A report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) titled “Unleashing the Benefits of Intra-African Trade Integration for the WAEMU” has called on countries within the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) to strengthen their trade ties and address structural barriers that continue to limit the region’s full participation in the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).
According to the Fund, although WAEMU has made steady progress in regional collaboration, the scale of trade between member countries and with the wider African market remains modest. This is in part because the region’s overall trade openness has grown slowly over the years.
In its words, “WAEMU members’ trade openness, integration into global value chains (GVCs), and export diversification remain limited.”
The report observes that from 2000 to 2019, WAEMU’s trade openness rose only slightly, from 48% to 52% of GDP. Even within Africa, the bloc’s exports to other countries on the continent averaged just a quarter of its total exports, higher than the African average but still far behind levels seen in more integrated regions like the European Union.
One of the most pressing challenges lies in the persistence of non-tariff barriers, rules and procedures that, though not officially tariffs, act as roadblocks to trade. These include differing national standards, inefficient customs operations, and unclear regulations. Even among WAEMU countries themselves, such measures are still widespread.
As the IMF points out, “NTMs hamper even trade among WAEMU countries,” and this reflects the fact that key areas like sanitary and technical standards have not yet been harmonized across the bloc.
The impact is not negligible. According to the report, “NTMs are estimated to hinder trade among WAEMU members by as much as import tariffs of 17 percent would.”
The IMF suggests that fully embracing AfCFTA provisions, such as lowering tariffs and reducing NTMs, could begin to shift this picture. If member countries manage to reduce tariffs by 90% and halve non-tariff barriers, the region’s trade openness could improve noticeably, with long-term gains for households and businesses alike.
Specifically, the report estimates that such efforts would “increase openness by 1.5 percentage points, associated with a 2 percent increase in long-term real income per capita.”
But the potential goes further. The IMF explores a more ambitious scenario, referred to as “AfCFTA+”, in which countries also enhance their trade environments by improving infrastructure, access to finance, and institutional quality. Under this approach, the benefits could be transformational.
It notes that if WAEMU countries pursued this path, “merchandise trade flow with other African countries could rise by more than 40 percent, while intra-WAEMU trade could increase by more than 30 percent.”
To reach this outcome, however, the Fund stresses the importance of moving beyond slow, one-by-one regulatory fixes. It encourages member states to push for a continent-wide, proactive review of the rules that still act as silent barriers to commerce.
In its recommendation, the IMF writes, “WAEMU members may wish to advocate vis-à-vis other AfCFTA signatories for the adoption of a more ambitious approach” to removing non-tariff measures.
In addition to broader reforms, the report emphasizes the value of simpler, lower-cost solutions. One such option is streamlining customs and border procedures, a change that could be implemented relatively quickly.
The authors estimate that “implementing half of the outstanding measures by WAEMU members could increase their openness by 1–2 percentage points,” which in turn could “raise incomes by 1.3–2.5 percent.”
The report further reminds policymakers that integration must be inclusive. Trade liberalization often brings disruption alongside opportunity.
To ensure the benefits are widely shared, the IMF recommends investing in workforce skills and expanding social safety nets.
As the report notes, “While the AfCFTA is expected to generate overall gains, some groups might face adverse impacts, at least initially.”
