Market evolution: Worked granite (CN 68029310) — 2015–2025

Introduction

This report examines the trade dynamics of worked granite (CN 68029310) in the European Union over the period 2015–2025. The product covers granite that has been polished, decorated or otherwise worked (but not carved), with a net weight of 10 kg or more — a category relevant to the construction, architectural cladding and monumental stone industries. Over the decade under review, the EU's position in this market underwent a marked structural transformation: EU production more than halved, exports collapsed, and the bloc shifted from being a net exporter to a net importer. At the same time, the geography of supply diversified away from China and toward a broader set of emerging suppliers. The following sections trace these dynamics in detail.

1. From net exporter to net importer: a decade of structural deterioration

1.1 The trade balance has more than doubled in deficit

The most striking feature of the 2015–2025 period is the EU's transition from a modest net exporter to a significant net importer of worked granite. In 2015, the EU's trade balance stood at −€110 million; by 2025 it had widened to −€251 million, a deterioration of 127% (trade overview). The net import reliance indicator captures this shift quantitatively: it moved from −9.0% in 2015 (indicating a net export position) to +11.3% in 2025 (indicating net import dependence). This represents a swing of over 20 percentage points and signals a fundamental repositioning of the EU in the global worked granite market.

1.2 Exports fell far more sharply than imports held steady

The widening deficit was driven overwhelmingly by the collapse of EU exports rather than a surge in imports.

EU export volumes more than halved over the decade, shedding over 200,000 tonnes. Import volumes, by contrast, declined only modestly (−6.3%), and the value of imports actually rose slightly (+3.6%), buoyed by higher unit prices. This asymmetry — collapsing exports against relatively stable imports — is the core mechanism behind the deteriorating balance.

1.3 EU production has contracted in parallel with export decline

The decline in exports is mirrored by a severe contraction in EU domestic production. According to Prodcom data (production volumes), production quantity fell from 6.74 billion kg in 2015 to 3.00 billion kg in 2025 (−55.5%), while production value dropped from €3.03 billion to €1.63 billion (−46.2%). This suggests that the EU stone-working industry has been under sustained structural pressure — likely reflecting rising energy and labour costs, competition from lower-cost producers abroad, and shifting construction demand patterns.

1.4 Unit prices diverge, revealing two distinct market segments

Despite falling volumes, both export and import unit prices rose over the period. However, a persistent and significant price gap exists:

EU exports are priced at roughly 1.9 times the level of imports. This differential indicates that the EU specialises in higher-value, more elaborately worked granite products (e.g., precision-cut slabs, polished architectural elements), while importing lower-cost semi-worked or standard-grade material. The faster rise in export prices (+17.4% vs. +10.6%) may reflect cost pressures on EU manufacturers or a shift toward more premium products as cheaper segments are lost to foreign competition.

2. Diversification of import sources: the waning of Chinese dominance

2.1 China remains the largest single supplier but has lost significant share

In 2015, China was the EU's dominant granite supplier, accounting for imports worth €215.0 million. By 2025, Chinese shipments had fallen to €141.1 million — a decline of 34.4% (top partners). China's coefficient of variation in import values (0.36) also indicates moderate volatility over the period, suggesting fluctuating rather than stable supply patterns.

2.2 India has become the EU's leading supplier by value

India's granite exports to the EU rose from €148.2 million in 2015 to €190.3 million in 2025 (+28.4%), overtaking China as the EU's top import source by value. India's supply was notably more stable than China's, with a coefficient of variation of just 0.09 — the lowest among the top import partners (volatility). India also experienced a notable price shock in 2022, with an abnormality score of 3.3 and a 35.1% price shift, affecting nearly half of import value (supply shocks).

2.3 Emerging suppliers have surged: Türkiye, Egypt, Vietnam and Brazil

Several smaller suppliers have grown dramatically over the decade, diversifying the EU's import base away from its two traditional sources.

Türkiye's rise is particularly noteworthy given its simultaneous role as a competitor: the EU's exports to Türkiye collapsed from €24.9 million to €5.5 million (−77.8%) over the same period, suggesting that Türkiye has shifted from being a customer of EU granite to a rival supplier. Egypt, which barely registered in 2015, is now a material source. Brazil has nearly tripled its shipments.

2.4 Import concentration has declined, reflecting the broader supplier base

The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) for import concentration by value fell from 4,542 in 2015 to 3,497 in 2025 (−23.0%). By volume, the decline was even steeper, from 5,995 to 2,919 (−51.3%). While an HHI of ~3,500 still indicates a moderately concentrated market (the India–China duopoly remains dominant in value terms), the trend is clearly toward greater diversification. This reduces the EU's single-country supply risk, though several of the newer suppliers (Egypt, Türkiye, North Macedonia) exhibit high volatility in their shipments.

3. Italy's diminishing but enduring dominance and the hollowing of EU export capacity

3.1 Italy accounts for roughly half of all EU granite exports

Italy has consistently been the EU's leading exporter of worked granite, shipping €76.3 million worth in 2025 — approximately 50% of total EU exports by value. Spain is a distant second at €47.9 million. Together, these two countries account for over 80% of EU outward trade (top reporters — exports).

Italy's specialisation in this product is unmatched within the EU: it records a Revealed Symmetric Comparative Advantage (RSCA) of 0.73 and an RCA of 6.53, confirming a strong and persistent competitive edge. Portugal (RSCA 0.65, RCA 4.66) and Slovenia (RSCA 0.47) are secondary but far less significant in absolute terms.

3.2 Italian and Spanish exports have halved — the US market has contracted

Despite their dominance, Italy's exports fell from €152.8 million to €76.3 million (−50.1%) and Spain's from €88.4 million to €47.9 million (−45.8%). Germany, the third-largest EU exporter, declined from €19.5 million to €12.8 million (−34.3%).

The United States, which was the EU's single largest export destination in 2015 at €92.0 million, saw purchases fall to €46.2 million (−49.8%) by 2025. Switzerland declined from €40.9 million to €27.2 million (−33.5%), and the United Kingdom — potentially affected by Brexit-related trade friction — dropped from €22.5 million to €7.9 million (−64.8%). These three markets alone lost a combined €82 million in export value.

3.3 Morocco has been the only resilient major export market

Among the EU's top export partners, Morocco stands out as the only destination that maintained or grew its purchases, rising from €25.1 million to €27.4 million (+9.2%). It also exhibited the lowest volatility among the top export partners (CV 0.08), making it the EU's most stable external market. Serbia emerged as a smaller but fast-growing outlet, more than doubling from €1.3 million to €3.2 million (+153.2%).

3.4 The EU's import landscape is becoming more centralised around a few large member states

On the import side, Germany remains the EU's largest importer but declined from €133.2 million to €103.4 million (−22.4%). By contrast, several Central and Eastern European member states sharply increased their intake:

Poland's surge — now the EU's second-largest importer — likely reflects the country's construction boom and its growing role as a processing and re-distribution hub for stone products in Central Europe. France nearly doubled its imports, while Romania's intake grew by 160%, consistent with rapid infrastructure development in southeastern Europe.

3.5 Trade intensity has risen, deepening the EU's integration in global granite markets

The EU's trade intensity — the share of trade relative to production — rose from 21.2% in 2015 to 35.8% in 2025 (+68.6%). Meanwhile, export propensity (exports as a share of production) was relatively stable at around 15–17%. The surge in trade intensity is therefore driven primarily by the import side: as domestic production has collapsed, the EU has become structurally more reliant on external granite supply to meet demand.

Conclusion

The EU's worked granite market has undergone a pronounced structural transformation between 2015 and 2025. Three interconnected trends define the period:

1. A collapse in domestic production — output halved from 6.7 billion kg to 3.0 billion kg — has undermined the EU's export capacity and converted the bloc from a net exporter into a net importer, with the trade deficit widening from €110 million to €251 million.

2. The geography of supply has diversified. China, while still a major source, has ceded ground to India (now the leading supplier at €190 million) and to a cohort of fast-growing exporters including Türkiye, Egypt, Vietnam and Brazil. Import concentration, as measured by the HHI, has declined by 23%, reducing single-source dependency — though several of these new suppliers exhibit high volatility.

3. Italy remains the anchor of EU granite exports but has seen its own shipments halve, alongside Spain and Germany. The US market — once worth €92 million — has contracted by half, and Brexit has severely reduced UK-bound trade. Morocco has emerged as the most stable and resilient export destination.

Looking ahead, the EU faces the challenge of balancing the cost advantages of diversified imports against the strategic value of maintaining domestic stone-working capacity — an industry where Italy, in particular, retains deep competitive advantages but faces mounting competitive and cost pressures from abroad.