Developing countries accounted for approximately 35% of global exports of biodiversity-based products in 2024, despite many resource-rich regions capturing only a limited share of the value generated from their biological resources. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), processing capacity, trade policies, certification costs and access to finance play a major role in determining who benefits from this growing market.
UNCTAD’s October 2026 Global Trade Update estimates that global exports of biodiversity-based products reached nearly $3.8 trillion in 2024, representing 17.3% of total merchandise trade. The figures cover approximately 1,800 products of biological origin and include products that are not necessarily certified as sustainable.
Europe accounted for 49% of these exports, followed by Asia at 24%, Latin America and the Caribbean at 11%, and Africa at just 3%. The figures highlight a gap between access to biodiversity and the ability to generate export revenue from it.
Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean are estimated to hold around two-thirds of the world’s biodiversity, yet together accounted for only 14% of biodiversity-based exports in 2024. UNCTAD argues that the opportunity lies not simply in exporting more raw materials, but in developing local processing, manufacturing and higher-value products while ensuring that biological resources are used sustainably.
Gum arabic illustrates the challenge. Although Africa is a major producer, much of the processing and downstream value addition takes place elsewhere. UNCTAD reports that African exports of gum arabic to high-income economies averaged $2.28 per kilogram in 2024, compared with $6.50 per kilogram for imports from those markets. While the difference does not directly measure processing profits, it highlights how value can be captured at different stages of the supply chain.
Trade barriers also affect the competitiveness of natural products. Selected alternatives to plastics, including jute, cotton, hemp and paper products, face average import tariffs of up to 16.1% in some markets. Such duties can make environmentally preferable materials more expensive relative to conventional alternatives.
Exporters must also navigate testing, plant-health, traceability and sustainability certification requirements. Although these standards can support environmental protection and consumer confidence, the associated costs can place smaller producers at a disadvantage. UNCTAD’s analysis found that producers alone bore the implementation costs for 51 of 87 sustainability standards examined and the certification costs for 45 of 89 standards.
Improving access to finance, equipment and international markets could help developing economies move further up the value chain. UNCTAD also highlights opportunities to create products from biological residues instead of expanding land use. In Kenya, for example, a pilot project converted discarded pineapple leaves into textile-grade fibre and compost. However, such initiatives require careful assessment of their overall environmental impact to establish whether they deliver genuine biodiversity benefits.
The commercial potential of biodiversity-based products is also reflected in UNCTAD’s BioTrade initiative. Companies and producer associations applying its BioTrade Principles and Criteria reported $50.5 billion in sales in 2024. This figure includes domestic sales and therefore cannot be directly compared with the $3.8 trillion global export market.
BioTrade promotes the collection, production, processing and sale of biodiversity-derived goods and services according to environmental, social and economic sustainability criteria. It represents a sustainability-focused segment of the broader biodiversity-based market rather than encompassing all trade in biological products.
The findings carry implications for international biodiversity policy as countries review progress under the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework at the October 2026 UN Biodiversity Conference. UNCTAD argues that trade policies can contribute to biodiversity goals by supporting sustainable production, lawful access to biological resources, fair benefit-sharing and improved market access.
For African economies, the findings underline the importance of strengthening domestic processing and product development rather than relying primarily on raw-material exports. Affordable certification, reliable financing and access to technology could help small businesses and producer communities compete in higher-value markets.
Ultimately, UNCTAD’s assessment suggests that export growth alone is not enough. The long-term opportunity is to generate greater economic value from biodiversity while protecting ecosystems and ensuring that the communities supplying biological resources share fairly in the benefits.