Open borders: Why is implementing the AfCFTA stalling?

It was meant to transform Africa’s economic landscape and drive its industrialisation. Its rollout was supposed to allow the continent to assert its financial and commercial independence in the face of global superpowers – its sovereignty, in short.

But seven years after its launch and five years after it came into force, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) has yet to deliver on its promises.

On paper, almost everything is in place. All African countries except Eritrea have signed the agreement, and nearly all have ratified it. Rules of origin have been largely harmonised, states have committed to progressively eliminating tariffs on 90% of tariff lines, and the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS) covers 23 countries. Since 2024, the first trade flows under the AfCFTA regime have gotten underway.

Nothing has changed

At summits, self-congratulation often reigns supreme. In the pages of The Africa Report, Wamkele Mene, the AfCFTA’s secretary-general, has hailed a “remarkable pace of adoption”. But in the ports, at the borders and within customs administrations, the reality is far less impressive.

Many signed the agreement as one signs a statement of principle

Since the AfCFTA came into force, intra-African trade has grown by around 7%, rising from just over $200bn in 2022 to nearly $220bn in 2025. That is progress in absolute terms, certainly, but intra-African trade’s share of the total has not budged, remaining stuck at around 15% of the continent’s overall trade.

In short, despite the AfCFTA’s launch, little or nothing has changed: Africa remains locked into a model of exporting raw materials, and the continent’s economies are more closely connected to external markets than to their neighbours.

This is all the more troubling given that the results so far – slow, uneven and fragmented – are out of step with the economic urgency the continent faces. At a time when global value chains are being reshaped, when trade tensions between major powers are opening windows of opportunity, and when Africa is desperately seeking sources of growth beyond raw materials, continental trade integration cannot afford to remain bogged down in technical negotiations.

Is the AfCFTA’s Secretariat to blame? Its leadership and strategy can certainly be questioned. But given the institution’s limited resources, it cannot be held responsible for everything.

Does the blame lie with member states, then? Many signed the agreement as one signs a statement of principle, without ever seriously preparing their economies for the opening up of the continental market.

Exposed to competition

Because opening up a market means accepting that certain domestic industries will be exposed to competition. It means giving up customs revenue, harmonising standards, modernising customs services and investing in transport infrastructure. In short, it means carrying out politically costly reforms.

African governments still often regard their neighbours as competitors. Protectionist reflexes die hard. As long as national interests take precedence over continental commitments, the AfCFTA will remain a symbol.

Finally, Africa created the AfCFTA without giving it any authority to enforce it. Unlike the European Union, this zone has neither a commission with binding powers, nor a substantial budget, nor a credible enforcement mechanism.

This is not a failure, but an unfinished project. Integration cannot simply be decreed – it has to be managed. And in the meantime, it is stalling.