unstable over time. Demand generally remains below US$ 15 million. Conversely, goat imports have been declining since the start of the decade, going from US$ 15 million in 2000 to US$ 1 million in 2017.

<!-- Start of picture text --> Figure 7: Trend of livestock import of Nigeria (in Figure 8: Nigerian imports of meat and edible<br>thousands of USD) offal (in thousands of US dollars)<br> 180 000 120000<br> 160 000 100000<br> 140 000<br>80000<br> 120 000<br>60000<br> 100 000<br> 80 000 40000<br> 60 000 20000<br> 40 000<br>0<br> 20 000<br> -<br>Total l'Afrique Aggregation<br>Source: FAOStat, estimates Source: Trademap<br>2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019<br>2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018<br><!-- End of picture text --> For the import of meat and edible meat, unlike ECCAS, Nigeria's imports of meat and edible offal have experienced a checkered pattern since 2001, with a peak in 2010. The protectionist policies explain this. Indeed, Nigeria imposed drastic measures prohibiting imports of beef meat. Since 2003, the bulk of global imports have come from Africa (Figure 8).<sup>6</sup> While the Nigerian government and trading community's concerns leading to recourse to imports bans or restrictions could be legitimate, this is by far the best approach. A preferred way forward is to promote exports and the use of market-friendly import regulations that foster a universal trade rule-of-law environment. The list of potential measures includes (a) a competitive foreign exchange regime, (b) use of the flexibilities built into the WTO law such as import restrictions for balance of payment or safeguard reasons, and (c) use of the anti-dumping provisions. As concluded by “the coherent and consistent pursuit of good trade policy requires not only a robust and appropriate domestic institutional framework and process for trade policy-making but also a supportive and institutionalized multilateral arrangement for trade policy surveillance” (Oyejide et al. 2005).

There is real potential for positioning in the livestock and edible meat and offal market for Chad. On the one hand, Chad's livestock production capacity is significant, with a preponderance of cattle. Moreover, this capacity is likely to be underestimated since the activities are carried out mainly in an informal way. An improvement in the logistics apparatus and a restructuring of the sector could make it possible to increase the supply from Chad. On the other hand, with requests for meat and edible offal worth up to $ 100 million in Nigeria and $ 30 million for ECCAS, Chad must implement policies that can make it possible to compete with other countries and, above all, ensure compliance of Chadian products with the regulatory requirements of Nigeria.<sup>7</sup> In addition, North and East African countries remain potential untapped markets that Chad can conquer should it improve its productivity and competitiveness.

# **2.3. Chad’s Competitors**

Among the top supplying countries in Africa, Namibia ranks first, accounting for the largest share over the past 5 years (48 percent). South Africa and Zambia follow, accounting respectively for 19 percent and 14

> 6 The erratic trade policy of Nigeria and its detrimental impact have been widely debated and analyzed (Fasan 2015).

> 7 Although Nigeria has banned the import of edible meats, the import ban is likely to be phased out as part of the African Continental Free Trade Area negotiations.

7