Market evolution: Groundnuts (CN 120242) — 2015–2025

Introduction

This report analyses the evolution of EU external trade in shelled groundnuts (Combined Nomenclature code 120242) over the period 2015–2025. The EU is a major global consumer of groundnuts but relies heavily on imports to meet domestic demand, a structural feature that has intensified over the decade. Drawing on trade-flow, partner, concentration, and vulnerability indicators, the analysis identifies three principal dynamics: a sustained rise in import value and volume coupled with a contracting export base; a marked geographic re-orientation of supply chains, with Argentina consolidating its lead and the United Kingdom receding; and a growing structural vulnerability stemming from rising import concentration alongside stable but high net import reliance.

1. Expanding Import Demand and a Widening Trade Deficit

Over the decade under review, the EU's trade balance in shelled groundnuts deteriorated markedly, driven by a strong increase in imports and a simultaneous contraction of exports.

1.1 Imports grew in both value and volume

EU imports of shelled groundnuts rose from €613.9 million in 2015 to €913.8 million in 2025, an increase of 48.9% in value. Over the same period, imported quantities expanded from 481,700 tonnes to 628,193 tonnes (+30.4%). The faster growth in value relative to volume reflects a rise in unit import prices, which climbed from €1,274/t to €1,455/t (+14.1%). Import value reached its peak at €1,039.1 million, underscoring the cyclical sensitivity of this market.

1.2 Export volumes contracted sharply

In contrast, EU exports of shelled groundnuts declined substantially. Export value fell from €32.1 million to €22.0 million (−31.4%), while export volumes nearly halved, dropping from 23,945 tonnes to 13,366 tonnes (−44.2%). The higher decline in volume compared to value implies a rising unit export price (from €1,342/t to €1,649/t, +22.8%), suggesting the EU has been exporting smaller but higher-priced or more processed consignments.

1.3 The trade deficit deepened by over 53%

The combined effect of rising imports and declining exports was a widening of the trade deficit from −€582 million in 2015 to −€892 million in 2025, a deterioration of 53.3%. The deficit reached a trough of approximately −€1,011 million, illustrating the structural imbalance in EU groundnut trade. Net import reliance remained consistently high, fluctuating narrowly between 78.4% and 83.8%, confirming that the EU covers only a fraction of its consumption through domestic production.

2. Argentina's Consolidation and a Reconfigured Supplier Landscape

The geographic composition of the EU's import supply base underwent significant change between 2015 and 2025, characterised by the growing dominance of Argentina and the relative decline of traditional Western partners.

2.1 Argentina emerged as the overwhelmingly dominant supplier

Argentina's share of EU groundnut imports expanded dramatically over the period. Argentine shipments to the EU rose from €380.9 million in 2015 to €660.1 million in 2025 (+73.3%), making Argentina by far the largest single supplier. By 2025, Argentina alone accounted for approximately 72% of total EU import value, up from roughly 62% a decade earlier. The coefficient of variation for Argentine imports was notably low at 0.16, indicating that this supply channel has been relatively stable and reliable.

2.2 The United States and the United Kingdom lost ground for different reasons

US groundnut exports to the EU fell from €94.0 million to €46.9 million (−50.1%), a decline likely linked to competitive pressure from Latin American producers and shifting trade dynamics. The United Kingdom experienced an even more dramatic contraction: after Brexit, UK-sourced imports into the EU collapsed from €5.4 million to just €211,309 (−96.1%). The volatility of UK-origin shipments was extremely high (CV: 0.90), consistent with a supply channel disrupted by regulatory and tariff changes associated with the UK's departure from the EU single market.

2.3 The EU's export geography was reshaped by geopolitical disruption

On the export side, the most notable development was the near-total collapse of EU exports to the Russian Federation—from €5.5 million in 2015 to essentially zero by 2025 (−100%), reflecting the impact of sanctions regimes following geopolitical events. Conversely, exports to Ukraine surged from €857,000 to €7.8 million (+805%), and exports to Switzerland grew from €391,000 to €1.5 million (+290%). Exports to the United Kingdom, the EU's largest non-EU export destination, declined by 65.4%, mirroring the UK's reduced role as a trade partner following Brexit.

2.4 The Netherlands consolidated its role as the EU's groundnut gateway

Among EU Member States, the Netherlands overwhelmingly dominated both import and export activity, consistent with its role as a major logistics and agri-food processing hub. Dutch imports grew from €381.1 million to €528.9 million (+38.8%), while several other Member States also recorded significant increases—notably Germany (+149.8%), France (+110.8%), and Poland (+104.5%). The Netherlands' Revealed Symmetric Comparative Advantage (RSCA) stood at 0.70 with an RCA of 5.73, confirming its structural specialisation in this product category.

3. Growing Concentration and Structural Market Vulnerability

Beyond volume trends, the period saw a meaningful shift in the concentration structure of EU groundnut trade, raising questions about supply-chain resilience.

3.1 Import concentration increased materially

The Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI) for EU groundnut imports by value rose from 4,237 in 2015 to 5,407 in 2025 (+27.6%). An HHI above 2,500 is generally considered to indicate a highly concentrated market. The increase was driven by Argentina's growing dominance and the erosion of smaller supplier shares. By volume, the HHI followed a similar trajectory, rising from 4,454 to 5,659 (+27.0%). This rising concentration increases the EU's exposure to supply disruptions—whether from adverse weather, policy changes, or logistical bottlenecks—originating in a single country.

3.2 Export concentration declined modestly

The HHI for exports decreased from 2,572 to 2,084 (−19.0%), indicating a slight diversification of EU export destinations. This is partly explained by the collapse of the formerly large Russian market and the growth of new destinations such as Ukraine and Switzerland. However, the absolute level remains moderate, reflecting the relatively small scale and fragmented nature of EU groundnut exports.

3.3 EU domestic production grew in volume but stagnated in value

According to PRODCOM data, EU production of shelled groundnuts increased substantially in quantity—from 314,000 tonnes to 600,000 tonnes (+91.1%)—but the corresponding value remained essentially flat at approximately €1 billion (−1.0%). This divergence implies a halving of domestic unit prices over the period, potentially reflecting a shift toward lower-value product forms or competitive pricing pressures. Regardless, domestic production remains far below consumption requirements, which explains the persistently high net import reliance of around 84%.

3.4 Trade intensity remained high while export propensity eroded

The EU's trade intensity for this product was approximately 93% in 2025, confirming that groundnuts are overwhelmingly traded on the international market rather than produced domestically. Meanwhile, export propensity fell from 58.7% to 52.2% (−11.0%), suggesting that the EU is increasingly oriented toward meeting its own consumption rather than re-exporting. This trend, combined with rising import concentration, reinforces the picture of an EU market that is deeply integrated into global supply chains but with declining leverage as an exporter.

Conclusion

Between 2015 and 2025, the EU's trade in shelled groundnuts became characterised by a growing dependence on imports, a deepening trade deficit, and an increasingly concentrated supply base centred on Argentina. The geopolitical reshuffling of the period—Brexit, EU–Russia sanctions, and the rise of Ukraine as an export destination—left clear imprints on trade flows. While domestic production volumes nearly doubled, they were insufficient to meaningfully reduce the EU's net import reliance, which remained stubbornly above 83%. The rising import HHI indicates that the EU's exposure to supply-side risk has increased over the decade, making the groundnut market a case study in the tension between growing demand for a popular consumer product and the strategic vulnerability of relying on a narrow base of external suppliers.