INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2937
www.rsisinternational.org
Qualitative Analysis of Stakeholder Perceptions of AGOA’s
Challenges in Nigeria
Afolayan, V.E.
1*
, Afolayan, D.O.
3,4
, Egbuna, N.E.
1,2
1
Department of Public Policy and Public Administration, African University of Science and Technology
(AUST), P.M.B. 681, Garki, Abuja, Nigeria.
2
International Center for Regional Integration and Trade Research (ICRITR), Nnamdi Azikiwe
University (NAU), Akwa, Anambra State, Nigeria.
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering, African University of Science and Technology (AUST), P.M.B.
681, Garki, Abuja, Nigeria.
4
Department of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering, Worcester Polytechnic Institute
(WPI), 100 Institute Rd, MA 01609, United States.
*Corresponding Author
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000235
Received: 28 September 2025; Accepted: 04 October 2025; Published: 08 November 2025
ABSTRACT
The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), as a trade preference program, offers trade privileges to
participating countries, including Nigeria, since its inception. After 24 years, the impact of the trade program on
Nigeria’s trade volume is fragmented, and the extent to which the trade preference has influenced trade volume
and internal trade policy remains uncertain. This paper analyses the stakeholder perception of the impact of
AGOA on trade volume. It identifies limitations of AGOA’s trade policy. Clearly, it presents specific policy-
relevant implications for trade challenges in Nigeria using a combined purposive and snowball sampling survey
method to collect and analyse primary data. The stakeholder perception indicates that AGOA trade increases
market capacity, leads to market expansion, and business development, and that the Nigerian market can meet
the AGOA’s product specifications. However, Nigeria’s failure to meet the standards due to weak trade policy
and other internal and external limitations to trade has worsened AGOA’s challenges on trade volume and
economic growth. In contrast to recommendations for policy remedies to address the limitations, the study
suggests that, given the internal challenges, the Nigerian government should review the conditions of AGOA to
determine if its current trade policy postures align with the current realities. The Nigerian government study the
conditions contained in the AfCFTA trade program and ascertain if its current capacity, socioeconomic structure,
and institutions can guarantee maximum benefits.
Keyword: African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), volume of trade, economic growth, market expansion,
trade, limitations, trade benefits.
INTRODUCTION
The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) is a United States Trade Act enacted in 2000, amended and
signed into law in July 2004, and has since been renewed to 2025 (Jacob et al., 2020; Rapanyane, 2022). AGOA
is a legislation that grants access to the United States for qualifying Sub-Saharan (SSA) countries (Kulu &
Bentum-ennin, 2023; J. N. Nshisso, 2017; Rapanyane, 2022). It is the core of U.S. economic policy and
commercial engagement with Africa, established to complement the success of the Generalised System of
Preferences (GSP), which was introduced in 1974. This legislation builds on GSP, an existing U.S. trade program
that grants duty-free access to approximately 6500 AGOA products in the US market. AGOA is the primary
U.S. trade policy for the African region, focusing on economic and political development, strengthening U.S.
trade ties with Africa and the Caribbean, and promoting growth and democratic ideals across Africa. It is
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2938
www.rsisinternational.org
expected of a participating country to meet a set of conditions contained in the AGOA legislation to qualify and
remain eligible for AGOA preferences (Babarinde & Wright, 2017; Fernandes et al., 2019; Kategekwa, 2017;
Mahabir et al., 2020; Williams, 2015). Some of the conditions include a country’s readiness to improve its rule
of law, human rights and respect for core labour standards, and other conditions stated at the discretion of the
US President (AGOA, 2024; Fernandes et al., 2019; Kulu & Bentum-ennin, 2023; Osabohien et al., 2021a;
Schneidman et al., 2021; Signe, 2022).
The execution of the trade preference program was indeed a great and promising start. The first decade witnessed
a significant increase in exports, from $22 billion to $61 billion, and the creation of over 300,000 jobs in Africa,
in addition to 1.3 million jobs elsewhere. For instance, South Africa increased automotive exports from $150
million to $2.2 billion by 2013. The AGOA has become a phenomenal success within its first twelve years of
operation. However, both the U.S. and AGOA participating countries failed to use the program effectively and
are unable to sustain the region’s economic growth recorded in the first 15 years after AGOA was implemented.
Exports to the U.S. have also declined significantly below their levels when AGOA was introduced (Claire,
2017; Rick, 2015). Diversification of the economy has lagged, and oil and gas, out of the 6,800 AGOA products
have become major AGOA exports since 2001. The U.S.-Africa trade, which forms a significant part of Africa’s
contribution of 3% to the global trade, suddenly diminished, accounting for < 1% of U.S. exports and a 56%
decrease in imports from 2002 to 2022 (Mhonyera, 2020; Nellie, 2023; Rick, 2015). Despite all this, Africa has
continued to explore alternatives to relying solely on low-value-added products and natural resources. It has
become challenging to devise one-size-fits-all solutions to address the limitations of the AGOA trade program.
According to the African Growth and Opportunity Act Trade Resources Centre of the Nigerian Export Promotion
Council (NEPC), Nigeria is yet to tap into the AGOA trade program due to several reasons (Observer, 2018;
Osabohien et al., 2021a; Signe, 2023). Every particular country has specific limitations to the attainment of
AGOA benefits. In Nigeria, most non-oil products do not meet quality standards. For instance, most Nigerian
foods are AGOA eligible but are exported without Food and Drug Administration (FDA) certifications. Such
products are exported ‘behind the door”, that is, exported illegally (Claire, 2017; Rick, 2015). AGOA (2014),
Henry (2023) & Osabohien et al. (2021a) reported that the two-way trade in AGOA goods between Nigeria and
the U.S. recorded the best trade balance of $33,965.6 and $28,942.6 in 2008 and 2011. Ever since then, the best
trade balance was $4,895.7 in 2017, and there were negative trade balances in 2014-2015 and 2020-2021. The
decline in trade following the initial surge also contributed to Nigeria’s low share of global trade (Henry, 2023;
Observer, 2018). Similarly, AGOA is still regarded as Nigeria’s untapped opportunity for non-oil exports, and
the U.S. has failed to implement an effective trade policy after 22 years of participating in the AGOA trade
program for several reasons (AGOA, 2014; Henry, 2023; Observer, 2018; Rick, 2015). Calls by the Nigerian
government through the Nigerian Export Promotion Council (NEPC) and the Nigerian-American Chamber of
Commerce (NACC) to exporters and Nigerians to take advantage of AGOA benefits have not yielded significant
results based on the volume and balance of trade (Claire, 2017; Henry, 2023; Nellie, 2023; Observer, 2018).
Indeed, several issues are present in the execution of the AGOA trade program, and these must be addressed to
ensure that Nigeria and the U.S. can effectively leverage the AGOA program for improved trade ties, the
development of AGOA-eligible products, and diversification.
Similarly, relevant Nigerian government agencies and representatives have emphasised that after thirteen (13)
years of joining the AGOA trade program, the country has only exported $6 million worth of non-oil goods,
which are mostly private-sector investments. This, as claimed, is due to Nigeria’s over-reliance on oil. The
situation has not changed significantly – the volume of trade remains low, and the trade balance remains negative.
For instance, the nineteen (19) years of access to AGOA trade benefits have not significantly helped Nigeria to
develop and increase exports within its area of enormous potential, such as the rich human and material
resources. Osabohien et al. (2021a) examined the impact of AGOA on the volume of imports, exports and trade
balance (socio-economic indicators) in Nigeria between 1996 to 2019 (2015 not included). The AGOA data was
compared with responses from in-depth interviews with stakeholders (heads of departments) of the Federal
Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment (FMITI), the Nigerian Export Promotion Council (NEPC), the
Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN) and individuals at the US Agency for International Development.
Similarly, Sunday (2019) applied the factor endowment theory to evaluate the impact of U.S. trade relations with
Nigeria, utilising credible secondary data, results, and reports. The analysis concluded that the relationship was
imbalanced and non-preferential, as claimed.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2939
www.rsisinternational.org
The AGOA has served as the cornerstone of the U.S.-Africa trade relationship for over two decades. One of the
most promising relations Nigeria had been the Sino-Nigerian relations under the AGOA trade program. As part
of the doctoral research, Oni (2018) used data collected from in-depth interviews of twenty four (24) respondents
in Nigeria to assess the impact of AGOA on trade relations, foreign direct investment (FDI) and compared with
data in the literature to provide answers to four (4) research questions using descriptive analysis and pivot table
based on testable assumptions. Evidence showed a declining trade and investment between 2000 and 2015.
Several other studies on AGOA have adopted statistical analysis to examine the growth of trade in AGOA
participating countries and have also reported a consecutive decline in trade over the last 20 years. However,
studies on the impact of AGOA trade preferences on the volume of trade in Nigeria, based on quasi-open surveys
consisting of discussions, opinions, and free comments by experts and government representatives, are relatively
scarce. This was described as a snow-ball method by Nshisso (2017) and Nshisso (2024).
Notably, a few reports and recommendations are published on web pages and blogs based on secondary data
sources; the primary data are limited and not updated to reflect the progression of events and a general assessment
of the program at the close of the trade program or prior to possible AGOA extension. While this is
commendable, and even though the trade policy was designed to be unbiased, research has shown there is a wide
range of AGOA utilisation rates. Highlights of some of the limitations and challenges associated with AGOA
utilisation include infrastructural constraints, supply chain constraints, a lack of diversification, a business
environment that is not conducive, a lack of access to finance, and a low level of awareness. There is, to an
extent, limited empirical evidence on the direct impacts of these factors on AGOA implementation. Considering
several issues to address, Nshisso (2017) and Nshisso (2024) recommend a multiple case study of the subject of
AGOA trade, along with a snowball sampling method, to ensure the efficient replication of results to a large
population in a similar situation.
This study presents an overview of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) since its inception,
identifying its loopholes and challenges that undermine the fulfilment of its objectives and shared benefits in
Nigeria and across the SSA region. It itemises the significance and substantial as well as potential contributions
of the Act to trade in sub-Saharan Africa and Nigeria, in terms of the volume of trade and trade relations. The
study also measures the impact of AGOA MTA/PTA trade program and compares it with its current realities.
The study addresses research questions such as: “To what extent have AGOA multilateral or preferential trade
agreements (MTA/PTA) affected trade in Nigeria?”, “What are the features of existing trade policies (local and
national) and trade agreements (AGOA), and their implications on trade in Nigeria?”, “To what extent has
AGOA PTA/MTA affected existing trade policies in Nigeria?”.
The study uses questionnaires administered to experts at the AGOA Branch of the Federal Ministry of Trade and
Investment (FMTI), as well as FMTI’s AGOA and Nigeria Export and Import Bank (NEXIM) branches, to
answer research questions and validate the research hypothesis. Based on the survey results and answers to
research questions, the following hypotheses are tested: “AGOA as an outcome of both a multilateral trade
agreement (MTA) and/or preferential trade agreement has contributed to the status of the volume of trade and
affected or supported the implementation of trade policies in Nigeria and other AGOA’s participating countries
– negative and positive effects”. The research, policy, and theoretical frameworks provided in the next section
offer an indication of what to expect in the study.
Research Framework
The AGOA trade program is one of the United States’ initiatives to contribute to the economic and political
development of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) countries. This came in the form of tariff-free packages for over
6,000 goods that are produced mainly in Africa. This intervention also focused on transforming its economic
and trade relationships with SSA. The intervention focuses on increasing trade between the United States and
countries within sub-Saharan Africa. Additionally, the Act aims to transform African nations into a free state
where democracy is practised, which supports growth and is market-friendly, as opposed to military or dictatorial
governance. Since the policy was enacted into law, some of the participating countries have benefited from the
project. Table 1 presents some of the positive and negative indices of AGOA between 1998 and 2022 (within 24
years).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2940
www.rsisinternational.org
It was truly conceivable that the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) facilitated a significant increase
in trade programs between the U.S. and Nigeria, as well as other eligible sub-Saharan African countries, through
duty-free access. However, several research outputs consider the increase as mere numbers that may not
contribute to achieving AGOA’s objectives. To many trade experts in Nigeria, pre-AGOA was considered better,
given the number of commodities available for export and the ability of the Nigerian government to mobilise its
resources for active trade engagement. Osabohien et al. (2021a) and Sunday (2019) argued that Nigeria
participated in AGOA within its areas of weakness and performed poorly in its areas of strength, including
textiles, apparel, agricultural products, minerals, and metals. This is because it is cheaper to process and obtain
products within these areas than to refine crude oil, considering the recent decarbonisation policy and
environmental management. Hence, Nigeria is unable to mobilise resources to engage the US (Osabohien et al.,
2021a; Sunday, 2019).
The extensive research on trade, monetary, and fiscal policies has reiterated the impact of trade impediments
associated with AGOA trade and Nigeria’s foreign trade and economic policies. Policies have outlined all that
needs to be done, and recommendations for policy review have elaborated on actionable steps (Chime, 2014; D.
Didia et al., 2015; Dal Didia & Tahir, 2022; Ola, 2019; ONI, 2018; Osabohien et al., 2021a). However, the
research gap persists and several problems remain unaddressed due to the weakness of existing research
frameworks (J. N. Nshisso, 2017; Ola, 2019; Osabohien et al., 2021a).
Table 1: Positive and negative indices of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) between the year it
was enacted (shortly prior to the enactment) and 2022 (AGOA, 2014, 2024; Chime, 2014; Claire, 2017; Henry,
2023; Jacob et al., 2020; Observer, 2018; Osabohien et al., 2021b; Rick, 2015; Signe, 2023).
Positive Indices of AGOA (1998-
2022)
Negative Indices of AGOA (1998-
2022)
Remarks
· Exports rose from $22 billion to $61
billion.
· > 300,000 jobs created in Africa from
1998-2022.
· 1.3 million Jobs created indirectly.
· South Africa increased its automotive
exports to the U.S. from $150 million in
2000 to $2.2 billion in 2013.
· Apparel production increased in East
Africa
· Increased US imports of
African goods.
· Exports from AGOA
participating countries to U.S.
tripled.
· As of 2010, AGOA has
become a phenomenal success
· Exports have fallen to what it was
in 2000 after the initial jump.
· Diversification of the economy has
lagged since 2016
· Oil and gas are now major AGOA
exports since 2001 out of the 6800
AGOA products.
· U.S.-Africa trade relations
remain underdeveloped.
· AGOA products account for
< 1% of U.S. import.
· 56% decrease in imports
from 2000-2022.
· AGOA products currently
form 4% of China imports and
4% EU.
· Exports lower than the value
it was at inception.
While several models and research methods have been adopted in analysing peculiar challenges in developed
countries with actionable steps that yield significant transformation, the same may not address current economic
challenges elsewhere. Nigeria’s position on existing policies must be considered when designing research to its
unique economic challenges, which have undermined all-around development over the years.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2941
www.rsisinternational.org
Review of Existing Policy and Theoretical Frameworks
The duty- and quota-free access to the U.S. market has boosted trade and investment between Sub-Saharan
Africa and the USA, and the AGOA participating countries have recorded success in trade. Some of the
qualifying products under the AGOA multilateral trade agreements include textiles, finished, or processed
agricultural products, non-oil products such as plant roots, and travel goods, among others, as specified in the
agreement. The level of success and the impact of the trade ware examined using different relevant models.
Sunday (2019) employed the factor endowment theoretical framework to assess trade relationships between the
US and Nigeria and referred to the interactions as ‘imbalanced’ and ‘deprived of trade benefits. Similarly, Runde
and Ramanujam (2022) identified the trade volume of AGOA products as a primary key performance indicator
(KPI) to measure the success of AGOA and its impact on U.S. trade with countries participating in the AGOA.
According to the United States Trade Representative (USTR), the volume of trade between the AGOA
participating countries and the United States grew by 25 %. However, AGOA participating countries gave
slightly contradictory opinions, arguing that the increase in trade volume was not solely for AGOA-eligible
products and was not entirely within the AGOA framework. This contradictory opinion raises questions about
the effectiveness of the AGOA and other trade legislations.
Didia et al. (2015) and Kulu and Bentum-Ennin (2023) associated the increase in trade volume with factors
contained within the trade agreement, as well as certain other factors outside the agreement. One of the
components of trade agreements that can contribute to increased trade volume is the preferential trade agreement.
This is typically a trade optimisation strategy. As also indicated, such a trade optimisation module may not meet
the needs of the AGOA participating countries that receive preferences (Kulu & Bentum-ennin, 2023). Figure 1
illustrates the two-way trade between AGOA-eligible countries and the United States. The figure shows U.S.
exports to AGOA countries, imports from AGOA countries, and the resulting trade balance with AGOA
countries. The direct implication of a negative balance of trade is a trade deficit. Similarly, the figure indicated
a significant increase in exports from the AGOA countries, and a growing share of AGOA usage, and a
substantial volume of imports from the United States.
The increase in trade volume, as reported has resulted in a trade surplus for the United States and a trade deficit
for the AGOA participating countries.
Figure 1: Two-way trade between the United States and AGOA participating countries showing U.S. exports
from the AGOA countries, imports to the AGOA countries and the trade balance (AGOA, 2024; Brice, 2024)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2942
www.rsisinternational.org
AGOA trade is a two-way trade and was designed as such to guarantee mutual trade benefits. However, several
loopholes have been identified that limit or undermine the effectiveness of the trade legislation. In Nigeria,
AGOA challenges are systemic and are caused by fundamental issues related to governance, institutions, and
market access (Osabohien et al., 2021). Studies on AGOA trade in Nigeria by AGOA (2024, 2014) revealed
similar reasons for its failure in the country. However, a case study of AGOA countries such as South Africa,
Ethiopia and Senegal indicated that the review of the AGOA PTA with the USA and renegotiation of the
agreement affected national trade policies of these countries. AGOA trade in Nigeria has also offered similar
trade policy remedies. However, the weak institutions and technological capacity have continued to frustrate
these interventions, amidst tons of recommendations for policy review (Henry, 2023, Jacob et al., 2020).
In this study, the stakeholders’ perceptions of previous studies and interventions were analysed to identify the
most significant challenges of AGOA in Nigeria. Based on the findings, specific policy-relevant implications
are drawn to address the systemic trade conflicts in Nigeria.
RESEARCH METHOLOGY AND DESIGN
Several empirical, numerical, and statistical methods have been used to assess AGOA’s contribution to economic
development in Nigeria. However, these methods do not adequately capture, and present implications of trade
policy remedies previously adopted in Nigeria to address AGOA’s challenges (Nshisso, 2024). This study
underscores the importance of stakeholders’ engagement in policymaking and sharing of accurate information
for identifying and analyzing existing policy issues. As recommended by Nshisso (2017), Nshisso (2024), and
Zikmund (2013), the data were collected using a combined purposive and snowball sampling method. The
findings are described using non-numerical features.
This study is targeted at reviewing the AGOA preferential trade agreement between Nigeria and the USA. Given
the diversity of the issue, two senior staff members from the Federal Ministries, Departments, and Agencies
(MDAs) were employed to identify thirty (30) stakeholders within the Nigerian AGOA branch. Partly open-
ended questionnaires were distributed to experts, who are stakeholders in AGOA trade in Nigeria. They were
drawn from the four major sections of the AGOA branch, including MDAs in charge of trade, investment, foreign
affairs, exports, and imports. Questionnaires were distributed to the MDAs to ensure that stakeholders’
perceptions, opinions, assessments, and judgements reflect nearly accurate and current realities of AGOA’s
legislation, trade policy, and the Nigerian export, import, and balance of trade, which are indices of trade volume.
Certain assumptions were taken to ensure the sampling strategy focused on non-numerical and statistical
descriptions of opinions or perceptions. The consent of the organisation representatives and the stakeholders
were sought, indicating they were anonymously chosen to participate in the survey. Similarly, data were sorted,
classified, and analysed using grouping, questions, and specific terms to ensure the stakeholders’ opinions are
clearly understood. While these steps have been taken to avoid biases that tend to influence perceptions, the
study may be limited by personality bias from the organisation’s representatives and stakeholders, as well as
overrating, incomplete or ambiguous responses, accuracy, and the relevance of published information.
Each questionnaire contains multiple-choice and open-ended questions, each with a list of options. Thirty (30)
questionnaires were distributed across four organisations, which include the Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade,
and Investment (FMITI), FMITI Multilateral Trade Division (AGOA Branch), Ministry of Foreign Affairs
(NMFA) and FMITI Nigeria Export-Import Bank (NEXIM) Division. Out of the total number of questionnaires
distributed, twenty-four (24) were administered to the staff of FMITI and FMITI Multilateral Trade Division
(AGOA Branch). The remaining six (6) questionnaires were administered to the staff of NMFA and NEXIM. A
total of twenty-six (26) of the thirty (30) questionnaires were retrieved from the stakeholders by the organisation
representatives and prepared for further analysis.
85% of the respondents completed the questionnaires, while 15% responded to 90% of the questions. In addition
to the questions provided in the questionnaire, respondents are expected to provide additional comments within
the space provided. Subjects were assigned, and respondents were requested to comment freely on each survey
question. Similarly, opinions were classified and numbered to measure the extent to which respondents agreed
or disagreed with the assigned policy-relevant implications and recommendations. Hence, an opinion,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2943
www.rsisinternational.org
expression, or perception is considered significant when up to 50% of the respondents allude to the assigned
subject and are well supported by closely related expressions.
The questionnaire was classified into two (2) sections. Section 1 consists of 3 confidential personal questions on
demographics, and Section 2 has twenty-two (22) technical questions focusing on AGOA trade, trade agreement,
trade liberalisation, trade negotiation, trade policy remedies, trade failures, AGOA’s legislation, AfCFTA, two-
way/one-way trade, and AGOA goods. Each question has between 1 and 3 sub-questions containing a list of
options from which the stakeholders are expected to choose. The options provided are not intended to constrain
or influence opinions but to guide and inform respondents about some of the most specific policy-relevant
implications. In addition to the options provided, stakeholders can add to the specific policy-relevant
implications.
Responses to the options were counted, and the data were classified and analysed. The analysis of survey
responses and their implications for issue identification are based on the research questions and hypothesis. The
specific research question (RQ) and research hypotheses (RH) are: To what extent has the AGOA trade
agreement (AGOA-TA) affected trade volume and trade policy in Nigeria? If not, what are the limitations and
challenges? Based on the RQ, the RH is: AGOA-TA has contributed to trade volume and affected trade policy
implementation in Nigeria. Overall, qualitative research methods were used to collate, analyse, and discuss the
primary data obtained from the survey. These findings were also compared with secondary data published in the
literature.
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Challenges of the AGOA Trade Program between Nigeria and the United States of America
AGOA-Nigeria Institutional Limitations
Table 2: Results showing responses on the minor and major loopholes of the AGOA trade program.
Perceptions on AGOA Challenges in Nigeria
Percentage (%)
AGOA-Nigeria Institutional Limitations
Weak legal institutions
33.0
Weak policy implementation
66.0
Countries with the highest utilisation rate of AGOA trade privileges
make more benefits of the program.
41.0
Non-compliance with the status of the AGOA’s legislation.
29.0
Incompleteness of the AGOA’s preferential trade agreement
33.0
Timely sealing of the AGOA preferential trade agreement between
Nigeria and the US.
20.0
Governance Challenges
Absence of timely review and implementation of trade policies
50.0
Lack of political will
58.0
Deception and economic malpractice (corruption and others)
45.0
Source: Field Survey, 2024
Table 2 presents the stakeholder perceptions on AGOA’s challenges in Nigeria. The foremost of these challenges
is disparities between the AGOA preferential trade agreement (PTA) and Nigeria’s trade policy and program.
Stakeholders’ perceptions of AGOA-Nigeria institutional limitations indicate that weak policy implementation
is one of the challenges AGOA faces in Nigeria. Although the strength of their perceptions on other issues like
weak legal institutions and trade policy/agreement is below 50%, they help to re-emphasise the need to address
the weak AGOA-Nigeria institution and other trade agreements between Nigeria and its allies. Similarly, the
governance challenges resolve around the existing institutions. Stakeholders perceived that those weak
institutions are responsible for the delayed review of AGOA trade policy and failure to assess the benefit of
AGOA to the Nigerian market since joining the trade program in the year 2000.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2944
www.rsisinternational.org
Governance Challenges
As previously mentioned, governance challenges affected the AGOA trade program in Nigeria. Figure 2
indicates the stakeholders’ perception of AGOA governance is faulty. The findings indicate that the Nigerian’s
government lack of willingness, along with deception and economic malpractices, also contributed to the failure
of AGOA in Nigeria. While only 45% of the perceptions agree that corruption and economic malpractices have
hindered the success of AGOA in Nigeria, such practices are expected due to weak institutions and law
enforcement. Overall, these challenges are fundamental and will affect development at all levels.
Infrastructural and Technological deficits
Table 3: Results showing responses on possible challenges to the fulfilment of the AGOA’s objectives.
Perceptions on AGOA Challenges in Nigeria
Respondents
Percentage (%)
Infrastructural and Technological Deficit
AGOA participating countries are not making full use of the
opportunity AGOA provide because of their structural disadvantages
16.0
66.0
Weak infrastructure
11.0
45.0
Nigeria’s negligence and failure to diversify the economy
16.0
66.0
AGOA trade policy/program is too demanding
7.0
29.0
Nigeria’s over-dependence on oil and petroleum products
18.0
79.0
Nigeria has not fully benefited from AGOA because of her weak
adherence to international product packaging standard
17.0
70.0
Little/no access to technical assistance and developmental support from
the USA to meet eligibility criteria.
19.0
79.0
Market Access Issues
Nigeria do not have the capacity to process and export the over 6,000
AGOA goods
9.0
41.0
Nigeria is limited as to the number of AGOA goods it can export due
to its failure to develop other sectors of the economy such as agriculture,
mining and mineral processing, Economic malpractices such as money
laundering, corruption, etc.
14.0
62.0
Nigeria’s benefits from the AGOA’s trade program is limited as a result
of inadequate infrastructural provision
17.0
70.0
Made in Nigeria/indigenous commodities increased in Nigeria markets
10.0
41.0
Source: Field Survey, 2024
Table 3 presents the stakeholders’ perceptions of infrastructural and technological deficits as one of the
significant AGOA challenges in Nigeria. Stakeholders underscore the relevance of technical assistance in
production to ensure manufacturers develop the technological capacity needed to transform raw materials into
goods and services that meet AGOA’s eligibility criteria. This is evident with the stakeholders’ agreement on
the need for technical assistance to ensure full-scale benefit of the AGOA trade program. It is valid that the
Nigerian market is enormous, but weak technological capacity has limited Nigerian participation in trade. This
also reflects current realities, as there are few indigenous products in the Nigerian market.
Similarly, the economic structure and landscape of Nigeria cannot support a foreign trade program such as the
AGOA trade program in its current state. This is evident in the stakeholders’ perceptions on some of the elements
of the Nigerian economic structure. Although the stakeholders agree that the Nigerian oil and gas industry has
benefited immensely from the AGOA trade program, the Nigerian government failed to diversify their economic
structure to support other areas of development, including solid minerals and agricultural material sectors. Over
66% of the stakeholders agree that negligence and weak economic structure contributed to the AGOA’s
challenges in Nigeria. This may be due to the disparities between the AGOA program and Nigeria’s economic
structure.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2945
www.rsisinternational.org
Market Access Issues
The AGOA trade program grants the AGOA’s participating countries a tariff-free status for over 6,000 goods.
This implies that Nigeria have access to the market for all these goods provided the AGOA’s standards are met.
However, Nigeria’s access to the market is limited due to several issues identified as significant for AGOA’s
success. The stakeholders agree that only a few Nigerian goods meet the AGOA standards, as shown in Table 3.
This AGOIA’s challenges are traceable to weak capacity for manufacturing, material value addition and
processing of its solid minerals in addition to crude oil.
Economic malpractices and weak infrastructure also play a part in denying Nigeria access to AGOA’s market.
Hence, Nigeria was not denied access to the market due to weak policy or any personal reasons, but because it
failed to meet the standards and terms of the trade agreement. The specific policy-relevant implications are:
Invest in technological capacity, build infrastructure, and strengthen institutions to guarantee manufacturing,
local production, and strict adherence to economic law and enforcement of trade policy remedies. As previously
discussed, weak institutions and poor infrastructure are significant shortcomings of the AGOA’s trade program,
and they require the necessary attention to ensure that Nigeria and Nigerians fully benefit from it.
AGOA’s Trade and Trade Policy Realities after 24 Years
Stakeholder Perception of AGOA’s Trade in Nigeria
Figure 2: Results showing responses as to whether anything has changed the volume of trade in Nigeria since
joining AGOA in 2000 (Source: Field Survey, 2024)
Figure 2 shows the stakeholders’ perception of AGOA trade in Nigeria. 75% of respondents believe that much
has changed regarding trade, while 4% disagree that there has ever been any positive impact since Nigeria joined
AGOA. Evidence indicates that despite the challenges of AGOA in Nigeria, a significant change in trade volume
occurred. While a significant number of respondents agreed that a lot has changed since Nigeria joined AGOA,
the minority still believe there is more to joining the trade pacts than the recorded trade data. In relation to
previous remarks by the stakeholders, it is unclear which indices the respondents used to measure the change in
trade volume, given the previously identified significance of the AGOA’s challenges. However, to avoid
speculations, a follow-up question examines how the change in trade volume contributes to the trade policy and
economic growth.
75
4
16
Yes, a lot has changed/improved
No, nothing has really improved
Yes and no (uncertain)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2946
www.rsisinternational.org
Stakeholder Perception of AGOA’s Contribution to Nigerian Trade Policy
Table 4: Results of responses as to if AGOA’s PTA and/or MTA had impact on trade in Nigeria and the US trade
relationship, and economic growth.
Source: Field Survey, 2024
The sustainability of the AGOA’s impact on trade, as reported in Figure 2, was questioned in Table 4. The
findings are the stakeholders’ perceptions of the impact of AGOA on different components of trade policy in
Nigeria. As stated in the AGOA trade agreement, Nigeria is expected to focus on economic and political
development in addition to the requirements for AGOA goods. Stakeholders’ perceptions of the significant
change in trade volume and the indices of trade volume do not agree, as shown in Table 4. Similarly, Nigeria
failed to sustain political development, the rule of law, and the trade agreement (PTA). The findings reveal that
the stakeholders agree there is inconsistent legislation due to poor management of the AGOA PTA, weak trade
policy implementations, and inherent loopholes in the trade agreement. Although previous studies on AGOA
trade volume also agreed that the volume of AGOA trade increased (Claire, 2017, Rick, 2015), it dipped
significantly below the expected level due to the issues raised in Table 4.
Stakeholder Perception of AGOA Contribution to Economic Development
Table 5: Results showing responses on the major contributions of AGOA’s trade program on the past and current
economic realities based on the volume of trade of AGOA goods (export-import) in Nigeria.
Perceptions of AGOA Contribution to Economic Development
Respondents
Percentage (%)
The volume of trade increased
16.0
66.7
Nigeria’s export to the USA increased
15.0
62.0
Nigeria’s import from the USA increased
9.0
37.0
Nigeria recorded economic growth
11.0
45.0
Nigeria benefited from the free-trade program
15.0
62.0
Source: Field Survey, 2024
Per capita income and GDP are the major indices of economic development (Osabohien et al., 2021). Nigeria’s
economic realities indicate that an increase in trade may not contribute to economic growth, as reflected in
stakeholders’ perceptions of the policy-relevant implications for economic growth (Table 8). The findings
indicate that the increase in Nigeria’s exports to the USA and overall trade volume does not fully translate on
economic growth. Similarly, most stakeholders (62%) who agree that Nigeria has benefited from AGOA cannot
fully substantiate the direct implications of the trade benefit to economic growth. It is valid, that amidst AGOA
challenges in Nigeria, its trade was sustained, but the contribution to Nigeria’s economic growth fell short of
stakeholders’ expectations.
Perceptions of AGOA on Nigeria Trade Policy
Respondents
Percentage (%)
Sustainability of AGOA’s Trade Program
Yes, the impact was sustained over the year
16.0
66.7
No, the impact was not sustained
3.0
12.5
Yes and no (uncertain)
3.0
12.5
Total
24.0
100.0
Fall in the Volume of Trade
Inconsistency in AGOA’s legislation caused the fall trade
14.0
58.0
Poor management of AGOA PTA
16.0
66.0
Weak policy implementation
16.0
66.0
Loopholes in the AGOA PTA
14.0
58.0
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2947
www.rsisinternational.org
Policy-Relevant Implications for Nigeria’s Economic Growth and Trade Policy
Table 6: Results of respondents’ responses on the nature and limitations of AGOA trade program to contribute
to the Nigerian economic growth.
Question
Respondents
Percentage (%)
The Nature of the AGOA Trade
AGOA is a single-way trade (measured only by export)
6.0
25.0
AGOA is a two-way trade (measured by export, import and balance of trade
16.0
66.0
Limitation of the AGOA Trade
AGOA success limited by inadequate infrastructure
17.0
70.0
Weak institutions and policy implementation
16.0
66.0
Lack of transparency and accountability
17.0
70.0
Source: Field Survey, 2024
Table 6 presents the stakeholders’ understanding of the AGOA trade program in Nigeria. As expected, the
AGOA’s trade program is a two-way trade, indicating equal access to the USA and Nigeria. However, one-
quarter of the stakeholders disagree that AGOA in Nigeria is practised as a two-way trade. Although the strength
of the objection is low (25%), it raises doubts about the practice of AGOA in Nigeria. Most of the stakeholders
(70%) who allude to the two-way AGOA trade, also consented that AGOA’s contribution is limited by
infrastructural deficit, weak legal institutions and governance structure, and corruption.
Nigeria, like most AGOA participating countries, remained in the trade program for 25 years without sanctions
or suspension. Despite its 25 years as an AGOA beneficiary, Nigeria’s challenges with AGOA deepen until the
expiration of the Act. Going forward, the stakeholders’ perception of these challenges requires specific attention
to resolve current realities. Some of the most policy-relevant implications from the study include:
1. Nigeria must rebuild its institutions to support all-around development by ensuring an inclusive, people-
centred, and policy-driven institutional process to address challenges to trade and economic development.
2. Invest in technological capacity and build a sustainable innovation ecosystem to support local
manufacturing and indigenous production of goods and services.
3. Develop a trade policy that supports free market access to locally made products by strictly enforcing
bans on imported technologies and products.
In response to the research hypothesis, AGOA has contributed to the increase in trade volume and attempted to
support trade policies in Nigeria. However, the increase in trade volume was not translated into economic growth,
despite the benefits of the AGOA, due to several challenges it presents in Nigeria.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FUTURE WORK
Four significant AGOA challenges in Nigeria have been identified as limitations to the AGOA trade program in
the last 25 years. These include AGOA-Nigeria institutional disparities, governance challenges, infrastructural
and technological deficits, and market access issues. The stakeholders’ perception agreed with previous studies
on AGOA trade in Nigeria. The findings also revealed that Nigeria’s inability to develop its raw materials to
meet the AGOA’s standard remains the major AGOA challenge in Nigeria. This is traceable to weak economic
structure, infrastructure, and technological capacity.
Governance challenges were considered a product of weak institutions, as indicated by the stakeholders. While
political will is validly critical for AGOA’s success in Nigeria, weak trade policy and processes are regarded as
a fundamental issue the Nigerian government must address to ensure the success of the new trade pact the nation
joined most recently – the Africa Continental Free-Trade Agreement (AfCFTA).
It is recommended that Nigeria focus on addressing its internal issues to mobilise its rich human and material
resources for an honest, robust, and active engagement of policies for trade and economic development. Future
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2948
www.rsisinternational.org
work will focus on addressing policy loopholes and strengthening policy remedies to help Nigeria concentrate
on solving its internal trade limitations and mobilise its rich human and material resources for future active trade
engagements.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors appreciate the contributions of resident and visiting faculty in the Department of Public Policy and
Public Administration at the African University of Science and Technology (AUST), Nigeria. We also
acknowledge the kind support of the African University of Science and Technology, Abuja, Nigeria.
Data Availability
Most of the research data collected during the survey are reported in the paper. Any other data and survey
questions that are not included in the article may be provided if the authors consider it necessary, or/ at the
request of the publisher.
Funding
The authors do not receive funding for this work. The survey and the entire research were done using personal
funds.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests
Author’s contributions
Conceptualisation: [Victoria Ebunutale Afolayan, David Oluwasegun Afolayan]; Methodology: [Victoria
Ebunutale Afolayan, David Oluwasegun Afolayan, Ngozi Eunice Egbuna]; Formal analysis and investigation:
[Victoria Ebunutale Afolayan, David Oluwasegun Afolayan]; Writing – original draft preparation: [Victoria
Ebunutale Afolayan, David Oluwasegun Afolayan]; Writing – review and editing: [David Oluwasegun
Afolayan, Ngozi Eunice Egbuna]; Resources: [Victoria Ebunutale Afolayan, David Oluwasegun Afolayan].
REFERENCES
1. AGOA. (2014). The US–Africa Trade Dilemma.
Https://Www.Un.Org/Africarenewal/Magazine/December-2014/Agoa-Us%E2%80%93africa-Trade-
Dilemma, 1–3.
2. AGOA. (2024). African Growth and Opportunity Act. AGOA.Info, , Https://Agoa.Info/about-
Agoa.Html February, 17, 2024.
3. Babarinde, O., & Wright, S. (2017). Africa and the United States: Assessing AGOA. Africa Today, 64(2),
23–47.
4. Brice, M. (2024). US senators will introduce bill to renew Africa trade pact through 2041. Reuters, 1–3,
https://agoa.info/news/article/16451-us-senat.
5. Chime, J. (2014). Analysis of The African Growth And Opportunity Act And Nigeria United States Trade
Relations, 2000-2012. African Journal of Politics and Administrative Studies, 6(1, March), 65–77.
6. Claire, F. (2017). AGOA: The US-Africa trade program. Council of Foreign Relations,
Https://Agoa.Info/News/Article/15274-Agoa-the-Us-Africa-Trade-Program.Html.
7. Didia, D., Nica, M., & Yu, G. (2015). The gravity model, African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA)
and US trade relations with sub-Saharan Africa. J. Int. Trade Econ. Dev., 24(8), 1130–1151.
8. Didia, Dal, & Tahir, S. (2022). African Growth and Opportunity Act (Agoa): Impact on Small Businesses
and Export Revenue in Nigeria. International Journal of Business & Management Studies, 03(09), 07–
17. https://doi.org/10.56734/ijbms.v3n9a2
9. Fernandes, A. M., Forero, A., Maemir, H., & Mattoo, A. (2019). Are trade preferences a panacea? The
export impact of the African Growth and Opportunity Act.
10. Henry, O. (2023). Nigeria’s untapped opportunity for non-oil export, rights enforcement. Vanguard
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 2949
www.rsisinternational.org
Nigeria, Https://Agoa.Info/News/Article/16205-Agoa-Nigeria-s-Untapped-Opportunity-for-Non-Oil-
Export-Rights-Enforcement.Html, 1–3, February, 17, 2024, 23:45 pm.
11. Jacob, J. N., Elgahm, E. M., & Halidu, A. (2020). African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and
Export Analysis. Studies in Politics and Society T, 9(1&2).
12. Kassa, W., & Coulibaly, S. (2019). Revisiting the trade impact of the African Growth and Opportunity
Act: A synthetic control approach. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 8993.
13. Kategekwa, J. (2017). Rethinking the AGOA model: how to create a pro-structural transformation of the
US-Africa trade partnership. American Journal of International Law, 111, 372–376.
14. Kulu, E., & Bentum-ennin, I. (2023). African growth and opportunity act ( AGOA ) and exports of Sub-
Saharan African countries to the United States of America: Does credit matte? Heliyon, 9(7), 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18068
15. Mahabir, A., Fan, J., & Mullings, R. (2020). Does the African growth and opportunity Act (AGOA)
impact EU-15 imports from Africa? Journal of Economic Studies, 47(5), 1155–1180.
16. Mhonyera, G. (2020). Identifying priority products and sectors for bilateral trade negotiations : The case
of AGOA beyond 2025 Assistant Promoter (Issue October 2020).
17. Nellie, P. (2023). The U.S. African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).
Https://Www.Reuters.Com/World/Us-African-Growth-Opportunity-Act-Agoa-2023-11-01/.
18. Nshisso, J. N. (2017). Exploring the impact of colonial legacy on the trade between the United States and
Sub-Sahara Africa under the African Growth and Opportunity Act ( AGAO ) program : A Multiple Case
Study Dissertation Manuscript Submitted to Northcentral University School (Issue November).
19. Nshisso, L. D. (2024). Lived Experiences of Congolese Women With Postpartum Family Planning
Counseling in the United States. Walden University.
20. Observer, N. (2018). Nigeria yet to reap benefits of AGOA since 2008.
Https://Agoa.Info/News/Article/15402-Nigeria-yet-to-Reap-Benefits-of-Agoa-since-2008-Re-
Strategises.Html.
21. Ola, T. P. (2019). United States–Nigeria’s Trade Relations before the African Growth and Opportunity
Act. Acta Universitatis Danubius. Œconomica, 15(3), 267–284.
22. ONI, O. S. (2018). THE IMPACT OF SINO-NIGERIAN TRADE RELATIONS ON AFRICAN
GROWTH AND OPPORTUNITY ACT IN NIGERIA (2000-2015). OBAFEMI AWOLOWO
UNIVERSITY, ILE-IFE.
23. Osabohien, R., Adeleye, N., & Osabuohien, E. (2021a). African Growth and Opportunity Act and trade
performance in Nigeria. Heliyon, 7(3), e06410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06410
24. Osabohien, R., Adeleye, N., & Osabuohien, E. (2021b). African Growth and Opportunity Act and trade
performance in Nigeria. HLY, 7(3), e06410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06410
25. Rapanyane, M. B. (2022). USA Investment and Trade Relations with Sub-Saharan Africa: Special
Reference to the African Growth and Opportunity Act. African Journal of Business and Economic
Research, 17(2), 183.
26. Rick, H. (2015). The African Growth and Opportunity Act, a US trade failure.
Https://Agoa.Info/News/Article/5648-the-African-Growth-and-Opportunity-Act-a-Us-Trade-
Failure.Html February, 17, 2024, 22:40 Pm.
27. Schneidman, W., McNulty, K., & Dicharry, N. (2021). How the Biden administration can make AGOA
more effective.
28. Signe, L. (2022). African Growth and Opportunity Act: Program usage, trends, and sectoral highlights.
29. Signe, L. (2023). Here’s why US - Africa trade under AGOA has been successful for some countries but
not others. May 2023, 1–5.
30. Sunday, I. S. (2019). NIGERIA-UNITED STATES TRADE RELATIONS UNDER AFRICAN
GROWTH AND OPPORTUNITY ACT (AGOA)(2000-2018): INTERROGATING THE TRENDS
AND ISSUES. African Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 2(2), 79–93.
31. Williams, B. R. (2015). African growth and opportunity act (AGOA): Background and reauthorization.
Congressional Research Service Washington, DC.
32. Zikmund, B. (2013). Carr, & Griffin (2010). Business Research Methods, 9.