value, figures vary. It is estimated to amount to approximately 68 billion USD annually60 (to be
compared to the total value of Africa’s exports to the world of 581,8 billion USD in 201361), and was
considered to be 2% of the global agricultural exports in 200662. The phenomenon of double counting
exist – as we can see in table 4, some countries are importers and exporters for the same product,


meaning for instance that they have imported a product, processed it and re-exported it. It is though less
important than in other countries, because many countries export natural resources or commodities with
little foreign input63.


Agricultural African exports go mainly to Europe and the Americas. The main importers of African agri-food
products are South Africa, Libya, Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia,
Mozambique, Angola, Lesotho and Mauritius.


In terms of value added, it is quite challenging to obtain an absolute value or a proportion. Authors
generally agree on the fact that VA in agriculture in Africa is low64, and has contracted or marginally
increased in most of the countries65. Although two thirds of agricultural value is added in developing


countries, it is worth 4.5 times less than value added in industrialized countries. Another striking figure is
that developing countries process only 38% of their agricultural products, compared to 98% in developed


countries66. However, measuring value added is a key indicator of the performance of a value chain67.


Efforts have to be put on measuring VA and on preparing strategies for higher VA products. Most reports
highlight that more VA can be obtained by more processing68; and that space exist for more processing


since a large share of agricultural exports in Africa are primary products and raw material.


(b) Socioeconomic indicators


Agriculture provides jobs to approximately 70% of the labour force in most countries69, and a continental
average gives the figure of 60% of the total workforce employed in the sector70. As for the level of
employment of the rural workforce, it is evaluated between 75% and 90%71. The proportion of women in


this workforce is high; they are said to produce more than 70% of food in most countries, and they are
generally considered as the dominant producers, traders and nutrition providers72.


Calculating income generation without having access to producers is arduous. Sources converge on the
fact that 70% to 80%73 of population living in rural areas, depends on agriculture for food, employment


and income.


The skills level of agri-food producers in general in Africa is assessed as low. One of the main challenges is
the lack of market information and marketing skills. Other shortages concern management tools and a bias


towards production techniques74. Training in fields such as certification, SPS regulations, production




18


techniques, is needed. Awareness around these issues has risen in the recent years. The development
community and partner countries are willing to raise the profile of agricultural workers, and the
development of skills to increase productivity is now embedded in most of the development initiatives in


agriculture75.




2. Gross mapping of the agricultural value chain


The products sold by African suppliers are diversified. Apart from the nine commodities identified during
the Abuja 2006 Summit, which will be scrutinized in the next section, the main agricultural commodities
and agri-food products exported by Africa to the world and to Africa are described in the following tables.




Table 5: List of the first ten agricultural products exported by Africa


HS group Product Export value in 2013


18 Cocoa and cocoa preparations 8,716,337


08 Edible fruit, nuts, peel of citrus fruit, melons 6,717,259


03 Fish, crustaceans, molluscs, aquatic invertebrates nes 3,967,569


09 Coffee, tea, mate and spices 3,581,151


07 Edible vegetables and certain roots and tubers 3,008,684


24 Tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes 2,999,244


17 Sugars and sugar confectionery 2,988,207


52 Cotton 2,890,413


12 Oil seed, oleagic fruits, grain, seed, fruit, etc, nes 2,421,699


22 Beverages, spirits and vinegar 2,335,350


Source: Trade Map, accessed on 23 November 2014




Table 6: List of the first ten agricultural products exported by Africa to Africa


HS group Product Export value in 2013


24 Tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes 1,713,156


17 Sugars and sugar confectionery 1,497,272


33 Essential oils, perfumes, cosmetics, toileteries 1,281,881


22 Beverages, spirits and vinegar 1,120,022


09 Coffee, tea, mate and spices 997,120


10 Cereals 899,894


15 Animal,vegetable fats and oils, cleavage products, etc 864,282


03 Fish, crustaceans, molluscs, aquatic invertebrates nes 704,450


11 Milling products, malt, starches, inulin, wheat gluten 639,076


04 Dairy products, eggs, honey, edible animal product nes 626,866


Source: Trade Map, accessed on 23 November 2014




There are some variations between regions: for instance, in COMESA starchy staples, pulses, fresh fruits
and vegetables, meat, fish and dairy products account for nearly 75% of the value of all regional




19


agricultural production; and in general, domestic markets for food staples dominate agricultural markets in
Africa76.


To produce these stocks, several functions are needed. They can be divided into several occupations:


- Input suppliers (seeds, fertilizers, etc.)
- Farmers
- Processing industries
- Service providers
- Traders
- Retailers
- Etc.


Generally, it is considered that a local supply base (such as pesticide manufacturers or seedling suppliers)
contributes to secure access to inputs for exporting firms77. Thus it is crucial, for an agricultural sector


willing to be export-oriented, to have an easy access to such segments of the VC. It is usually mentioned
that most of African agriculture is characterized by low input.


No detailed description of each segment will be made in this section; however, a common assertion about
the processing segment, in the specialized literature, says that African manufacturers mainly concentrate


on light consumer goods and agro-processing, generally with a limited size and scope, though, according
to OECD the industries and services linked to agriculture in value chains often account for more than 30%
of GDP in emerging and urbanized countries78. African agro-processors are said to be vulnerable to the


end or erosion of trade preferences as trade liberalization goes further79.


The farming segment of the agriculture VC is one of the most studied parts. Generic figures concerning
arable land in Africa, turn around 733 million hectares80, with Sub-Saharan Africa accounting for 12% of


the world arable land81. Authors usually agree on the fact that the surface of arable land is enough to feed
the African population, if efficiently farmed82.


It is underlying in many of the publications, that most of the stakeholders – at least for the farming


segment – are smallholders, most of them with poor vertical or horizontal linkages to other segments of
the VC. This aspect will be further explained in the specific description of the commodities.


Concerning cross-sector issues linked to the different segments – such the effects of climate change –
there is a broad bunch of aspects to be covered; they will just be mentioned here. Climate change is an


issue; it may cause losses of 25% of agricultural output in Africa83, but forecasts by 2100 predict a loss of
6 to 47% of agricultural revenue in Africa84 because of climate change. As the sector heavily depends on
rain-fed production, especially in Eastern and Southern Africa85, the question is particularly striking.


Agriculture as a sector is not exempt of criticism, as it is the larger user of water (70% of the world
consumption) and one of the main contributors to greenhouse gas emissions (30%). But the awareness on
environmental issues is growing; and today, trends in agro ecology and agro-forestry seek to enhance


yield, quality of production and soil regeneration86. It has to be mentioned as well that the sector is also a
provider of environmental services – which is generally unrecognized, and non-remunerated sequestering
carbon, managing watersheds, and preserving biodiversity87.




3. Competitiveness


(a) Production costs


Production costs are major aspects to deal with in agricultural value chain. They are the main decision
factors for sourcing and investing in value chains, as they represent a comparative advantage. Figures
vary, but in general there is agreement around the fact that agricultural productivity in Africa is inferior to


the world average. More details will be provided in the sections on specific commodities. Some authors
advance the fact that agricultural productivity is the lowest of the world, with 335 USD of VA per worker88.
Labour productivity highly depends on education, and access to education has increased in rural areas


thanks – inter alia – to the context of the Millennium Development Goals89. Therefore a movement in labour
productivity is expected in the near future.


There is growth in yield – 6 to 9% on average – but at a slower path than for other regions of the world,
and for some sectors, prospects of yield growth are negative because of climate change90. Minor


variations between RECs exist in yield growth. Yield enhancing practices are still rare, especially in Sub-
Saharan Africa91.


Labour costs are challenging to calculate. The circulation of workers remains an issue, as the free mobility


of persons in Africa is not attained yet, except for some groups in some RECs. Most of the RECs – at least




20


CEMAC, CEN-SAD, COMESA, EAC, ECCAS, ECOWAS, SACD, UEMOA and UMA have protocols and
regulations on the free movement of people, labour, services, right of establishment and right of
residence92. There are variations among on the concrete implementation of mobility of workers: in general,


protocols on FTAs often allow for the temporary entry of business people into the territory of the trading
partners and they also permit movement of labour to take up work93. However, a large share of labour
migrations in agriculture is informal and non-declared.


Exchange rates variability is a crucial factor to take into account, as multiple and different national
currencies almost all of which are non-convertible also raise trade costs94. Some RECs are already
monetary unions (UEMOA, CEMAC). Others are making progress to address currency convertibility in their


regions, such as COMESA and ECOWAS95




(b) Access to facilities


A common assertion when tackling the issue of agriculture in Africa – especially in Sub-Saharan Africa – is
to point out the lack of infrastructure, especially when it comes to transportation. In Sub-Saharan Africa,


the lowest coverage in road density is 31 km for 1000 km2, though the average road density is 137 km for
1000 km296. Furthermore, unpaved road are impassable during the wet season or violent rain episodes.
Bad transport conditions are major explanations for food waste: they can result in inadequate storage,


rupture of the cold chain and increase maintenance costs for trucks and transports companies.
Inadequate infrastructure, especially for road, is often quoted by donor countries and partner countries as
a major barrier for firms97. A project exists for a trans-African road network, connecting cities of more than


500000 inhabitants98.


Africa produces approximately 3% of the world electricity99. Power outages are frequent and are a threat
to the development of a modern agriculture. But developments are under implementation in the energy


sector: RECs have evolved towards establishing regional power pools, interconnected electricity grids,
formulating master plans for regional power development, and developing environmentally benign power
sources. SADC, UEMOA, ECOWAS and EAC have launched pools100. Other transnational electricity supply
initiatives exist, not necessarily involving the RECs; but efforts on the development of a coherent, efficient


energy supply have to be boosted.


As for the access to research, technology, innovation and generic information, the lack of ambition and
thus investment in research and development (R&D) is a subject of concern. Worldwide, developing


countries have usually a higher percentage of total agriculture spending in research than developed
countries: 2.5% versus 1%. In Africa, this figure is 0.7%. If analysed as a share gross national product,
R&D expenditures amount to 0.28% in Sub-Saharan Africa, compared to 0.39% on average in developing


countries, and 0.72% in Asia101. Furthermore, the private sector is not committed enough to R&D,
amounting for only 2% of total agricultural research102. R&D investments are necessary to maintain and
expand the presence of a country in global markets103, and are vital to enhance yield. Geographical areas


facing this limited access to technology are mainly Western, Eastern and Southern Africa104. However, it
does not impede some interesting initiatives to be implemented, especially in soil (interactions soil / plant)
and production systems in the context of agro ecology105. There are a number of research centres on
agriculture operating in Africa, some Africa-originated, others from a global origin.







21


Table 7: List of research centres and institutes on agriculture


Research centres and institutes


CGIAR Global Agricultural Research Partnership


IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute


ASARECA Association for strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central


Africa


CORAF / WECARD Conseil Ouest et Centre Africain pour la Recherche et le Développement


Agricole / West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and


Development


FANRPAN Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network


FARA Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (in English)


AERC African Economic Research Consortium


IITA International Institute for Tropical Agriculture


PRASAC-CEMAC Pôle Régional de Recherche Appliquée au Développement des Systèmes


Agricoles d'Afrique Centrale




Source: Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain Initiatives in ACP regions.
Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU); IRD (2013). Sciences au Sud. 72.


Novembre – Décembre.




As for market information, progress has been boosted by the implementation of the CAADP, and systems


are being implemented in the context of development projects, regional initiatives or private sector
opportunities.









22


Table 8: A sample of market information systems in agriculture in Africa


Name Regional Economic Community Country


Regional Agricultural Trade Intelligence Network (RATIN)


Kenya Agricultural Commodity Exchange (KACE) Kenya


Malawi Agricultural Commodity Exchanges (MACE) Malawi


COMESA-wide Food and Agricultural Marketing Information


System (FAMIS)


COMESA


COMESA Trade Information Network (TINET) COMESA


SADC Agricultural Information Management System (AIMS) SADC


SADC Livestock Information Management System (LIMS) SADC


African Agricultural Markets Programme (AAMP) Kenya, Uganda,
Tanzania, Malawi,
Zambia, and
Mozambique


Agricultural Information System (AGRIS) Compact CAADP / ECOWAS


Réseau des systèmes d’information des marchés agricoles en


Afrique de l’Ouest (RESIMAO)


Benin, Burkina Faso,
Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea,
Niger, Mali, Senegal,
Togo, Nigeria


Esoko Africa (private SME)


CommodAfrica


CopHorti - Communauté de pratiques sur l'Horticulture


Border Information Centers (BIC) project on the Ghana-Togo


Aflao border


ECOWAS, UEMOA, Abidjan-
Lagos Corridor Organization
(ALCO) sponsored by the World
Bank, the USAID-sponsored West
Africa Trade Hub


Ghana, Togo


EAC information Centre in Dar-es Salaam EAC


Source: Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain Initiatives in ACP regions.


Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU); http://www.sadc.int ;
http://www.comesa.int ; https://esoko.com ; http://www.eac.int ; http://www.resimao.net ;
http://www.resakss.org




4. Investment and finance
In 2012, for the first time ever, developing economies absorbed more Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) than
developed countries106. This can be an opportunity for agricultural VCs. However, Africa is by far the area


with less FDI: around 60 billion of USD, 107stagnating in 2011 – 2012. Both domestic investment and FDI in
agriculture are considered as low108, and the inability to attract foreign investment is seen as a critical
issue. As risks and thus income uncertainty is a major hurdle to investment – harder to overcome in
agriculture, multilateral initiatives have been taken on agricultural risk management. Other initiatives to


boost investment in agriculture thanks to easier connections have been launched, through platforms.


It is expected that some of these platforms foster investments. It is also expected that incentives will be
developed109 by countries willing to multiply FDI in their territory.




23


Table 9: Sample of regional-scale partnerships


Name Countries Partners Sector / scope


Grow Africa Ghana, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Tanzania,
Mozambique, Burkina Faso and Kenya


AUC, WEF, NPCA, USAID, WB, FAO and
others


Platform for investment


3ADI Africa AUC, AFDB, FAO, IFAD, UNIDO Technical assistance on value
chains


African Agriculture Fund Africa IFAD, UNIDO, AFD, AfDB, AECID, FISEA,
DBSA, BOAD, EBID


Investment


Africa-Brazil Marketplace Initiative Africa FARA, Embrapa, ABC, DFID, GATES, IFAD,
WB.


Partnership on innovation


Making Finance Work For Africa Africa AUC, GIZ, BMZ, AfDB, AFRACA Agricultural finance


Pan African Agribusiness and Agro


Industry Consortium (PanAAC)


Africa AU, NEPAD Platform for agribusiness
partnerships


African Agricultural Growth and


Investment (AAGI) Task Force


Africa World Economic Forum, Governments of
Tanzania, Mozambique, NEPAD


Platforms for public-private
investment in agriculture


Platform for Agricultural Risk


Management (PARM)


Africa Afd, IFAD, FAO, WFP, World Bank Platform on agricultural risk
management


Forum for Agricultural Risk


Management


Africa SECO, WB, Dutch Ministry of Foreign
Affairs


Platform on agricultural risk
management


Source: OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood.





24


5. Market access
Measuring market access consists in examining potential barriers to the entry in a specific market: tariffs
barriers, non-tariff measures 110 including certification and standards, sanitary and phyto-sanitary


measures. Trade facilitation (i.e. export procedures such as custom delays) will also be tackled in this
section.


According to regional institutions, intra-African trade in agriculture faces a higher rate of protection than


non-agricultural sectors. It means that, on average, African countries impose higher tariffs to agricultural
products supplied by African countries than to agricultural products supplied by other countries in the
world111.


The tariffs applied by African countries to agricultural products are by no means unified. On average, they


apply higher tariffs to agricultural products than to other kinds of products.


Table 10: Average tariffs on agricultural products applied by the first ten African importers of


agricultural products


Average MFN tariffs on


agricultural products


Average of preferential tariffs on


agricultural products


Angola 18.21 18.21


Botswana 17.39 16.53


Congo Democratic Republic of 11.76 11.76


Kenya 28.27 26.34


Lesotho 17.62 16.75


Libya 0 0


Mozambique 11.57 11.06


Namibia 17.62 16.75


South Africa 17.53 14.71


Swaziland 17.62 16.75


Zimbabwe 24.84 23.22


Source: Market Access Map, accessed on 27 November 2014




Generally, import tariffs increase according to the degree of processing: this is called tariff escalation.
Tariff escalation dissuades countries from moving up in the commodity value chains112. Furthermore, tariffs
applied by African countries to have been growing in the recent years


Non-tariff measures (NTMs) are a major impediment to international trade and can prevent market


access. They can be defined as policy measures, other than custom tariffs and including technical
regulations, product standards and customs procedures, that may have an impact on international
trade113.


It is challenging to obtain information about NTM faced by individual countries in Africa, especially in the
agri-food. The International Trade Centre’s Market Access Map114 compiles data (based on what is
reported by countries) and runs surveys among exporting companies. Since 2012, the organization has


published monographs on company perspectives for Burkina Faso, Morocco, Peru, Malawi, Madagascar,
Mauritius, Rwanda, Kenya, Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire and Tunisia115. Other African countries, such as Egypt,
Guinea or Tanzania, have been or are being surveyed. Figures show that a large number of African


exporting companies are facing NTMs: from 38% of companies in Egypt, up to 95% in Guinea. There is a
wide variation of NTMs according to the sector, but of them are technical measures including certification
requirements and technical regulations. Internal barriers exist, such as national impediments (export-
related measures within the exporting countries) and barriers applied to trade within regional trade


agreements116.




25




Figure 1: NTMs faced by Burkina Faso and Kenya’s exporters (percentage)






Source: International Trade Centre, http://www.intracen.org/itc/market-info-tools/non-tariff-measures/




UNCTAD also provides NTMs through its database on TRAINS NTMs. These cover official measures as
reported by government authorities.


Certifications and standards are a major impediment to agri-food trade. It is often quoted by developing


countries, and especially LDCs, as a barrier to enter high-end markets – for instance, Botswana unable to
enter the EU beef market, or Namibia the grape market117. But it is also crucial in intra-African trade. In
general, 60% of firms cite quality and safety standards compliance as the main factor influencing sourcing


and investment decisions118. To meet standards and to be certified, products need to be tested in
laboratories: often such structures do not exist in LDC, and products must be sent to a country where a
certifying structure exist, before being shipped to the end market119.


In addition to compliance to mandatory regulations, voluntary sustainability standards exist, that can be an
asset for sustainable production and trade. According the ITC’s Standards Map, at least 49 standards
exist for agriculture products supplied by African countries to African importers120.


Trade facilitation is a very important in cross-border trade. Trade facilitation practices, like customs


procedures and delays, are cumbersome and slow, and have a great impact on the final price of the


8.1


54.7


1.2


9.3


5.8


20.9


Burkina Faso


Technical regulations


Certification requirements


Pre-shipment inspections
and other formalities


Taxes and other charges


Rules of origin


Export-related measures
(applied by the exporting
country)


13


42


91


27


0
4


1
3


Kenya


Technical regulations


Conformity assessment


Pre-shipment inspections and other
formalities
Charges, taxes and other para-tariff
measures
Rules of origin


Export-related measures (applied by the
exporting country)
Quantity control measures


Price control measures


Anti-competitive measures




26


product, by increasing the cost of moving the raw, semi-finished or finished agrifood product 121 .
Obviously, it also has an impact on the perishability of the item. For 60% of lead firms in importing
agricultural products from developing countries, customs delays are the main trade problem when dealing


with developing country suppliers122. Delays at customs amount to 12 days in Sub-Saharan Africa,
compared with 7 days in Latin America and 6 days in Central and East Asia123.


The problem has been identified and tackled by many institutions. The World Bank has been working on


public-private partnerships to facilitate goods clearance. UNCTAD has developed the ASYCUDA 124
system, a computerised customs management system covering foreign trade procedures showing
impressive efficiency gains: in Cambodia for instance, at the checkpoints served by ASYCUDA, more than


90% of import and export goods are cleared from customs within 24 hours after the presentation of
customs declaration125. African RECs, particularly COMESA, ECOWAS, EAC and SADC, together with
partners, are working on harmonizing, simplifying and automating customs procedures and


documentation126. Other kinds of partnerships, like African Alliance for E-Commerce (AAEC), are facilitating
exchange of information and experiences on trade facilitation, and promoting a “single window”
concept127.




6. Regional business environment
The business environment around the agriculture sector in Africa is generally described as not favourable.
The regional and continental integration is weak128. There are sector actors working on regional issues,


including regional business associations, but they often lack of recognition, support and funding.


Professional networks and associations representing actors of the commodities value chains can be
classified into several categories:


- Sector-specific bodies


Table 11 : Some sector associations


Sector Associations


EAGC East African Grain Council East Africa Grains Council Training Institute


ESADA Eastern and Southern Africa Dairy Association


EAFCA Eastern Africa Fine Coffee Association


RECAO Network of Chambers of Agriculture of West Africa


Source: Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain Initiatives in ACP regions.
Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU).


Table 12: A list of sector-specific bodies


Sector-specific centres


AfricaRice Africa Rice Centre


CIP International Potato Centre


World Cocoa Foundation World Cocoa Foundation


CARBAP Africa Centre for Research on Banana and Plantain


Source: Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain Initiatives in ACP regions.
Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU).



- Producers’ associations




27



Table 13: A list of some farmers’ associations


Farmers' associations


PAFO Pan African Farmers Organization


EAFF Eastern Africa Farmers Federation


PROPAC Plateforme Régionale des Organisations Paysannes d'Afrique Centrale


ROPPA Réseau des Organisations Paysannes et de Producteurs de l'Afrique de l'Ouest


SACAU Southern African Confederation of Agricultural Unions


Source: Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain Initiatives in ACP regions.
Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU).




- Other actors intervening in agriculture in Africa


Table 14: A sample of other actors working on agriculture


OTHERS


AGRA Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa


ATC Agri and Co-operative Training and Consultancy Services Ltd


HubRural


CTA Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation ACP EU


CFC Common Fund for Commodities


IFDC International Fertilizer Development Centre


AFOMDNet Réseau d'Analyse sur les Facteurs d'Offres Vivrières, de Marché
et de Diversification


FIDAfrique-IFADAfrica International Fund for Agricultural Development - Fonds
International de Développement Agricole


ACTESA Alliance for Common Trade in Eastern and Southern Africa


African Alliance for E-Commerce (AAEC) Trade facilitation


Pan-African Chamber of Commerce and Industry


Source: Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain Initiatives in ACP regions.


Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU).




The role of Parliamentarians has recently been highlighted by several actors and initiatives.


Parliamentarians are responsible for drafting, voting and assessing trade policies conducive to a better
and more integrated continental agriculture. They have to be knowledgeable of the particular issues of
agriculture. Regional Parliaments exist, and are mobilized in support of sustainable agricultural sector.









28


Table 15 : Parliamentarians’ associations and regional Parliaments interested in the development of


agriculture in Africa


Parliaments


AWEPA Association of European Parliamentarians with Africa


EALA East African Legislative Assembly


SADC-PF Southern African Development Community Parliamentary Forum


PF-ICGLR Parliamentary Forum of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR)


PAP Pan-African Parliament


CEMAC-P Parliament of the Economic and Monetary Community of Central Africa


ECOWAS-P Parliament of the Economic Community of West African States


Source: Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain Initiatives in ACP regions.
Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU).




When it comes to competition framework and intellectual property rights, most RECs do not have regional
frameworks to comply with. Some countries have not established independent competition authorities and


do not possess a corpus of legislation on the matter. On the contrary, some RECs have their department
on competition and in most cases, a regional competition policy, such as COMESA, CEMAC, SADC or
WAEMU.


Though the general regional policy environment is described as unfavourable by regional institutions129, it
is true that such environment has been positively evolving, with continent-wide initiatives to boost the
sector, and with the marked political will towards the establishment of the CFTA. However, the region will
be evaluated on results. For the moment, only 9 out of 54 countries130 have complied with the Maputo rule,


edited in 2003, and has invested at least 10% of their national budget in agriculture. This is a good
indicator of the long road remaining for regional institutions to encourage the development of agriculture
as a part of regional policies.




7. Summary of the main features of agriculture and regional trade in Africa


Many issues have been tackled in this chapter. Precisions about the sectors defined by the Abuja Summit
in 2006 will be given in the following section, mainly on export values and competitiveness issues. A table
recapping the figures and trends examined in this section is useful.





29


Table 16: A summary of the agriculture sector in Africa


Macroeconomic profile


Macroeconomic indicators


Contribution to GDP Around 25%


Export value / market value 68 billion USD


Export destinations South Africa, Libya, Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe, Botswana,
Namibia, Mozambique, Angola, Lesotho and Mauritius


Value added Low; approx. 38% of agricultural commodities are processed


Socioeconomic indicators


Workforce including number of smallholders 70% of the total workforce, 75 to 90% of the rural workforce, most of them
smallholders


% of women in total workforce At least 70%


Level of skills of labour force and management Low


Mapping


Type of products sold by African suppliers to


African counterparts


Tobacco, sugar, essential oils, beverages, coffee / tea, cereals, animal and vegetal
fats and oils, fish and crustaceans, milling products, dairy products


Segments Input suppliers (seeds, fertilizers, etc.), Farmers, Processing industries, Service
providers, Traders, Retailers, Etc.


Surface 733 million ha, 12% of the world arable land


Issues (seasonality, environmental risks) Losses because of climate change: 25% on the short term, 6 to 47% on the long
term


Competitiveness


Production costs


Productivity 335 USD of VA per worker. Growth in yield: 6-9%


Labour costs Problems in mobility of workers


Exchange rates Variability: some RECs are monetary unions


Access to facilities


Existing infrastructure (roads, etc.) 137 km for 1000 km2 on average in Sub-Saharan Africa


Energy supply 3% of the world electricity production


Access to technology / research / innovation /


information


0.28% of the GDPs are invested in R&D. Market information systems existing


Investment


Domestic investment Partnerships to boost investment


FDI


Incentives to investors Platforms on agricultural risk management


Market access


Tariffs from 0 to 26.34% for preferential treatments in the first ten African importers


No- tariff measures Prevalent, especially technical regulations


Certification and standards Influencing sourcing and investment


Trade facilitation Delays at customs: 12 days in Sub-Saharan Africa


Business environment


Business actors Sector-specific bodies, producers' associations, Parliamentarians associations


Competition framework Some regional competition framework existing: COMESA, CEMAC, SADC or
WAEMU


Intellectual property if existing




30


C: OVERVIEW OF THE VALUE CHAINS OF COMMODITIES HIGHLIGHTED BY THE ABUJA
FOOD SUMMIT


Carlos Lopes, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), had


declared: “Africa can feed Africa”131. This assertion could be the rationale behind the selection of nine
“continental” commodities and three “regional” ones, most of them being of paramount importance for
RVCs. Following on the presentation of the main features of agriculture in Africa in the former chapter, this


section provides a rapid overview on RVCs for these 9 + 3 commodities132. It is mainly an illustration of the
general characteristics described earlier.




1. Macroeconomic indicators


Countries and RECs have different positions towards the 9 + 3 sectors. Most RECs have their own


agricultural strategy and place emphasis on commodities, often belonging to the Abuja list. For instance,
COMESA places strong emphasis on food staples, including starchy staples, pulses, fresh fruits and
vegetables, livestock, fisheries and dairy133. Such commodities are given special attention, from regional


institutions and international cooperation, however some others are overlooked in spite of their being
essential to food security, like roots and tubers. In WAEMU / UEMOA, five commodities were selected in
2006 to develop a regional approach: rice, maize, livestock and meat, poultry and cotton. Other important
crops for food security and regional trade include millet, sorghum, yam, cassava and pulse crops134.


The market value of these commodities is high. While Africa was said to produce 6.6% of the global
agricultural output in 2007135, it could be around 10% today136, and obviously these commodities amount
for a large share of this contribution. The total export value of the nine continental commodities is worth


around 15 billion USD (2013)137, but out of this sum, 12 billion USD are exported out of Africa. It has also to
be compared with the import value of these commodities, around 31 billion USD in 2013, 10% of which is
supplied by African countries.


A large number of African supplying countries are selling these nine commodities to African countries. The
ten first African countries exporting them to other African countries are South Africa, Namibia, Egypt,
Zambia, Uganda, Morocco, Senegal, Zimbabwe, Côte d’Ivoire and Togo138.





31


Table 17: Supplying countries to African markets for the nine continental commodities


Supplying market Total export value of the Abuja


commodities within Africa


Number of Abuja commodities exported


within Africa


Benin 30641 4


Botswana 65762 2


Burkina Faso 21292 2


Burundi 1 1


Congo 3589 1


Congo Democratic Republic of 5629 1


Côte d'Ivoire 70769 2


Egypt 280178 4


Ethiopia 16016 1


Ghana 30098 4


Guinea Bissau 16873 1


Kenya 40104 6


Liberia 3511 1


Malawi 22316 6


Mauritania 10772 1


Morocco 124311 5


Mozambique 17244 2


Namibia 318610 3


Niger 19280 1


Rwanda 39010 4


Senegal 121927 3


Seychelles 54591 2


South Africa 989150 9


South Sudan 10753 1


Sudan


Swaziland 5017 1


Tanzania 39589 3


Togo 67704 3


Tunisia 52116 2


Uganda 145084 7


Zambia 224378 5


Zimbabwe 105430 2


Source: TradeMap, accessed on 27 November 2014 139


Some countries seem very well integrated in RVCs: for instance, countries selling 5 or more continental


commodities on the continent.


The export values in each country vary from a commodity to another.




32


Table 18: Export value per country for the nine continental commodities


Abuja


commodities


Rice Legumes Maize Cotton Oil palm Beef/ livestock Dairy Poultry Fisheries


HS code in


Trade Map


Rice 1006 Edible vegetables


and certain roots


and tubers 07


Maize - Corn 1005 Cotton 52 1511 Palm oil &


its fraction


0202 Meat of


bovine animals,


frozen


04 Dairy products,


eggs, honey,


edible animal


product nes


0207 Meat & edible


offal of poultry


meat


03 Fish, crustaceans,


molluscs, aquatic


invertebrates nes


Exports to


Africa


249,765 465,219 495,053 239,679 198,598 87,750 626,866 88,026 704,450


Export to


World (total)


409,416 3, 008,684 983,009 210,3184 240,235 145,507 106,4977 91266 396,7569


Imports


from Africa


250,271 438975 429820 207677 215976 77,770 601,235 73,692 766,395


Imports


from world


(total)


5, 166,860 2, 134,713 4, 361,271 425,133 3, 744,034 1, 540,749 544,2940 2, 158,434 3, 571,313


African


exporters to


Africa


South
Africa


75,426 South
Africa


164,375 South
Africa


280,413 Zimbabwe 97,170 Côte
d'Ivoire


67,990 Botswana 48,238 South
Africa


284,437 South
Africa


82,539 Namibia 341,045


Egypt 64,701 Egypt 114,372 Zambia 153,015 Zambia 40,363 Togo 41,819 South
Africa


20,354 Egypt 99,495 Namibia 2,333 Senegal 90,435


Uganda 36,965 Zambia 29,908 Uganda 26,750 Burkina
Faso


18,782 Uganda 40,344 Namibia 17,332 Tunisia 50,879 Tunisia 1,237 South Africa 66,048


Tanzania 20,004 Morocco 21,056 Morocco 10,849 Benin 15,652 Kenya 13,131 Kenya 1,135 Morocco 47,072 Malawi 887 Seychelles 54,536


Botswana 17,524 Uganda 20,179 Tanzania 8,857 Sudan 10,753 Ghana 11,642 Zambia 424 Senegal 37,490 Ghana 384 Morocco 45,108


Rwanda 12,248 Niger 19,280 Burkina
Faso


2,510 Mozambique 8,396 South
Africa


7,501 Uganda 237 Uganda 25,514 Morocco 226 Guinea
Bissau


16,873


Benin 9,903 Ethiopia 16,016 Rwanda 2,507 South Africa 8,057 DRC 5,629 Rwanda 24 Rwanda 24,231 Kenya 134 Ghana 11,692


Liberia 3,511 Kenya 12,473 Benin 2,429 Malawi 7,758 Congo 3,589 Malawi 2 Togo 20,027 Uganda 95 Mauritania 10,772


Côte
d'Ivoire


2,779 Tanzania 10,728 Kenya 2,338 Togo 5,858 Benin 2,657 Senegal 2 Kenya 10,893 Zambia 68 Mozambique 8,848


Malawi 1,599 Malawi 10,370 Malawi 1,700 Swaziland 5,017 Egypt 1,610 Burundi 1 Ghana 6,380 Seychelles 55 Zimbabwe 8,260


Source: Trade Map, accessed on 27 November 2014




33


The first ten export destinations for the nine continental commodities supplied by African markets are
South Africa, Libya, Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, Mozambique, Angola,
Lesotho, and Mauritius. Only seven countries source more than five commodities of the Abuja list, or more,


from African counterparts.




Table 19: Importing markets sourcing the nine continental commodities from African suppliers


Importing market Total importing value of


the Abuja commodities


Number of Abuja commodities sourced


from Africa


Algeria 45476 2


Angola 119396 5


Benin 26014 1


Botswana 184975 5


Burkina Faso 7688 1


Burundi 8059 1


Cameroon 31521 1


Congo Democratic Republic of 211302 6


Côte d'Ivoire 63446 1


Egypt 42005 2


Ghana 8291 1


Kenya 55688 4


Lesotho 106602 6


Libya 256477 4


Malawi 20995 2


Mauritius 98123 2


Morocco 18697 2


Mozambique 150730 6


Namibia 157816 4


Niger 28457 1


Nigeria 11422 2


Rwanda 38578 2


Senegal 68940 2


South Africa 282053 4


South Sudan 26236 2


Sudan


Swaziland 74593 6


Tanzania, United Republic 49690 3


Togo 23759 1


Tunisia 4372 1


Zambia 56555 3


Zimbabwe 197103 7


Source: Trade Map, accessed on 27 November 2014





34


Value addition is often quoted by authors as a mean to effectively improve gains in commodity value
chains. But most of the value in the nine continental commodities is added elsewhere. For instance, in
Uganda, 80 to 90% of the VA of cotton is added by foreign ginners and textile industries, once the product


exported140. In West Africa, only 10% of the cotton production is locally processed into yarn and textile. In
most of the countries, the industrial capacity for processing is weaker than the production141. The addition
of value depends on the segment of the chain: in the beef sector, more value added can be obtained in


primal cuts, canning and beef sides. There is also an issue about perception of the value added by African
consumers. In Senegal, rice consumers consider the national cereal of lower quality, and prefer to buy
more expensive imported rice from Asia142


.


2: Socioeconomic indicators
The number of workers in the nine agricultural sectors is challenging to calculate and depends on the
commodity: some are more labour-intensive than others. In Kenya for instance, the working population


involved in the livestock sector goes beyond one million persons: at least 500000 pastoralists, 625000
dairy smallholders, 2000 employees in abattoirs, 5000 to 10000 butchers, 4000 to 6000 traders, 1000
employees in hotels and 145000 in catering directly linked with the industry143.


Most of the workers of the nine continental commodities are smallholders. Family farming – as a system
where the farm unit is owned by a family and passed from generation to generation – is the “backbone” of
Africa, as FAO recently pointed out144. As an illustration, in the livestock sector in SADC, 75% of the cattle


is kept under smallholders traditional farming systems145.


It does not impede RECs to make projections and to assess the number of workers who should be
involved in a sector. For instance, WAEMU / UEMOA was foreseeing in 2003 the creation of 50000 jobs if
25% of the local production was processed in West Africa.




3: Elements about the mapping of the chains
Each commodity is an industry with various components. Cotton can serve for the textile market and for


the vegetable oil market, for instance. Oil palm can be used as such or incorporated into agri-food
products – it is estimated that 80% of the African production of palm oil is used in agribusiness146, not only
in Africa. France, for instance, incorporates 130000 tons of palm oil into agri-food products each year.


Value chains are decomposed into segments. For cotton, it can be described as cotton fibre, yarn, textile
and clothing. A parallel value chain, with the same segments, can be created with organic cotton. For the
beef and livestock sector, various components exist (bovine meat, sheep meat, goat meat, side products


such as skins, hides and leather apparel).






Figure 2: main outputs of the meat value chain in Eastern Africa (in percentage of exports)




Source: Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009.
Developing African Agriculture through Regional Value Chains. Addis Ababa.


85.4


8
bovine meat (veal, boneless,
dried, salted, fresh and chilled)


sheep meat


goat meat


homogenized meat


meat extracts and sausages




35






The surface used for the nine continental commodities has increased. It is estimated that 93 million


hectares on the continent are dedicated to cereals, out of which 29% serve for maize, 8.4% for rice and
23.7% for sorghum. The surface area for cotton has recently grown, especially in some countries such as
Cameroon where the crop represents 30% of cultivated areas in the North of the country147. Oil palm


spreads over 7% of the agricultural surface in Africa, and represents 39% of the surface dedicated to
vegetable oil production. For roots and tubers, cassava production is equal to 48.6% of land under root
crops. But according to the specialization of the area, the land can be used for livestock farming, which is


the case for 60% of total land area in SADC148.


The issues linked to seasonality and climate change vary depending on the commodity. A dominance of
rain-fed production is observed, especially for sectors such as cotton, cultivated in sub-humid and semi-


arid areas149. Climate change leads to a change in cycles: they are shortened. Oil palm production takes
place in tropical humid zones, and its culture is said to affect rain forests150.




4: Competitiveness


(a) Production costs


As discussed earlier, productivity has grown in Africa but it is still much weaker than in other parts of the


world. For instance, growth in yield has reached more than 9% for maize, but is equal to 34% of the world
average. Yield in rice is equivalent to 55% of the world average, and 69% for sorghum151. For oil palm, the
best yield is around 3.8 tons per hectare, while in Asia it amounts to 6 tons in the best farms. Yield growth
in the livestock / meat sector has reached 9%, but there is variation between RECs, especially in SADC


where productivity is considered as low. Productivity in milk production has gained 10%.


In cotton, the increased productivity has recently accelerated. While it was restricted to 0.5% per hectare
between 1998 and 2007, it is now worth 6.6% in Southern Africa, and 1.3 kg per hectare and per year in


Cameroon for instance152. In Western and Central Africa, in order to improve yields, a 153part of the sector
has decided to turn to organic cotton.


The cost of inputs represents a large share of the incomes and costs in each sector. For instance,


livestock purchasing costs: 65.5 of total chain revenue and costs. When calculating the production costs
for a sector like cotton, the charges for land rent, seeds, fertilizers and chemicals, workforce for harvesting
and ginning, must not be put aside. Seeds and pesticides are often costly, especially because they have to


be bought from abroad.


Exchange rates variations are an interesting parameter to take into account as well154.


(b): Access to facilities and infrastructures


As underlined earlier, the overall development of infrastructures in Africa is weak and it affects the
continental commodities. It is particularly true for transportation: bad road conditions are affecting the
export of products in good shape. Shortages in electricity impede a good deployment of processing


industries, for instance in the cotton sector. But the limited access to post-harvest handling technologies
(cotton) or animal disease control (livestock) is a major problem. Some technical sector actors are working
on more cooperation and sharing of experiences about this, such as the SADC Livestock Technical


Committee for SADC155.


As for the access to services and credit, it is certainly a subject of concern. Regional sector initiatives have
been implemented in order to face the lack of funding through credit. For instance, for the cotton sector, in


Western and Central Africa, advance and recovery of credit, based on single-channel input and seed
supply, is possible156.


(c) Market access


Market access is generally a major subject of concern for African exporters when planning to export to
other continents, as tariffs (even with the preferential treatment due to LDCs, or special agreements such
as AGOA157 or EBA) remain a barrier and NTMs are common. However, the level of protection from African


importers towards African suppliers, in the nine commodities, is far from being insignificant: in general,
intra-regional exports of the nine commodities face an average tariff of 21.99%158.




36


This is maybe the aspect where the implementation of the CFTA will have more impact. When the CFTA
will be operational, no tariff barriers in goods will remain. Various scenarios have been projected by


economists to assess the impact of tariff elimination thanks to a CFTA on African exports. It is expected


that intra-African exports in agriculture will increase by at least 10% by 2022 (the CFTA being implemented
as of 2017). This increase is much less important for exports to other destinations (barely positive, or even


negative, for export to other developing countries and developed countries)159.


The experience of the Tripartite Free Trade Area is pertinent in a perspective of scaling up and paving the
way for the CFTA. COMESA, EAC and SADC decided in 2005 to establish a tripartite structure, aiming,
inter alia, at implementing a single Free Trade Area. This FTA covers 26 African countries, representing


more than half of AU membership, with a combined population of 530 million persons (57% of Africa’s
population) and a total GDP representing 53% of Africa’s total GDP160. Prospects would expect a boosting


effect of the Tripartite FTA on regional commerce between the 3 RECs. Few data is available on the
matter. According to preliminary findings of pilot experiences separately led on livestock, rice and maize,
in ECOWAS and COMESA, intra-REC export increase of 15% on average in livestock can be expected,


while intra-African exports showed growth of 25%. It seems thus that continental trade is more optimal
than intra-REC trade. This provides an additional incentive to accelerate the implementation of the CFTA,
which should be operational by 2017.


(d) Business environment


Important characteristics of the regional and continental business environment have been provided in the
previous section of this chapter, inter alia concerning business actors in agriculture. Other mechanisms


exist, at the regional level (e.g. for dairy products, with the Eastern and Southern Africa Dairy Association
(ESADA) or at the national level (Meat Board of Namibia).


As seen earlier, competition frameworks are not fully operational in all RECs.


As for marketing, the existence of RECs encourages the creation of formalized or semi-formalized regional
marketing channels. This is particularly true for livestock in SADC161, or to a lesser extent for cotton in


WAEMU / UEMOA. It is relevant to organize a marketing structure at the regional level, as it provides for
economies of scale, enhanced coherence and elimination of unnecessary competition. Such marketing
channels need funding and institutionalization through regional cooperation to maximize their efficiency.


The regional policy environment for the nine Abuja commodities is generally marked by the upcoming
implementation of the CFTA and its impact on the other aspects of continental integration. The existence
of RECs could be seen as irrelevant with the arrival of the CFTA, but it is not the case. RECs have a
precious knowledge of their regional context and opportunities, which cannot be transferred to a


continental degree, or with costly procedures. For instance, threatened sectors can be supported and
revitalized within the context of a REC: that is the case of the cotton sector in Malawi, United Republic of
Tanzania and Zambia, which experienced a revival thanks to intra-regional opportunities in COMESA162.


It is also in the context of the RECs that regional technical cooperation projects, often funded by large
cooperation partners, can take place. Important agriculture partners such as the World Bank, UNIDO, the
Common Fund for Commodities (CFC), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, USAID, or IFAD163 are


targeting commodities belonging to the Abuja list, whether at the regional or sub-regional levels. They do
not necessarily use the RECs as supporting or implementing partners, but many technical assistance
programmes see the RECs as essential partners for an efficient and result-conducive approach in


agriculture development in Africa.




SUMMARY


This chapter introduced a simplified methodology for the description of agricultural value chains by
presenting all aspects of regional production, sales and consumption in agriculture. The subject is far too


vast to be captured in a handful of pages, especially when no field investigation is undertaken to collect
first-hand data from stakeholders. However, some relevant remarks can be gathered after this rapid
overview of a sector employing 70 % of the African population:


- Though the share intra-African trade in agricultural products is estimated to less than 10%, there
are regional value chains in agricultural products in Africa: a supply base exists and the
continental demand is growing;


- There are variations in the degree of participation of countries in these chains. Some are well
integrated, as importers and exporters for instance. Some others are less integrated, either




37


because of the structure of their economy, or because they tend to source products from other
areas;


- There is space to increase value added in exported products. Opportunities exist to further
develop value chains already existing but with a minimum regional component;


- Political will is needed to accelerate the development of agricultural RVCs, especially through a
rapid implementation of the CFTA in order to eliminate barriers to trade and provide for economies


of scale.


Chapter 3 will set up a simplified method for value chain prioritization, and thereby identifying at least two
commodities, not belonging to the Abuja list, that could be further developed through RVCs in Africa.





38


CHAPTER 3


ESTABLISHING NEW REGIONAL VALUE CHAINS TO ENHANCE VALUE ADDED


IN AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES AND PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS:


SOME KEY ELEMENTS


The purpose of this chapter is twofold: first, it will suggest a way to prioritize regional agricultural value
chains to be further developed, based on a review of existing methods and criteria to select promising
sectors in a particular area. Then, it will test this approach by screening several social, economic and


environmental indicators for different commodities already cultivated in Africa (and not belonging to the
list of commodities selected by the Abuja summit) and selecting two of them, while focusing on
developing the addition of value in these sectors.




A: PRIORITIZATION: METHODOLOGIES


The first chapter of this study provided a quick review of publications on, inter alia, value chain analysis
methodologies. It showed that almost each development agency has developed its own methodology to


assess the degree of development of a value chain. Most of these publications assume that the sectors to
be scrutinized are not pre-selected beforehand. Generally, a government or a partner institution submits a
request to a specialized agency with the objective of determining the most promising sectors to be


developed. Then a value chain analysis will study all the aspects of the sector in order to design
interventions aimed at improving it.


Pre-selections should be avoided by governments and programmes164, in order not to create bias in


favour of a particular sector. But it is costly and time-consuming to analyse a large bunch of sectors.
Generally, a prioritization exercise is undertaken, in order to identify chains with the most promising
prospects for economic growth165. Such exercise can be prepared by desk review and analysis, through


national and international references. However, the ideal way is to organize the exercise with the
participation of broad range of concerned stakeholders, in order to take into consideration all the different
components and possible consequences of the development of a value chain166.


Different methods for rapid sector prioritization are presented below. They include the VC methodologies


reviewed in Chapter 1 of this study, and two other publications which provide a list of priority issues when
establishing a value chain.





39




Table 20 Main priority criteria for the identification of value chains to be developed


Agro value chain analysis and


development ( UNIDO)


2009


Economic Report on


Africa 2009 Economic


commission for Africa


and Africa Union 2009


Developing sustainable food


value chain- guiding principles


FAO , 2014


Making value chain work


better for the poor


DFID/MAP 2008


Connecting local


producers in developing


countries to


regional and global value


chains, OECD, 2013


Building Competitiveness


in Africa's Agriculture : A


Guide to Value Chain


Concepts and


Applications, World Bank,


2010


Poverty reduction




Pre requisites Measuring performance Potential of the value


chains to improve


livelihoods of the


poor people


Productive capacity Pre-requisites










Fits in the country's strategy




Refinement of definition of
strategic commodities for
the region


Economically


sustainable


(profitable) -


economic


impacts


Profits


Jobs/incomes


Tax revenues


Food supply


Present integration of the
poor in the market (what are
they producing, selling,
employment)


Human capital Initial list: combinations and


product category, target
markets,


and resulting VC and supply


chains that could be
prioritized




Potential for employment


generation


2. Socially


sustainable


(inclusive) -


social impacts




Added value


distribution


Cultural
traditions


Nutrition and


health Worker


rights and
safety


Animal welfare


Institutions


Potential of the
product/activity


for poverty reduction


Standards and certification Market analysis


Number of smallholders in the


sector




3.


Environmentally


sustainable


(green) -


environmental


Carbon
footprint


Water footprint


Soil
conservation


Biodiversity
Food


Potential for labour intensive


technology


Infrastructure


and services


Nature of demand – size




40


impacts loss and waste


Toxicity




Required investments


Improvement of
agricultural


productivity and local
market


access by smallholders


Understanding performance Low barriers to entry for the


poor (capital, knowledge)


National systems of
innovation


Tendencies, segments,
potential niches due to
seasonality


Entry-barrier levels for poor


agro-processors




Macroeconomic stability
and national economic
policy coordination


4. Dynamic systems Low risk Transportation, ICT, energy
and water


Price tendencies


Geographical location of


producers


Short term regional
strategy


5. Governance-centred Poverty incidence and/or


absolute poverty figures


Business environment Customer preferences


Macroeconomic stability and


public governance


Current competitors




Economic growth


Rationalizing business and


financial regulations,
including eliminating


trade and barriers


6. End-market driven Market potential Ease of opening a business
and


permitting / licensing




Improving performance
Strong domestic and/or


international demand for the
product


Access to finance Domestic capacity and


economic impact


Contribution to GDP - export


earnings


Simplifying and
harmonizing cross-
borders regulations and
documentation




7. Vision - strategy -driven


Growth potential of certain


products/activities


Trade and investment policy Capacity to competitively
respondto opportunities


Potential for domestic /


international demand


Improving regional


infrastructure


8. Upgrading focused Possibility for scaling up Market access


Public and private investment


prospects


Standardizing consumer
and industrial regulations


9. Scalable




Potential for leveraging
public investment with
private investment


Import tariffs Analysis of institution


Potential for market integration


of local SMESs


Long term regional
strategy


10. Multilateral Involves a large number of


people


Export-import procedures Analysis of technology


Creating regional
institutions to progress


Other criteria, such as Border transit times Analysis of service providers




41


















towards common
monetary instruments


Promotion of policy changes Identify and develop cross
border clusters that have
direct dealings with
strategic value chains


Value chain actors have


entrepreneurial capacity to


achieve improvement.


Industry-specific policies Analysis of policies


Scaling up potential


Pragmatic aspect


Environmental sustainability Industry institutionalisation
industry maturity and
coordination


Analysis of production
conditions


Extent of value adding potentials


Production cost in comparison to


competitors




Within framework of national
and regional strategies


Public private coordination


Available resources and number of


operators




Social inclusion and gender Other factors affecting chain
participation of developing
countries




Availability of raw materials and


other inputs Labour cost availability and
skill level





SPS Standards and their


implementation


Transport cost quality and
regulation in industry
maturity including the
presence of upstream and
downstream chain.






Access to micro finance and
micro economic stability ,
business environment
import and export
restrictions trade policy


Vulnerability to climate
disease and natural
disasters




42




Table 21: Main priority criteria for the identification of value chains to be developed






Source: UNIDO (2009). Agro-value chain analysis and development. The UNIDO Approach. A staff working paper. Vienna; Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009).
Economic Report on Africa 2009. Developing African Agriculture Through Regional Value Chains. Addis Ababa; FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains – Guiding principles.


Rome; M4P (2008) Making Value Chains Work Better for the Poor: A Toolbook for Practitioners of Value Chain Analysis, Version 3. Making Markets Work Better for the Poor (M4P) Project,
UK Department for International Development (DFID). Agricultural Development International. Phnom Penh; OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional


and global value chains – update. OECD Trade Policy Paper (160). December. Webber, C. Martin (2010). Agriculture and Rural Development: Building Competitiveness in Africa's
Agriculture: A Guide to Value Chain Concepts and Applications. World Bank Publications. Washington DC




.




43


B: BUILDING A PRIORITISATION SHEET FOR AGRICULTURAL RVCs


The particular purpose of this report, and the fact that none of the methods presented above is exact science
and they can all be expanded or modified to better fit the situation or environment of the analysis167, led to a
decision to build a proper list of criteria. The rationale behind the choice of each criterion is explained below.




Table 22: Proposal for a customized assessment sheet to prioritize agricultural RVCs


Economic criteria


Export value in Africa


Growth of market demand in Africa


Contribution to GDP


Start-up costs


Existence of a competitive advantage


Potential for VA growth


Social criteria


Workforce


Potential for income generation


Potential for skills development


Other effects on rural life


Environmental criteria


Impact of the infrastructures needed (existing and future) on the environment


Existence of sustainable certifications and standards


Impact on biodiversity and soil conservation


Regional integration criteria


Potential impact on regional employment


Complementarities between countries


Potential for developing African infrastructures


Potential for innovation and R&D


Source: Author.




1. Economic criteria
Export value and its growth on the continent are basic indicators that can be obtained through databases
such as Comtrade168 or Trade Map169. Learning about start-up costs consists in gathering information about


the existence of the commodity chain in the area (is there a strong base? How much would it cost to create
it?), including the availability of resources and inputs, and the mechanisms and efficiency assessment of the
chain. This leads to the evaluation of a competitive advantage, based on the productivity, costs of production,
infrastructure and business environment, if such elements are available at an early stage of analysis. As the


focus of the report is about value addition, there will be a particular emphasis on VA.









44


2. Social criteria


Knowing about the workforce – is it a family farming system with smallholders or an extensive farming system
with rural employees – and the potential for income growth can help assessing if it is worth putting resources
in the VC and if it will affect the fight against poverty in the area. Other impacts, such as the prevalence of


women workers and the possibility of skills development (with the existence of training centres or
programmes, for instance), have to be taken into account.


3. Environmental criteria
Most of the prioritization methods put a strong emphasis on the economic and financial aspects, without


considering (or only marginally) the social and environmental impacts 170 . As the preservation of the
environment is a key issue in agriculture development – e.g. in the attention given to soil regeneration, etc. – it
seems evident to include environmental criteria in this assessment sheet. Moreover, many sustainable


certifications and standards exist for agri-food products. They are mainly used for high end developed
markets, but as the level of exigency of the African consumers will grow, they will be more and more crucial to
continental trade.


4. Regional integration criteria
Most of the methodologies for prioritization methods are based on a national perspective or the objective of


national integration into a GVC. For the purpose of this report, a degree of adaptation to the regional context –
especially in the situation of the future CFTA – is needed. The choice is put on the synergies between
countries (LDC producer vs. importer, intra-REC trade, etc.) and on the maximization of effects at the regional


level (possibility to foster infrastructures at the regional level, potential to create regional innovation centres,
etc.).


5. Criteria and their respective weight


The UNIDO methodology proposes to assign weight to each criterion, in order for the appraisal to be rapid
and reasoned171. The weight attached to the indicators depends on the importance given to them by the


institution or authority in charge of the prioritization. Each category (economic, social, environmental and
regional) is given a weight. Each line is attributed a score (from 1 – low score – to 5 – high score), then a sub-
total is calculated and changed into a percentage. A total weighted score is calculated at the end.


This methodology seems efficient and quick for a prioritization based on desk review, as it is the case in this
study. The proposed weights are based on the objectives of this study (value addition, regional integration)
and are described in the table below.





45


Table 23: Proposed weighted assessment sheet to prioritize agricultural RVCs


Weight Categories and criteria VC 1 VC2, etc.


Economic criteria


30% Export value in Africa


Growth of market demand in Africa


Contribution to GDP


Start-up costs


Existence of a competitive advantage


Potential for VA growth


Sub-total


Economic impact = (30 x sub-total) / 100


Social criteria


20% Target population


Potential for income generation


Potential for skills development


Other effects on rural life


Sub-total


Social impact = (20 x sub-total) / 100


Environmental criteria


20% Impact of the infrastructures needed on the environment


Existence of sustainable certifications and standards


Impact on biodiversity and soil conservation


Sub-total


Environmental impact = (20 x sub-total) / 100


Regional integration criteria


30% Potential impact on regional employment


Complementarities between countries


Potential for developing African infrastructures


Potential for innovation and R&D


Sub-total


Regional impact = (30 x sub-total) / 100


Total (sub-total+sub-total+sub-total+sub-total)


Total weighted score (impact+impact+impact+impact)


Source: Author




C: SELECTION OF PROMISING COMMODITIES FOR RVCS


The approach of this chapter consists in applying the proposed methodology – assessment sheet, to a
number of selected commodities presenting promising prospects for RVC development. Based on their
recognized importance for the African agricultural economy, and on the emphasis put by several key


publications, the following commodities or agricultural products have been chosen for testing the method:




46


- floriculture172
- cashew173
- pineapples174
- avocados175
- tea176
- onion / shallot177
- potato178.


Their degree of priority for the development of RVCs is assessed and summarized in the following table. This
this assessment was made out of global desk review; therefore, the information might be missing and


decision bias based on the availability of information might occur. It has to be noted that the following rapid
analysis of two sectors aims at illustrating the methodology and at being part of a set on decision instruments
for policy-makers, and not at being the unique support in the decision to develop a commodity chain.







47


Table 24: Assessment of priority commodities for the development of VA-oriented RVCs


Weight Categories and criteria Floriculture Cashew Pineapples Avocados Tea Onion / shallot Potato


HS code HS0603 HS 0801 HS 080430 HS 080440 HS 0902 HS 0703 HS 0701


Economic criteria


30% Export value in Africa 3 2 1 1 5 4 4


Growth of market demand in Africa 3 2 4 4 5 2 4


Contribution to GDP 3 3 5 3 2


Start-up costs 3 3 3 3 3 3 3


Existence of a competitive advantage 3 3 2 2 2 2 2


Potential for VA growth 3 4 4 4 5 3 4


Sub-total 15 17 14 17 25 17 19


Economic impact = (30 x sub-total) / 100 4.5 5.1 4.2 5.1 7.5 5.1 5.7


Social criteria


20% Target population 3 4 2 4 2 3


Potential for income generation 3


Potential for skills development 2


Other effects on rural life 2 2 5


Sub-total 3 9 2 2 6 2 8


Social impact = (20 x sub-total) / 100 0.6 1.8 0.4 0.4 1.2 0.4 1.6


Environmental criteria


20% Impact of the infrastructures needed on the environment -1


Existence of sustainable certifications and standards 3 3 3 3 3 3 3


Impact on biodiversity and soil conservation -2 3


Sub-total 3 3 3 3 1 3 5


Environmental impact = (20 x sub-total) / 100 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.6 1


Regional integration criteria




48


30% Potential impact on regional employment 4 3 3 2 3 2 2


Complementarities between countries 4 4 4 3 4 3 3


Potential for developing African infrastructures 3 2 2 3 3 2


Potential for innovation and R&D 3 3 3 3 3 4


Sub-total 14 12 12 8 13 8 11


Regional impact = (30 x sub-total) / 100 4.2 3.6 3.6 2.4 3.9 2.4 3.3


Total (sub-total+sub-total+sub-total+sub-total) 35 41 31 30 45 30 43


Total weighted score (impact+impact+impact+impact) 9.9 11.1 8.8 8.5 12.8 8.5 11.6




Source: Author




49


As a result, the following two sectors will be briefly analysed: the tea sector and the potato sector. The
modalities for this analysis will follow the main lines highlighted in the quick value chain analysis as
discussed previously.




1. The tea value chain: an existing RVC with growth potential at the regional and global levels


Macroeconomic profile


Tea production worldwide was worth 8.17 billion USD in 2012, with an average growth of 6% between


2008 and 2012, but at a slower pace between 2011 and 2012 (1%)179. Kenya is the second largest
exporting country in the world, just behind Sri Lanka, and the first for black tea180. Other regional
producers were in descending order Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Malawi and the United Republic of Tanzania.
Burundi, Madagascar, Uganda, DRC, Mozambique, South Africa and Zimbabwe are involved as well in tea


export181. Together, these producers account for more than 15% of the world output.


The domestic market is key, amounting to 10 to 30% of sales182. Various programmes are trying to boost
consumption in Eastern African countries. As for continental demand, it is extremely important as well,


with Morocco among the world top exporter183, but also Sudan, Somalia, Djibouti, Nigeria or Egypt.
Continental demand is said to be worth around 20% of sales of Kenyan tea184.


Potential to boost value added is high in the tea sector – e.g. most of the tea from Eastern Africa is


exported in bulk shape. Several opportunities exist:


- In packaging, more processing can be done to export smaller, branded retail packages, or
packing into tea bags, instant tea and ready-to-drink beverages


- In product diversification, niche markets can be attained by producing more green tea or
flavoured tea, or tea with health benefits, such as the Zimbabwe’s Makoni or the South Africa’s
Rooibos


- In certification and standards, the interest for organic tea or Fairtrade-labelled tea is growing
among domestic consumers, ready to pay a higher price.


The workforce is mostly composed of smallholders: they are approximately 450000 in Kenya185. They are
said to be among the small-scale tea farmers that are the highest paid in the world, with a growth in


income having risen by 12.5% in 2012186. The chain in Kenya is well structured, and is even seen as “one
of the most successful cases of smallholder farmer inclusion in a VC”187. The farmers sell their tea to
buying centres (around 4000 in total in the country), which are in charge of quality control and


transportation to one of the 63 tea factories in Kenya (around 60 buying centres for each factory).
Committee members of the buying centres are elected from the farmers, and some members of the
factory board are elected from the buying centres committee members. The factories are owned by


farmers: 150000 farmers are shareholders of the Kenyan tea factories.


Then, the tea factories own the Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA), a private company since 2000. All
tea farmers in Kenya are required to sell their output through KTDA. Most of the tea is sold in auction in
Mombasa, but a growing part is sold directly to tea packers, including national ones. One of them, Kenya


Tea Packers (KETEPA), is even indirectly owned by farmers, as it has KTDA as one of its major
shareholders. KTDA is also responsible for providing inputs to farmers and human resources services for
the factories.


As a result, Kenyan tea growers capture around 75% of factory-gate tea price, while farmers in Rwanda,
Uganda and Tanzania obtain only 25% of this price188. However, the system is not exempt of problems,
with small holders increasingly unsatisfied with the payment structure imposed by KTDA, its non-


transparent communication and its business strategy189.


The tea sector is therefore quite structured and its governance chain is well installed, at least in Kenya.
Other tea boards exist, such as the Tanzania Tea Board or the Office du Thé in Burundi. The East African


Tea Trade Association is also an actor intervening in the VC. The sector can be said to act already
regional, as Kenya’s auction centres market domestic tea and tea from the sub-region (mainly from


Burundi, Rwanda, DRC, Uganda, Madagascar, United Republic of Tanzania, Malawi and Mozambique)190.


In the tea sector, inputs and raw material are locally or regionally purchased, and there is no known issue
concerning a problematic availability of inputs. However, the cost of inputs is rising191.


The VC segments are quite different between green tea and black tea.





50


Figure 3: Differences in processing green and black tea leaves


































Source: Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013.


Making the Most of Africa’s Commodities: Industrializing for Growth, Jobs and Economic Transformation.
Addis Ababa.


2. Competitiveness
Production costs have risen in the recent year, to reach a growth of 15% in 2012. This is mainly due to


energy costs, which are estimated to be at least 30% of the production costs. Improving sourcing of
energy to buy a cheaper and more predictable energy (e.g. hydro-energy) would increase the producers’
margins192.When exporting to continental destinations, tariffs remain an issue.


Table 25: Tariff applied to tea exports from the 3 main African suppliers by their top 5 African markets


Kenya Uganda Rwanda


Importers Tariffs Importers Tariffs Importers Tariffs


Egypt 0 Kenya 0 Kenya 0


Sudan 0 Sudan 2 Uganda 0


Nigeria 5 DRC 20 Tanzania 0


South Africa 14.77 Chad 30 DRC 20


Somalia n.a. Rwanda 0 Burundi 0


Source: Trade Map, accessed on 30 November 2014




The table shows that African tea exporters are still heavily impacted by tariffs applied by their buyers.
Tariffs in tea can amount to 30% and more. For instance, Morocco, the 14th largest tea importer in the
world with 167.4 million USD in 2012193 and importing 283,000 USD of black tea from Kenya in 2013,


imposes to Kenyan tea a tariff of 32.5%.


Green tea


Tea leaves heated


Tea leaves rolled or twisted


Tea leaves dried


Black tea


Tea leaves withered / partially
dried


Tea leaves rolled up or cut


Tea leaves fermented


Tea leaves dried


Tea leaves sorted by size




51




Table 26: Tariffs applied by Morocco for the product 090240


MFN 32.5


Preferential tariff for AGADIR countries 0


Preferential tariff for Algeria 0


Preferential tariff for LDC 0


Preferential tariff for Libya 0


Preferential tariff for the League of Arab States 0


Source: Market Access Map, accessed on 30 November 2014




3. Potential to develop VA in the tea RVC


The tea RVC is an adequate sector for VA development: it has a strong macroeconomic profile, including a
strong regional and domestic market; a regional production capacity internationally competitive; and a


favourable business environment, with a governance chain well established in the leading country and
replicable in other territories, and the arrival of the CFTA which will foster continental integration.


Current drawbacks are:


- the heavy tariffs imposed by some important continental buyers.
- the rather unstable international demand, which can be compensated by a faster development of


continental sales.


- the high costs of production, especially due to insufficient infrastructures in energy supply.
- the threats posed by climate change, which will soon oblige to redesign the tea growing map in


Eastern Africa194.


According to the Economic Commission for Africa195, upgrading trajectories for commodity value chains
can be organized around four blocks:


1- processes: increasing the efficiency of internal processes.
2- products: introducing new products or improving existing ones.


3- functions: changing the mix of activities or moving to different links in the value chain.
4- chains: moving to a new value chain..


An analysis of VA growth potential against these four blocks seems pertinent. It could be196:


1- Processes: in Kenya, the difficulties linked to the KTDA monopoly and methods should be solved,
through consultations and dialogue supported by the government. However, the system, which
gives an important place to smallholders, could be improved and scaled up at the regional levels:


i.e. by creating or reinforcing national tea institutions and participatory mechanisms, and
strengthening existing regional ones. A clear organizational scheme at the regional level could be
proposed and sustained contacts established. Development cooperation and aid for trade


mechanisms could be instrumental in this regard: aid for trade funds are often used for
institutional strengthening, and examples exist in the tea sector (e.g. a programme by the French
Agency for Development – AFD – to reinforce the trading capacities of the Burundi tea structure,
the Office du Thé du Burundi197). A strong regional institutional mechanism could take the lead in


designing a marketing strategy, oriented towards boosting regional consumption and promoting


the sector at the continental level, e.g. by campaigning for an early eradication of high tariffs in
importing markets.


2- Products: the regional processing of new outputs could be developed. New products could


including ready-made beverages, green tea, flavoured tea and better-packaged or conditioned
teas. Such products should be ahead of the curve in certification and standard requirements, as
transnational corporations have been pushing increasing pressure on tea factories on


sustainability standards in the recent years198. Seeking standards and certification opportunities is
relevant at the regional level, as regional cooperation can help identify best practices to allow
economies of scale. Furthermore, regional cooperation, as seen earlier, can be instrumental in the


promotion of regional certification standards targeting the African consumers. It can also support




52


the securing of intellectual property rights and trademark protection199 for specialty tea products,
such as teas with particular health benefits.


3- Functions: linkage development can help maximize positive externalities derived from cooperation


between firms and institutions. A linkage development strategy has to be carefully designed, after
a thorough examination of the sector and its segments. At first glance, the tourism sector seems
to be a value chain with which the tea sector could have benefits creating an alliance. The number


of foreign visitors in East Africa has been steadily increasing in the recent years, amounting to
more than 5 million200. The total GDP of the travel and tourism sector in Africa reached 75 billion
USD in 2013201. Tea is already marketed to tourists as a souvenir, but emphasis could be put on


the local production and the sustainability certification. Tours to tea growing communities, visits to
sustainable tea factories, etc., could be potential by-products providing additional income for
farming communities.


4- Chains: the creation of a new VC does not seem relevant here, however, developing organic tea
could be assimilated to setting up a new, parallel VC to traditional tea production.


4. The potato value chain: a promising RVC with food security benefits


Potato is “more than an ordinary food for the poor” and provides solid nutritional benefits202. 2008 was


celebrated as the International Year of the Potato, in a context of upheaval in international food markets,
leading to a re-assessment of the crop as a source of food, employment and income203. The potato
production is rapidly increasing in developing countries, with a growth of cultivated areas of 25% between
1997 and 2007204. In Africa, the increase over the same period has reached 50%205. According to Trade


Map, the total export value of potato production in Africa (exports to world + exports to Africa) reached
369 million USD in 2013, with a relative increase since 2009; while at the same time, imports from world
reached 432 million USD.


African main suppliers are South Africa, Ethiopia, Morocco, Namibia, Tunisia, Kenya, Egypt, Rwanda,
Nigeria and Swaziland. Nonetheless, the potato value chain is often said to be promising in Western Africa,
with production amounting to more than 156,000 tons a year (8% of the total production in SSA) for the


five leading producing countries: Mali, Niger, Guinea, Senegal and Burkina Faso, as well as Mali
accounting for more than 70% of the total production. A Central African country, Cameroon, is also a
leading potato producer206. Potato is identified as a priority sector in National Agricultural Investment


Programmes by the governments of Mali and Senegal207. However, it has to be noted that potatoes
cultivated in West Africa are mainly sold on local markets; inter-regional trade is still weak208


For most of West African producers, potato is a cash crop209. However, its nutritive value and its
importance for food security are undeniable. Thus some experts highlight the “twin role of potato”, a staple


food crop for household consumption and food security and a cash crop210. As the population is growing
in the region – probably 450 million persons to feed in Sahel and West Africa by 2030211, cultivation of
efficient staples crops, with potential for additional revenues if sold to other continental markets, is


particularly relevant. Consumption is mainly urban; however, except The Gambia, Mauritania, Senegal,
Côte d’Ivoire and Nigeria, consumption is not very well developed212.


Women play an important role in the VC. They represent more than a half of the producers in Guinea, and


are the most active in the commercialization process213.


The potato sector in West Africa has reached a critical level of output, making processing viable. Hence
the potential for adding value exist:


- In packaging and storing potato production
- In product diversification, since potato can be sold chilled, cut, prepared, or incorporated in food


preparation (frozen or dehydrated potato products ; chips – the main use of potato in the
processing sector214, crisps)


- In certification and standards: according to Market Access Map, 27 voluntary standards could
potentially apply to the cultivation of potato in Africa, exported in Africa.


The potato VC can be decomposed as follows:





53


Figure 4 : basic representation of the potato value chain in West Africa


























































Source: Centre pour le Développement de l’Entreprise (2009). Guide technique de la culture de la pomme
de terre en Afrique de l’Ouest. October; FAO and CFC (2010). Strengthening potato value chains.


Technical and policy options for developing countries. Rome.




5. Competitiveness


Start-up costs are said to be quite important. It is important that the producer carefully assess the market
potential before setting or extending production areas215. It seems that production costs have been rising


by 5 – 10% per year216 in the recent period. Seeds represent the main production cost (40 – 60% total
production costs).


Yields in potato production have been growing these last years. One of the main benefits of potato


growing in West Africa is that the crop can be cultivated during the rainy and dry season. Average yield
reach 22 tons per hectare in West Africa217, but some varieties introduced in the sub-region could give up
to 27 – 38 tons per hectare218.


Most of the production is based on rain-fed agriculture. However, the irregularity of rain in the Sahel area


remains an issue219. Potato is the plant producing the biggest quantity of food per soil occupation day;


Inputs: seeds
and fertilizers


Cultivation


Harvesting and
post-harvest


handling


Commercialization


Processing into
food products


Storage


Consumption




54


comparatively, it needs less work and less water220. Nonetheless, often motorized pumps are needed to
pump water from streams and rivers, resulting in an increase in production costs221.


The weakness and the inadequacy of infrastructure such as storage facilities, remains a problem222; it


leads to bad conservation and quality of sold crops. Transport costs and the need for appropriate handling
remain a major constraint for smallholders.


As it is the case for other commodities, access to credit is problematic. However, there are differences in


prices, depending on the season and the distance for delivery. Prices are highest in August – September
(inter-season), and in December – May (dry season)223.


As for other commodities, market access is not free of charges. For a country potentially exporting


potatoes, like Mali, protection rates can reach 50% on the continent (by Angola) and are on average
between 20 and 30%.




6. Potential to develop VA in the potato RVC


The potato RVC in West Africa is an interesting sector, because of its interest for food security and as a


compensatory mechanism against volatile cereal prices224. It draws attention from the development
cooperation sector, with technical cooperation projects being implemented by development partners such
as FAO, the Common Fund for Commodities (CFC) jointly with European Co-operative for Rural


Development (EUCORD), or smaller-scale NGOs. It has not been given special emphasis in the Abuja
selection of commodities, and it has space to develop its potential for value addition.


Current drawbacks encompass:


- the conditions of production, largely depends on rain-fed agriculture.
- the supply of seeds and inputs.
- the technical skills of producers, especially in terms of post-harvest handling and pest


management.


- the development of a regional demand.
- the lack of infrastructures for adequate storage and value-adding processing.


The same four blocks used above for the tea sector will serve as a framework for the analysis of a possible


VA optimization strategy for the potato sector in West Africa.


1- Processes: institutional strengthening in the sector should be sought, by building or reinforcing
potato growers associations and federations. Some of them exist at the local level, for instance,


the Farmer Federation of Fouta-Djallon (FPFD) in Guinea. However, their existence at the national
level should be fortified. Contacts and leakages with the regional structures of producers, like
ROPPA, could be developed. These institutions could potentially lead changes in several
segments of the chain, like fostering policy decisions on developing adequate storing or


processing units, promoting policy coordination, improving transportation conditions, or designing
a regional marketing channel. They should be instrumental in the development of national and
regional markets, like broadcasting promotion campaigns aimed at boosting regional


consumption. If there are surplus, they could provide advice on export procedures towards other
countries of the continent. The regional level is also pertinent to organize training and skills
development among producers and to disseminate the results of research; and research is


particularly active in the potato sector, with the International Potato Centre based in Quito
(Ecuador) and research programs of the Global Agricultural Research Partnership (CGIAR).
Exchange of best practices with other developing countries – for instance, Latin American


countries which have the strongest potato cultivation and consumption culture, or Asia where
consumption is rapidly growing – could be helpful. The development of local seed production and
an increase in yield are also crucial to the sector.


2- Products: there is space for the development of new potato products in West Africa. First, the
consumption potato (with local varieties for instance) could be developed. Then, the processing
into chips, potato flours, food preparations and other edible products should be developed. In


Eastern Africa, potato chips are the main output of processing industries and their rapid growth is
due to changes in eating habits and growing urbanization and tourism225. West Africa is likely to
follow the same trends. Research programmes and households surveys could tell what could be


the outputs of potato processing industries. Furthermore, these products – as well as potato
crops – need packaging; a packaging industry could be further developed, along with an efficient
marketing channel.





55


3- Functions: linkages with other agricultural sectors can be found. For instance, the onion sector,
strong in West Africa, could benefit from a stronger packaging industry. A linkage development
strategy should be carefully developed. The tourism sector (Senegal, Cape Verde) and the


expatriate segment (Nigeria) could provide interesting opportunities.


4- Chains: moving to a new value chain does not seem necessary. However, developing a stronger


sustainability certification culture – and therefore, a parallel VC – could be instrumental to tap into
new high-end markets, like the tourism market or the urbanized middle class.


SUMMARY


This third chapter briefly discussed two “new” potential RVCs that could be developed. It is hoped that its
logical and progressive structure will provide policy-makers with mechanisms to better understand the


prioritization of value chains, a process which has to mix research, participatory assessment, field
investigation and political will. The methodology presented here is only an introduction.


This chapter also presented the two potential RVCs as perfect illustrations of the benefits that the CFTA


should provide. For the tea sector, the main gain could be the elimination of tariff barriers at the
continental level, allowing Eastern African countries to freely sell to expanding markets out of their RECs.
For the potato sector, one of the principal advantages lays in the fact that policy coordination and dialogue


will be enhanced through the CFTA, providing for a better strategy towards trade development and food
security. In a nutshell, chains as different as tea and potato will equally benefit from the implementation of
the CFTA.


Eventually, the CFTA will support the strengthening of a coherent continental market potentially able to


fulfil all its needs in food and agri-food products.







56


CHAPTER 4


RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOSTERING AND ESTABLISHING REGIONAL


VALUE CHAINS IN AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES AND PROCESSED FOOD


FOR AFRICA


This study was intended to provide an overview of existing value chains in agricultural commodities in
Africa and to select promising ones, with a particular focus on the incremental creation of value linked to
the upcoming implementation of the CFTA. As nine commodities (selected by the AU in 2006 in Abuja)


plus two (prioritized through a new methodology) have been scrutinized, it is logical that the conclusion of
the study provides a digest of potential policy recommendations and guidelines in order to move forward
with the “scaling up” and “moving up” exercises in value chains.


A number of policy recommendations have already been provided in the study, especially in its third
chapter about potential RVCs. Most of them are sector-specific and will not be repeated in this chapter. It
seems useful to prepare a kind of compendium of general recommendations targeted at policy-makers
willing to address the challenges to agricultural development in Africa. This compendium is mostly focused


on the regional and continental levels.


As the value chain approach has been the underlying principle of this study, it is logical to use the VC
methodology to organize the recommendations.




1. Interventions at the “macro” level
A VA optimization strategy in agricultural commodities and agri-food products would require interventions
on a large bunch of categories and sub-categories of the VCs.


A first group of recommendations would concern productive capacities: while productivity and yield-
enhancing techniques should be promoted, the protection of environment should not be ignored. The
issues of degraded land, land property issues, water management and quality of fertilizers should be at the


core of discussion on boosting productivity226. A steady supply of inputs, in qualitative and quantitative
terms, should be secured227.


However this would be possible only if sector actors are strong, aware and capacitated. Therefore – and


particularly in the context of enhanced integration with the establishment of the CFTA – the creation and
strengthening of specialized structures should be developed. It is crucial to create multi stakeholders
structures in sectors where none exist (like some roots and tubers)228, to strengthen farmers’ organisations


and trade associations, but also to involve actors at the policy-making level. This can be done by fostering
or setting up the national agriculture committees in national and regional Parliaments, and by organizing
“value chains sessions” at important continental events a such as meetings of the AU or UNECA229. As
policy-makers are responsible for the implementation of cross-sector or sector-specific programmes, such


as the AIDA, the programmes for infrastructure development or the Maputo commitments, it is crucial that
they are aware of issues and evolutions, and that they are connected to professional groups. The lobbies
in agriculture are often under-capacitated and in need of skills development; capacity-building activities


exist but should be fostered, maybe at RECs level first, and extended then at the continental level.
Exchange of best practices could be sought with other continents – Asia, and Latin America.


Capacitating professional associations will allow them to better understand policy-making decision


processes, impact of the CFTA and will enhance their role in agricultural policy negotiations. Capacitating
policy-makers will facilitate the comprehension of sector-specific problems and the resolution of
blockages and protests at the national and regional levels.









57


2. Interventions impacting competitiveness


Competitiveness is the largest group of recommendations when the scope is on value chains. For
instance, when asked about the most effective ways in helping developing countries to better participate
in GVCs, business leaders talk about infrastructure development230, which is an important sub-category of


the competitiveness aspect of value chains. Trade facilitation, barriers to investment and access to
information are other decisive issues in the competitiveness pool.




The costs of production could be monitored by the concerned institutions strengthened at the national,
regional and continental level. By securing a steady access to inputs and encouraging the development of
local inputs (by establishing a fertilizer factory, for instance), governments or professional groups will help
mastering the costs. To control the costs, free movements of goods and workers is crucial. This is where


the involvement at the political level is key, and governments and RECs need now to operationalize the
existing policies or protocols on free movement of people and labour migration231.


Skilled labour migration is relevant if skills are largely recognized. Thus agreements on mutual recognition


of qualifications and competences, oriented towards agriculture, are needed232.




3. Access to facilities and information
Infrastructures are one of the major blocking points in developing trade, whether regionally, continentally


or internationally. Many actions plans and implementation strategies for Africa have been prepared and
agreed on the issue. A Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) exists. Its
implementation should be prioritized and operationalized233. Road infrastructure, energy and water supply


are common constraints to producers and processors; tackling these issues at national, regional and
continental level will incrementally help the addition of value in agricultural VCs.


Information is power. Almost all the actors of the agricultural VC in Africa lack adequate access to


information -- either farmers, with prices or weather information; the processors, with export information;
the professional associations; or the policy-makers. It should be a priority to develop or strengthen and
generalize information systems. Some Market Information Systems exist but should be given attention and


adequate resources (funding, staff, etc.). Alternative systems (by mobile phone, radio, etc.) should be
expanded. Considering these issues at the regional or continental levels could allow economies of scale
and enhanced coherence.


Macro-information on value chains is also key. Often countries and RECs depend on donors to obtain


information about the value chains to be prioritized, the good practices implemented and the ones to be
avoided234. An endogenous capacity on VC should be created and disseminated. Channels already exist,
with networks and associations. They should be identified and fortified.


Access to information is also about access to research findings. Currently, funding on research is scarce
and should be increased to 2% of agricultural GDP235. Regional centres of excellence of agricultural
research could be strengthened when existing, and created where there is none236.




4. Investment and funding
Accessing to funding and investment is currently challenging, especially for smallholders. Investment
should be boosted, but safeguards should be given to investors. Current initiatives on risk information and


management are promising, but more needs to be done, for instance by encouraging investments through
established frameworks for the strengthening of regional and continental complementarities237.


Tax and investment incentives should be created, but foreign and national investors should be assured


that no non-technical barriers, such as corruption, will interfere with their investment. Tax incentives and
progress towards the transparency of the regulatory environment could be promoted. In fostering large-
scale investments, the promotion of public-private partnerships schemes is pertinent.


Access to credit is often denied to agricultural producers – especially smallholders. Policy-makers and
professional associations should lobby for a better access to credit, to buy inputs or to modernize their
production systems. RECs and governments could be instrumental in establishing finance institutions,
including cross-border ones, to fund micro-credit for producers and exporters238.




58


5. Market access


The main immediate gain of the CFTA implementation will be the abolition of tariffs, allowing for the
effective creation of a continental market. However, special attention should be given to non-tariff barriers
and quantitative restrictions in food products. The creation of an Africa marketplace is feasible, given that


trading interests of countries are not necessarily confined to the borders of their RECs (this was evidenced
by some results of the brief value chain analysis in this report) and that tariffs will soon be part of history.


However, the eradication of tariff is a fear for many economic actors on the continent. For some of them, it


is true that the establishment of the CFTA will have short-term adverse impacts239. This is the reason why
adjustment mechanisms should be put in place, to address the adjustment costs such as revenue
shortfalls240 and industry decline.


But market access is not only about tariffs. It is also about trade facilitation and custom procedures, that


will not be automatically abolished by the establishment of the CFTA. Important efforts should be put at
the continental level to harmonize procedures and to reduce delays, by standardizing the nature of the
required documents, for instance, or promoting the use of ICT in this area with online hubs about trade


procedures, transportation and custom documentation241. The fight against illegal practices, such as road
blockages or illegal fees at customs offices, could be strengthened.


Standards and certifications are part of market access issues. Regional standards, when existing, should


be disseminated, explained and understood by chain stakeholders. New ones should be developed, to
promote inclusiveness in productive processes and sustainability in consumption.




6. Business environment
The improvement of the business climate environment is also quoted by business leaders as one of the
priorities to develop inclusive VCs242. This can be done by several actions. First, securing contractual
arrangements and business models, will automatically foster investment and improve levels of trust


between different economic actors. But the dialogue between stakeholders, through forums, fairs, events
or other mechanisms (Chambers of Commerce, Chambers of Agriculture) should be dramatically
expanded.


Awareness actions among populations, on the importance of agriculture for local development and the
respective roles of the VC actors, could globally contribute to a better business environment


It is also through joint marketing that the business climate will improve, if it results in an increase of sales.
And the regional and continental levels are particularly relevant for that. Sector marketing strategies could


be developed first at the regional, than at the continental level. Electronic vectors of communication
(Internet campaigns) and traditional means (TV or poster announcements) could serve.




7. The role of international organizations
International organizations, particularly continental ones or trade-oriented ones like UNCTAD, can play an
important role in supporting the African continent for the development of viable and sustainable
agricultural VCs. Many organizations, including UNCTAD, have been a long-standing development partner


of African countries, RECs and the African Union.


The study opened with criticism towards the capacity of development partners, and particularly UN
agencies, to design and promote a single concept of value chain. This is a concrete action that


international organizations could take: organizing rapidly a task force or a committee in order to harmonize
views and methodologies on the VC concept. This does not mean abolishing differences and expertise of
each organization. Every organization has its scope, its experience and its competence. But the growing


interesting for VC calls for an inter-organization standing mechanism to share knowledge, concepts and
experience on the concept. It could also aimed at disseminating VC knowledge, and ensuring that VC
knowledge created within the UN system is turned into concrete and efficient policy interventions243. If


adequately designed and equipped, it will eventually avoid overlaps and join the voices calling for an
enhanced efficiency of the UN development system.


International organizations could also be instrumental in fostering and mandating research on relevant
topics. As the emergence of regional chains is a relatively new trend244, a better understanding of their


mechanisms and benefits would require more statistical research and field investigations. This would
eventually feed policy interventions and RVC development.




59


This list of possible policy interventions is not exhaustive, and should be customized and adapted to each
commodity, each segment, or each level of focus (national, regional or continental). It however provides a
basis, some food for thought. As the Economic Commission for Africa recently highlighted, developing


regionally integrated VCs and markets is both feasible and important245, and this study is an attempt to
contribute to the process.





60


REFERENCES


AFD, CIRAD and FIDA (2011). Les cultures vivrieҒres pluviales en Afrique de l’Ouest et du Centre Eleғments
d’analyse et propositions pour l’action. A savoir (06). May.


African Development Bank (2013). Agricultural Value Chain Financing (AVCF) and Development for
Enhanced Export Competitiveness. Tunis.


African Union (2006). Resolution of the Abuja Food Security Summit. Addis Ababa.


African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade.
Issues Affecting Intra-African Trade, Proposed Action Plan for boosting Intra-African Trade and
Framework for the fast tracking of a Continental Free Trade Area. Addis Ababa.


Benin, S., Kennedy, A., Lambert, M., McBride, L. (2010). Monitoring African agricultural development
processes and performance: A comparative analysis. ReSAKSS Annual Trends and Outlook Report
2010. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).


Centre pour le Développement de l’Entreprise (2009). Guide technique de la culture de la pomme de terre
en Afrique de l’Ouest. October.


Chen, Y. (2011). Literature Review – Value Chains. George Washington University – IDS Capstone project.


European Parliament, Directorate-General for External Policies, Policy Department (2014). African,
Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Countries’ position on Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs).
Brussels.


Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013. Making the


Most of Africa’s Commodities: Industrializing for Growth, Jobs and Economic Transformation. Addis
Ababa.


Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009. Developing


African Agriculture Through Regional Value Chains. Addis Ababa.


Economic Commission for Africa, African Union and African Development Bank (2013). Assessing Regional
Integration in Africa (ARIA VI): Harmonizing Policies to Transform the Trading Environment. Addis


Ababa.


Economic Commission for Africa, African Union and African Development Bank (2012). Assessing Regional
Integration in Africa (ARIA V): Towards an African Continental Free Trade Area. Addis Ababa.


Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Livestock value chains in Eastern and Southern Africa: a regional
perspective ECA-AUC-FAO. Powerpoint presentation. Addis-Ababa.


Economic Commission for Africa, Sub-regional office for West Africa (2012). Regional Integration :
agricultural value chains to integrate and transform agriculture in West Africa. Niamey.


Economic Commission for Africa, Southern Africa Office (2010). Agricultural Input Business Development
in Africa: Opportunities, Issues and Challenges.


European Union (2013). Using trade to promote development in countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, the


Caribbean & the Pacific.


FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains – Guiding principles. Rome.


FAO (2007). Governance, coordination and distribution along commodity value chains. Commodity and


Trade proceedings. Rome.


FAO and CFC (2010). Strengthening potato value chains. Technical and policy options for developing
countries. Rome.


FAO and IFAD (2013). Rebuilding West Africa’s food potential: Policies and market incentives for
smallholder-inclusive food value chains. Rome.


GTZ (2008). ValueLinks Manual. The Methodology of Value Chain Promotion. January.


ICTSD (2013). Special Edition. Aid For Trade: Into the future. Bridges Africa. Trade and Sustainable


Development News and Analysis on Africa. 2 (4). July. Geneva.


ICTSD (2013). Tackling Africa’s trade challenges. Bridges Africa. Trade and Sustainable Development


News and Analysis on Africa. 2 (1). March. Geneva.




61


IFAD (2010). Rural poverty report 2011. New realities, new challenges: new opportunities for tomorrow’s
generation. Rome.


ITC (2013). LDCs and Global Value Chains: Using Aid for Trade to Seize New Opportunities. Technical


paper. Geneva.


ITC (2013). Improving Africa’s Cotton Value Chain for Asian Markets. Technical paper. Geneva.


ITC (2012). The participation of LDCs in value chains. Geneva.


ITC (2012). Africa’s trade potential. Export opportunities in growth markets. Technical paper. Geneva.


ITC (2009). Medicinal plants and extracts. Market News Service. Geneva, December.


ITC (2008). Sector Analysis for Value Chain Development. Geneva, June.


ITC. Export potential assessment. Identifying priority sectors and attractive markets for better targeted
export promotion actions.


IRD (2013). Sciences au Sud. 72. Novembre – Décembre.


Lavigne Delville, P., (2014). “Les Africains resteront-ils mai ࡂtres de l’ameғnagement de leur territoire et les
paysans de leurs terres ?”. Débats et controverses (9), 2014 (1). GRET. Nogent-sur-Marne.


M4P (2008) Making Value Chains Work Better for the Poor: A Toolbook for Practitioners of Value Chain
Analysis, Version 3. Making Markets Work Better for the Poor (M4P) Project, UK Department for
International Development (DFID). Agricultural Development International. Phnom Penh.


Mitchell, J., Keane, J., Coles, C. (2009). Trading Up: How a Value Chain Approach Can Benefit the Rural


Poor. ODI. London, December.


Morris, M., Kaplinsky, R., Kaplan, D. (2012). One Thing Leads To Another. Promoting Industrialisation by
Making the Most of the Commodity Boom in Sub-Saharan Africa.


OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –
update. OECD Trade Policy Paper (160). December.


OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid For Trade 2013: Connecting to value chains.


OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood.


Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain Initiatives in ACP regions. Technical Centre


for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU).


SADC Secretariat (2011). Regional Agricultural Policy (RAP) Country Summary Agricultural Policy Review
Reports. January.


Schaffnit-Chatterjee, C. (2014). “Agricultural value chains in Sub-Saharan Africa”. Current issues Emerging
markets, 14 April 2014. Deutsche Bank Research. Frankfurt.


South Centre (2014). Addressing the issue of commodities. South Bulletin (80), 30 June 2014.


South Centre (2014). Global value chains: unpacking the issues of concern for developing countries. South
Bulletin (77), 4 February 2014.


South Centre (2013). Global value chains (GVCs) from a development perspective. Analytical note.
Geneva.


Springer-Heinze, Andreas and Eiligmann, Alfons (2008). Value links: training seminar.


Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Tea sector.


Agritrade. October.


Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Cotton sector.


Agritrade. October.


Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. ACP–EU


fisheries: Market access and trade. Agritrade. October.


Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Oil crops


sector. Agritrade. October.


Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Poultry sector.


Agritrade. September.


Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Rice. Agritrade.


September.




62


UNCTAD (2014). Economic Development in Africa Report 2014. Catalysing investment for transformative
growth in Africa. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2014). Trade and Development Report 2014. Global governance and policy space for


development. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2013). Global supply chains: trade and economic policies for developing countries. Policy issues


in international trade and commodities study series (55). Geneva.


UNCTAD (2013). Economic Development in Africa Report 2013. Intra-African trade: unlocking private


sector dynamism. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2013). Regional integration and foreign direct investment in developing and transition
economies. Note by the UNCTAD secretariat. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2013). World Investment Report. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2013). Global Commodities Forum. 2013 Report. Recommitting to commodity sector
development as an engine of economic growth and poverty reduction. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2012). Enabling the Graduation of LDCs: Enhancing the Role of Commodities and Improving
Agricultural Productivity. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2012). Global Commodities Forum. 2012 Report. Harnessing development gains from


commodities production and trade. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2012). Economic Development in Africa Report 2012. Structural transformation and sustainable
development in Africa. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2012). Evolution of the international trading system and its trends from a development


perspective. Note by the UNCTAD secretariat. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2011). Integration of developing countries in global supply chains, including through adding
value to their exports. Note by the UNCTAD secretariat. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2011). Report of the Trade and Development Commission on its third session. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2009). Economic Development in Africa Report 2009. Strengthening regional economic
integration for Africa’s development. Geneva.


UNCTAD (2007). Trade and Development Report 2007. Regional cooperation for development. Geneva.


UNDPI (2014). Briefing by African Regional Economic Communities to UN Member States. Africa Renewal.


New York. October.


UNDPI (2014). 2014 Special Edition. Agriculture is Africa’s next frontier. Africa Renewal. New York.


UNDPI (2014). Trade in Africa: unfinished business. Africa Renewal. New York, August.


UNIDO (2009). Agro-value chain analysis and development. The UNIDO Approach. A staff working paper.


Vienna.


USAID (2008). Participatory market system development. Best practices in implementation of value chain
development programs. September.


Webber, C. Martin (2010). Agriculture and Rural Development : Building Competitiveness in Africa's
Agriculture : A Guide to Value Chain Concepts and Applications. World Bank Publications. Washington
DC




--- Databases and websites ---
Eurostat, http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eurostat/home/


FAOSTAT, http://faostat3.fao.org/faostat-gateway/go/to/download/G1/*/E


Integrated Trade Intelligence Portal (World Trade Organization), http://i-tip.wto.org


Market Access Map (ITC), http://www.macmap.org


Regional Trade Agreements Information System (RTA-IS) (World Trade Organization),
http://rtais.wto.org/UI/PublicMaintainRTAHome.aspx


Statistics Database (World Trade Organization), http://stat.wto.org/Home/WSDBHome.aspx?Language=


Standards Map (ITC), http://www.standardsmap.org




63


Tariff Download Facility (World Trade Organization), http://tariffdata.wto.org


Trade Competitiveness Map (ITC), http://legacy.intracen.org/appli1/tradecom/TPIC.aspx


Trade Map (ITC), http://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx


UN Commodity Trade Database (UN Comtrade), http://comtrade.un.org


United States International Trade Commission, www.usitc.gov


World Customs Organization, http://www.wcoomd.org/en.aspx






Notes

1 Webber, C. Martin (2010). Agriculture and Rural Development : Building Competitiveness in Africa's


Agriculture : A Guide to Value Chain Concepts and Applications. World Bank Publications. Washington
DC.


2 http://www.fao.org/family-farming-2014/en/
3 UNDPI (2014). 2014 Special Edition. Agriculture is Africa’s next frontier. Africa Renewal. New York.
4 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid For Trade 2013: Connecting to value chains.
5 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013. Making


the Most of Africa’s Commodities: Industrializing for Growth, Jobs and Economic Transformation.
Addis Ababa.


6 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009.
Developing African Agriculture Through Regional Value Chains. Addis Ababa.


7 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
8 Please refer to Part 1 of this report.
9 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid For Trade 2013: Connecting to value chains.
10 UNCTAD (2013). World Investment Report. Geneva.
11 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
12 Ibid.
13 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update. OECD Trade Policy Paper (160). December.
14 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
15 Ibid.
16 UNDPI (2014). 2014 Special Edition, op.cit.
17 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
18 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
19 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
20 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade.


Issues Affecting Intra-African Trade, Proposed Action Plan for boosting Intra-African Trade and


Framework for the fast tracking of a Continental Free Trade Area. Addis Ababa.
21 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
22 Kaplinsky and Morris (2001), quoted in Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012). Mapping Study on Value Chain


Initiatives in ACP regions. Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP-EU).
23 UNCTAD (2013). World Investment Report, op.cit.
24 Ibid.
25 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
26 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.



27 UNCTAD (2013). World Investment Report, op.cit.
28 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
29 M4P (2008) Making Value Chains Work Better for the Poor: A Toolbook for Practitioners of Value Chain


Analysis, Version 3. Making Markets Work Better for the Poor (M4P) Project, UK Department for
International Development (DFID). Agricultural Development International. Phnom Penh.


30 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
31 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
32 Ibid.
33 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
34 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.




64



35 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.

36 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
37 Ibid.
38 Ibid.
39 UNCTAD (2013). World Investment Report, op.cit.
40 Established in 2006 under the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP), it


supports efforts to promote evidence and outcome-based policy planning and implementation as part
of the CAADP agenda. http://www.resakss.org


41 Economic Commission for Africa, African Union and African Development Bank (2012). Assessing


Regional Integration in Africa (ARIA V): Towards an African Continental Free Trade Area. Addis Ababa.
42 UN Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing


Countries and Small Island Developing States, http://unohrlls.org
43 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
44 Economic Commission for Africa, African Union and African Development Bank (2012). ARIA V, op.cit.
45 FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains – Guiding principles. Rome.
46 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
47 Please see below.
48 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
49 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
50 It has to be mentioned that the bibliography in annex of this report, presents a very large selection of


publications on value chains, agriculture and regional integration. Not all of them have been used to
prepare this document.


51 UNIDO (2009). Agro-value chain analysis and development. The UNIDO Approach. A staff working


paper. Vienna.
52 Please refer to Table 2.
53 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
54 UNDPI (2014). 2014 Special Edition, op.cit.
55 Ibid.
56 In the Harmonized System, the more digits are provided, the more specific the product will be. HS


codes up to 6-digit level are followed internationally and are common to all countries. Because greater
commodity details are needed than the 4- and 6-digit HS headings and subheadings, and to suit the
national requirements, national customs usually determine an 8-digit level.


57 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
58 Source: http://www.sadc.int
59 Source : http://www.resakss.org/region/monitoring-progress/africa-wide
60 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
61 Source : Trade Map, accessed 2 October 2014.
62 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
63 UNCTAD (2013). World Investment Report, op.cit.
64 Ibid.
65 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
66 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
67 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
68 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
69 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
70 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
71 Ibid; Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
72 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
73 Source: http://www.sadc.int ; http://www.comesa.int ; OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for


Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
74 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
75 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
76 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
77 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
78 Ibid.
79 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
80 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
81 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.




65



82 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
83 Ibid.
84 UNDPI (2014). 2014 Special Edition, op.cit.
85 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
86 IRD (2013). Sciences au Sud. 72. Novembre – Décembre.
87 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
88 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
89 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
90 IRD (2013). Sciences au Sud, op.cit.
91 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
92 Economic Commission for Africa, African Union and African Development Bank (2012). ARIA V, op.cit.
93 Ibid.
94 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
95 Ibid.
96 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
97 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
98 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
99 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
100 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
101 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
102 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
103 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
104 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
105 IRD (2013). Sciences au Sud, op.cit.
106 UNCTAD (2013). World Investment Report, op.cit.
107 Ibid.
108 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
109 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
110 Non-tariff measures (NTMs) are a major impediment to international trade and can prevent market


access. They can be defined as policy measures, other than custom tariffs and including technical


regulations, product standards and customs procedures, that may have an impact on international
trade.


111 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
112 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
113 International Trade Centre (ITC), http://www.intracen.org
114 http://www.macmap.org
115 Source: http://www.intracen.org/itc/publications/publications-catalogue/?taxid=2267
116 Source : http://www.intracen.org/itc/market-info-tools/non-tariff-measures/business-


surveys/#summary_of_results
117 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
118 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
119 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
120 Source : http://www.standardsmap.org, accessed on 27 November 2014
121 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
122 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
123 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
124 Automatized System for Customs Data (ASYCUDA), www.asycuda.org
125 Cambodia Development Council. Cambodia Investment Board. Cambodia Special Economic Zone


Board
126 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
127 http://www.aace-africa.net/nouveau_2/




66



128 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
129 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
130 UNDPI (2014). 2014 Special Edition, op.cit.
131 UNDPI (2014). 2014 Special Edition, op.cit.
132 A lot of relevant information about these sectors has already been provided in the former section;


repetitions will be avoided and references to previous paragraphs will be made.
133 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
134 Ibid.
135 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
136 UNDPI (2014). 2014 Special Edition, op.cit.
137 Source : Author’s calculation based on TradeMap.
138 Source : Author’s calculation based on TradeMap.
139 Nota : for each commodity, only the first ten exporters have been selected.
140 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
141 Ibid.
142 FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains, op.cit.
143 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
144 Source : http://www.fao.org/family-farming-2014/news/news/details-press-room/en/c/218469/
145 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
146 Ibid.
147 IRD (2013). Sciences au Sud, op.cit.
148 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
149 IRD (2013). Sciences au Sud, op.cit.
150 Ibid.
151 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
152 IRD (2013). Sciences au Sud, op.cit.
153 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
154 Please refer to the former section.
155 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
156 Ibid.
157 African Growth and Opportunity Act (United States of America), Everything But Arms (European Union).
158 Source : Author’s calculation based on Market Access Map.
159 Economic Commission for Africa, African Union and African Development Bank (2012). ARIA V, op.cit.
160 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
161 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2009). Economic Report on Africa 2009, op.cit.
162 Ibid.
163 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
164 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
165 UNIDO (2009). Agro-value chain analysis and development, op.cit.
166 Ibid.
167 UNIDO (2009). Agro-value chain analysis and development, op.cit.
168 http://comtrade.un.org
169 http://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx
170 FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains, op.cit.
171 UNIDO (2009). Agro-value chain analysis and development, op.cit.
172 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
173 Ibid.
174 FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains, op.cit.; Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
175 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.
176 Webber, C. Martin (2010), op.cit.; Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic


Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.; FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains, op.cit.; Technical


Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Tea sector. Agritrade.
October.


177 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
178 Ibid.
179 Source: Comtrade, http://comtrade.un.org
180 Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Tea sector,


op.cit.
181 Ibid.
182 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
183 Source: Comtrade, http://comtrade.un.org




67



184 Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Tea sector,


op.cit.
185 FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains, op.cit.
186 Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Tea sector,


op.cit.
187 FAO (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains, op.cit.
188 Ibid.
189 Ibid.
190 Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Tea sector,


op.cit.
191 Ibid.
192 Ibid.
193 Source : Comtrade, http://comtrade.un.org
194 Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Tea sector,


op.cit.
195 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
196 Such assessment is not exhaustive and should be discussed, designed and amplified through


consultation mechanisms.
197 Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Tea sector,


op.cit.
198 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
199 Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (ACP—EU) (2013). Executive brief. Tea sector,


op.cit.
200 Source: EAC Statistic Portal,


http://www.eac.int/statistics/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=1
201 Source : World Travel and Tourism Council, http://www.wttc.org
202 FAO and CFC (2010). Strengthening potato value chains. Technical and policy options for developing


countries. Rome.
203 Ibid.
204 Source : International Potato Centre, http://cipotato.org
205 Centre pour le Développement de l’Entreprise (2009). Guide technique de la culture de la pomme de


terre en Afrique de l’Ouest. October.
206 FAO and IFAD (2013). Rebuilding West Africa’s food potential: Policies and market incentives for


smallholder-inclusive food value chains. Rome.
207 Ibid.
208 FAO and CFC (2010) , op.cit.
209 Centre pour le Développement de l’Entreprise (2009), op.cit.
210 FAO and CFC (2010) , op.cit.
211 FAO and IFAD (2013) , op.cit.
212 AFD, CIRAD and FIDA (2011). Les cultures vivrie Ғres pluviales en Afrique de l’Ouest et du Centre


Eleғments d’analyse et propositions pour l’action. A savoir (06). May.
213 FAO and CFC (2010) , op.cit.
214 Ibid.
215 Centre pour le Développement de l’Entreprise (2009), op.cit.
216 Ibid.
217 Ibid.
218 FAO and CFC (2010) , op.cit.
219 Centre pour le Développement de l’Entreprise (2009), op.cit.
220 Ibid.
221 FAO and CFC (2010) , op.cit.
222 Ibid.
223 Ibid.
224 Ibid.
225 Ibid.
226 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
227 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
228 Ibid.
229 Ibid.
230 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
231 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
232 Ibid.




68



233 Ibid.
234 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
235 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
236 Proctor, F., Lucchesi, V. (2012), op.cit.
237 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
238 Ibid.
239 Ibid.
240 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
241 African Union Commission and Economic Commission for Africa (2012). Boosting Intra-African Trade,


op.cit.
242 OECD, World Trade Organization (2013). Aid for Trade and Value Chains in Agrifood, op.cit.
243 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.
244 OECD (2013). Connecting local producers in developing countries to regional and global value chains –


update, op.cit.
245 Economic Commission for Africa and African Union (2013). Economic Report on Africa 2013, op.cit.








Login