63 by-country, on a joint free-alongside-ship (f.a.s.) and cost-insurance-freight (c.i.f.) basis. (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Panama, Philippines, Uruguay and Venezuela are among other countries that follow similar procedures). The f.a.s. valuation includes the purchase price of the product plus all charges incurred in placing merchandise along the vessel at the port of exportation.27 In contrast, the c.i.f. valuation measures the value of imports at the port of entry in the United States and includes all freight, insurance, and other charges (excluding import duties) incurred in bringing the merchandise from the port of exportation and placing it alongside the carrier.<sup>2</sup> ' Since this detailed freight cost information is available for almost two decades is can be used to determine how African freight rates compare with those for other countries, and how these charges have changed over time.

Several points should be noted regarding the available transport cost data. First, although the United States ranks below OECD Europe as a destination for Sub-Saharan countries exports, this trade exceeded $10.8 billion in 1993 which places it ahead of any other market. For some countries like Angola, Congo, Liberia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, and Zaire over one-fifth of total exports went to North America. Second, although U.S. imports are concentrated in fuels, foods, and raw materials, some labor intensive manufactured goods are still of sufficient importance that freight costs can be analyzed for these products. As such, the United States transport cost information should provide a useful "base" for assessing the importance of the comparative level and changes in "An important limitation of these data is that they do not reflect the cost of inland transportation -- which may be very high for some African countries -- or port charges. The importance of the latter should not be underestimated. For example, World Bank data compiled by Tyler Biggs show port charges for clearing a 20 foot container in Abidjan (Cote d'lvoire) and Dakar (Senegal) were $1,100 and $910 respectively. In contrast, the ocean freight cost for shipping the container to the Hamburg/Le Havre ranged between $1,350 to $1,430.

2&The c.i.f. to f.a.s. ratio can be used to measure nominal international transport and insurance charges for exports of product i from country j (Fj) from: (2) f = (V..i, - _Vf,d)_ Vf, = (vc Vfj)- I where V,bj represents the c.i.f. and Vfij is the f.a.s. value of exports of tariff line level product i from country j to the United States. The measure understates the true importance of transportation costs for land-locked African countries. Since the f.a.s. value is measured alongside the ship at the exporting country it excludes costs incurred by a land-locked country in transitting its neighbors. United States import statistics tabulate the f.a.s. and c.i.f. values of goods imported by air and ocean vessel separately so nominal freight rates for both these modes of transport can be estimated. A further point is that equation (1) likely will not reflect port costs as it primarily measures **"at** sea" charges. Several related studies suggest that port costs and port problems in many African and other developing countries often are of key importance for exporters (see Hans Jurgen Peters (1989)).