Market evolution: Silk waste (CN 5003) — 2015–2025

Introduction

This report examines the evolution of European Union trade in silk waste (Customs code 5003), a niche product encompassing cocoons unsuitable for reeling, yarn waste, and garnetted stock. Over the decade from 2015 to 2025, the EU has remained a consistent net importer of this commodity, with a structural trade deficit averaging around €25–28 million per year. The analysis draws on trade data for the EU as reporter and explores how volumes, values, geographic flows, and price dynamics have evolved across the period. Three key themes emerge: a long-term contraction in traded volumes accompanied by rising unit prices, a persistent and even intensifying concentration of imports around China, and a gradual decline in EU export activity marked by occasional price shocks.

1. The Import Squeeze: Falling Volumes, Rising Prices

1.1 A structural decline in import volumes

The most prominent feature of the 2015–2025 period is the sustained contraction in the quantity of silk waste imported by the EU. Beginning at 1,040 tonnes in 2015, import volumes fell to a low of 700 tonnes before ending the period at 777 tonnes in 2025 — a cumulative decline of 25.3%. This contraction reflects a combination of factors: the global decline in sericulture and silk manufacturing capacity, shifting textile supply chains, and possibly reduced demand from EU-based silk processing industries, particularly in Italy and Germany.

Source: EU trade overview

1.2 Unit values have climbed despite volume weakness

While volumes contracted, the average unit price of imports rose by 26.0% over the period, from €26,745 per tonne in 2015 to €33,702 per tonne in 2025. This divergence — falling quantities but rising prices — is consistent with a market where supply constraints are exerting upward pressure on pricing. As global silk waste production shrinks (tied to the broader decline in raw silk output), remaining supply commands higher prices. The minimum import price of €21,606/t was recorded at some point during the period (likely during a demand trough), while the maximum reached €35,403/t, illustrating considerable price variation.

1.3 Exports tell an even starker story

EU exports of silk waste have declined far more sharply than imports. Export value fell 41.1% (from €2.0 million to €1.2 million), and export volumes dropped 40.9% (from 66 tonnes to 39 tonnes). Interestingly, the export unit price remained broadly flat (−0.3%), hovering around €30,400–30,500 per tonne. This suggests that the EU is not merely re-exporting at higher prices but is losing export capacity outright. The export performance reflects a shrinking role for the EU as a processing or intermediary hub for silk waste.

2. China's Dominance and the Geography of Silk Waste Trade

2.1 China: the overwhelmingly dominant supplier

China has consistently supplied the vast majority of EU silk waste imports. In 2015, Chinese exports to the EU totalled €23.7 million, representing approximately 85% of total EU import value. By 2025, this figure stood at €23.0 million — a modest decline of 3.0%, but its share actually increased to approximately 88% as other suppliers contracted more sharply.

Source: Top import partners

This dominance is underpinned by China's position as the world's largest silk producer by a wide margin. The relative stability of Chinese supply (coefficient of variation of only 0.13 for import values) stands in contrast to the extreme volatility of most other suppliers, underscoring how structurally dependent the EU market has become on a single origin.

2.2 The decline of secondary suppliers and the rise of niche origins

Several traditional secondary suppliers have seen dramatic declines. Imports from the United Kingdom fell 89.3% — likely reflecting post-Brexit trade restructuring after 2020. Japan, once a modest source, essentially disappeared (-98.4%). Türkiye and Tunisia also contracted significantly.

Against this backdrop, two notable exceptions stand out. Thailand surged from a negligible €14,161 in 2015 to €237,440 in 2025, an increase of over 1,500%. This suggests the emergence of a new, albeit still small, supply channel, possibly linked to Southeast Asian silk processing. However, Thai imports were highly volatile (CV of 0.99), indicating this is not yet a reliable or stable source.

2.3 Italy and Germany anchor the import side within the EU

Among EU member states, Italy and Germany dominate silk waste imports, reflecting their historically strong textile and luxury goods industries. Italy alone imported €16.4 million in 2025 (down 7.7% from 2015), accounting for roughly 63% of EU-level imports. Germany followed at €9.0 million (down 10.1%).

Source: Top EU importers

Several smaller member states — France, Estonia, Portugal — saw dramatic percentage increases, though from very low bases. Portugal's rise from €149 to €90,747 is particularly striking and may reflect the emergence of niche textile processing activity or re-export functions. The specialisation analysis confirms that Germany (RSCA: 0.58) and Italy (RSCA: 0.19) are the most specialised EU exporters of silk waste, consistent with their dominant roles in silk-related value chains.

3. Market Concentration and Price Shocks

3.1 Import concentration has tightened

The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) for EU imports by value increased modestly from 7,419 to 7,817 (+5.4%) over the period. An HHI above 2,500 is generally considered highly concentrated; at nearly 8,000, the EU import market for silk waste is extremely concentrated, overwhelmingly driven by China's dominance. The concentration analysis shows that concentration by volume rose even more sharply (+15.0%), from 7,129 to 8,198, indicating that the declining volumes have been disproportionately absorbed by smaller suppliers.

The export-side HHI also increased (from 2,357 to 2,866, +21.6%), suggesting that EU exports have also become more concentrated around fewer destinations. This reflects the disappearance of some traditional export partners (notably Switzerland and the UK) and the growing relative importance of a smaller set of buyers.

3.2 Notable price shocks in EU export markets

The volatility analysis reveals several significant price shock events in EU exports:

Source: Supply shocks

The most extreme event was a near-tenfold price increase in EU exports to Switzerland in 2019 (abnormality score of 142.2). This is particularly notable given that Switzerland was historically a major EU export destination (€465,991 in 2015) but had essentially collapsed to €9,972 by 2025 (−97.9%). The 2019 price spike likely reflects a one-off or small-volume premium transaction occurring as broader trade was already declining. Similarly, the 2018 US price shock (+204.1%) coincided with a period when the United States was absorbing 17.2% of EU export value — a share that subsequently became highly volatile (US export CV of 1.77).

3.3 Divergent volatility profiles across trading partners

The volatility analysis reveals a stark contrast between China's reliability as an import source (CV: 0.13) and the extreme volatility of smaller suppliers. On the import side, Japan (CV: 1.79), Singapore (CV: 1.73), and Peru (CV: 1.71) exhibited the highest volatility, though their absolute trade volumes were negligible. Among meaningful partners, the United Kingdom (CV: 0.89) and Türkiye (CV: 1.22) showed substantial instability.

On the export side, Vietnamese exports from the EU were most volatile (CV: 1.77), followed by US-bound shipments (CV: 1.77) and Chinese-bound exports (CV: 1.02). The growth of EU exports to China — from just €3,221 in 2015 to €273,693 in 2025 (+8,396%) — is remarkable but accompanied by high volatility, suggesting this is still an irregular or opportunistic trade flow rather than a stable channel. Similarly, EU exports to Ukraine grew 256.7% (to €84,216), possibly reflecting regional supply chain reconfigurations following geopolitical disruptions.

Conclusion

The EU market for silk waste (CN 5003) between 2015 and 2025 is characterised by structural decline, extreme supplier concentration, and episodic price volatility. Import volumes have fallen by a quarter, yet prices have risen by over 25%, painting a picture of a market under supply-side pressure. China's dominance has not only persisted but intensified, with the country now accounting for nearly 88% of EU import value. The EU's own export capacity has eroded significantly, with volumes and values both declining by around 40%, while traditional export destinations such as Switzerland and the United Kingdom have largely disappeared.

Within the EU, Italy and Germany remain the two pillars of silk waste trade, though Italy's share is gradually declining. Emerging import activity in France, Portugal, and Estonia hints at possible shifts in the geographic distribution of silk processing within Europe, but these remain small in absolute terms.

Looking ahead, the market's dependence on Chinese supply represents both a structural feature and a potential vulnerability. Any disruption to Chinese exports — whether from policy changes, climate impacts on sericulture, or geopolitical tensions — would have outsized effects on an already concentrated EU market. The combination of declining volumes and rising prices also suggests that silk waste is becoming an increasingly niche input, likely facing continued competition from synthetic alternatives in textile manufacturing.