Diversification and Competitiveness of Banana Exports in the Andean Community Countries

Abstract

This study asks how diversified and how competitive banana exports from Ecuador, Colombia, Peru and Bolivia were during 2020 to 2024, and what risks arise from their market mix. The original contribution is a two-metric approach that jointly applies the Herfindahl Hirschman Index by destination to measure geographic concentration and the normalized Revealed Comparative Advantage to measure relative competitiveness. Using both indicators together creates a clear and reproducible benchmark for policy and firm decisions. A quantitative and descriptive design was applied to official trade data for HS 0803. Results show that Ecuador combined strong comparative advantage with low concentration, which supports regional leadership. Colombia expanded exports while its concentration rose, a sign of greater exposure despite solid performance in Europe. Peru lost shares and became more dependent on a few outlets, yet kept advantages in organic and niche segments. Bolivia displayed extreme concentration centered on Argentina. Practically, the findings support market diversification, staged entry into new destinations, stronger commercial partnerships, and the integration of sustainability and risk management. Theoretically, the study clarifies that diversification and competitiveness are distinct constructs and that assessing both together with transparent indices improves the diagnosis of resilience.

1. Introduction

Banana, often reported as plantain in trade statistics, is a strategic crop in global agriculture due to its export earnings and employment effects, with about USD 13.5 billion in annual exports [1]. Only about 18 percent of world output enters international markets, since large producers such as India and China absorb most production domestically [2]. This asymmetry elevates two analytical pillars. Competitiveness reflects the ability to win and sustain market share over time. Diversification reflects how widely exports are distributed across products and destinations. In the Andean Community, these pillars are particularly salient. Ecuador leads global exports, which places the bloc at the center of price formation and market access yet simultaneously heightens exposure to external shocks [3,4,5,6,7]. Framing the problem through both competitiveness and diversification is therefore essential to move beyond descriptive trade statistics and toward a risk aware diagnosis that can inform policy and firm strategy.

At the global level, banana trade is structurally concentrated on both supply and demand. A small set of tropical exporters moves most of the volume, and a few large import markets, the United States, the European Union, and China, absorb the bulk of purchases [8]. Latin American suppliers such as Ecuador, Colombia, Guatemala, and Costa Rica, together with the Philippines in Asia, account for a substantial share of the roughly twenty one million tons exported in recent years [2]. Concentration can be efficient from a logistics standpoint, yet it introduces correlated risks and amplifies volatility when disruptions arise. Understanding where the Andean countries sit within this concentrated structure is a prerequisite for any credible assessment of resilience.

Biological and climatic fragilities compound these structural features. The Cavendish variety, dominant in international trade, faces Tropical Race 4 of Fusarium wilt, a disease that has spread from Asia to new regions and is recognized as a growing threat to global markets [9,10]. There is no effective cure, and outbreaks have already disrupted production and trade routes. These biological pressures coincide with extreme weather and logistics shocks that test the resilience of supply chains. The Philippines export decline in 2020, driven by the joint impact of COVID-19 and TR4, illustrates how quickly market shares can shift and how narrow exporter bases magnify losses [11]. Such episodes sharpen the motivation to quantify not only who is competitive but also how concentrated their market portfolios are.

Asia underscores the tension between scale and tradability. India and China produce at massive scale, yet their export participation remains minimal given domestic demand and price competitiveness constraints [12]. As a result, a narrow group of Asian exporters led by the Philippines, with more limited contributions from Vietnam and Cambodia in recent years, supplies international demand [8,13]. This configuration makes Asian supply particularly sensitive to phytosanitary and meteorological shocks, reinforcing the case for comparative diagnostics that track both market power and concentration through time.

Europe crystallizes many pressures on the import side. The European Union is among the world’s largest consumers and depends heavily on external suppliers, chiefly from Latin America, to meet internal demand [8,14,15]. That dependence has been shaped by a legacy of trade preferences and tariff reforms, the well-known banana disputes at the WTO, alongside high standards for quality, safety, and sustainability [16,17]. Logistics adds an additional layer of vulnerability. Large gateways such as Antwerp and Rotterdam handle immense volumes, and strikes or container dislocations can quickly translate into shortages or price spikes [18]. For exporters, this environment raises the bar on sustained cost competitiveness while rewarding diversified and resilient destination mixes.

Within the Andean Community, export structures are heterogeneous. Ecuador anchors global supply and has consolidated its position over decades due to favorable agroecological conditions, labor expertise, and access to markets [19]. Colombia ships significant volumes from specialized regions such as Urabá and Magdalena and has traditionally ranked among the top global exporters [20]. Peru has built a strong organic niche linked to Piura within a broader and more diversified export matrix dominated by minerals and other high value agrifood products [18]. Bolivia remains marginal in international banana trade, with production centered in Chapare and sales oriented mainly to neighboring markets [21]. These asymmetries suggest that the bloc’s capacity to preserve revealed advantages and to spread market risk is uneven, a hypothesis that needs systematic testing with comparable metrics.

The research gap is explicit. Despite abundant work on Andean agrifood exports, there is no recent bloc wide diagnosis for bananas that jointly and critically measures concentration and competitiveness during the post-2020 period characterized by health shocks, demand shifts, and logistics turmoil. The literature has not applied, for this product and region in the same time window, the Herfindahl Hirschman Index to capture concentration together with a normalized Revealed Comparative Advantage to capture competitiveness. Without this integrated view, policymakers and firms lack an empirical basis to discriminate between robust specialization and vulnerable dependence.

Methodological precedents validate this joint approach. Evidence on Peru’s blueberries shows that high revealed advantage can coexist with risky destination concentration, a combination that calls for targeted diversification even when competitiveness is strong [22]. Comparative analyses of South American coffee document how shifts in HHI track diversification gains and how RCA profiles distinguish leaders from followers across destinations [23]. Studies on Mexico’s bananas and Chilean cherries further demonstrate the portability of these tools across crops and contexts, again revealing configurations where market strength does not guarantee resilience [24,25]. These lessons motivate a focused application to the Andean banana case.

Scientific problem. Decision makers in the Andean Community lack an updated empirical framework to identify how concentrated their banana export baskets are and whether their revealed advantages are robust enough to sustain leadership under recurrent shocks.

Research question. What are the levels of diversification and competitiveness of banana exports from Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia during 2020 to 2024?

Objectives. First, to measure the diversification of banana exports from the four Andean countries using the Herfindahl Hirschman Index. Second, to evaluate their competitiveness using a normalized Revealed Comparative Advantage. Together, these metrics will enable a comparable and risk aware diagnosis that can guide export strategy and public policy for a more resilient participation in global banana markets.

Theoretical Framework

The Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI) summarizes the degree of concentration of exports as the sum of the squared shares of each component of the portfolio (by product or by destination). Values close to 1800 reflect high concentration and, therefore, greater dependence on a few products or markets; values near 1000 imply a more balanced distribution and, consequently, greater diversification. The recent literature emphasizes that concentration—measured through the HHI—is not merely a static property of the portfolio but a feature that influences exposure to shocks and macroeconomic resilience: geographic and sectoral diversification tends to cushion volatility, whereas excessive specialization amplifies idiosyncratic risks. In particular, it has been shown that trade openness can reduce aggregate volatility when it allows the diversification of demand and supply risks across countries, rather than solely deepening sectoral specialization [26,27].

From a methodological perspective, the HHI presents clear operational advantages (direct interpretation, temporal and cross-country comparability) and is standard in high-impact studies of export concentration. Nevertheless, its interpretation requires caution: (i) the granularity of the classification (e.g., HS 6 vs. HS 2), that is, the level of tariff-line analysis, affects the magnitude of the index; (ii) the HHI by product and the HHI by destination capture different dimensions of concentration and should be analyzed in parallel; and (iii) changes in the HHI over time are more informative than point-level comparisons across economies with very different productive structures. In terms of sustainability, a lower HHI (more diversified portfolios) reduces vulnerability to price shocks and environmental regulations in one or a few sectors, facilitating orderly transitions toward baskets less intensive in emissions [26].

Balassa’s Revealed Comparative Advantage (RCA) contrasts the share of a product in a country’s exports with its share in world trade. A value greater than 1 indicates revealed comparative advantage; equal to 1, neutrality; less than 1, disadvantage. To facilitate comparison across products and periods, its normalized version is used, ranging from −1 to +1, defined as RCAnorm = (RCA − 1)/(RCA + 1), which eliminates scale asymmetries. The RCA is particularly useful as an operational metric of observed export competitiveness in the absence of comparable sectoral productivity data. In theoretical terms, the modern literature has evaluated the consistency of RCA indices with quantitative trade models, specifying conditions under which RCA is informative about true comparative advantages and proposing consistent practices of use and inference [28,29].

This approach is also relevant for sustainability when the RCA is calculated over subsets of food products of high commercial importance, enabling the evaluation of a country’s relative position in “food-producing industries.” Recent evidence suggests that institutional frameworks can induce comparative advantages and thereby improve performance, an empirical–theoretical result consistent with the use of RCA as an operational indicator of “green” competitiveness in practice [30].

This study adopts both HHI and RCA given their wide use and traceability in the trade and growth literature, as well as their clear interpretability for deriving testable hypotheses. In line with best international practices, the HHI is calculated annually and by destination (geographic concentration). Year-to-year variations are reported to avoid spurious comparisons due to classification changes. The economic interpretation is anchored in the relationship between diversification and volatility [27]. On the other hand, RCA is calculated in both its classical and normalized versions to enhance comparability.

Based on this theoretical framework, the study contrasts the following propositions: the lower the HHI (greater diversification), the lower the expected volatility of export performance and the greater the resilience to external shocks, consistent with the mechanism of cross-country diversification and with the evidence of declining volatility through trade [26,27]. Sectors with revealed comparative advantage exhibit a higher probability of quota expansion and export persistence in the medium term, holding constant common shocks and market size [28,29].

2. Methodology

This study adopts a quantitative, descriptive, and strictly univariate approach whose purpose is to describe—without inferring causal relationships—two dimensions of the export performance of bananas/plantains in the Andean Community countries (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru): (i) the degree of geographic concentration of exports using the Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI) [26,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40], and (ii) revealed competitiveness using Balassa’s Revealed Comparative Advantage (RCA), as documented in numerous prior studies [5,41,42,43,44,45,46,47]; in this study, the normalized version is employed to achieve more appropriate cross-country comparability. These indicators are selected for their wide adoption in the trade and industrial organization literature, their direct interpretability, and their empirical traceability. The HHI summarizes the dependence of an export portfolio on a small number of destination markets, whereas the RCA, based on observed trade flows, approximates a country’s relative specialization in a given product with respect to the world trade pattern.

The analysis covers the period 2020–2024. The temporal window is justified on three complementary grounds. First, as of the consultation date (1 July 2025), official records provide complete and comparable series for the four countries, avoiding asymmetric truncation across years. Second, the interval captures the disruption and subsequent normalization associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, a context in which destination concentration and the competitive position of bananas may experience substantive—and thus descriptively informative—variations. Third, the year 2025 is excluded to prevent biases stemming from pending updates and the typical incompleteness of trade data still undergoing consolidation.

Statistics are drawn from official secondary sources of the International Trade Centre portal [48]. The analysis focuses on Harmonized System subheading HS 0803 (“bananas, including plantains, fresh or dried”). Values are expressed in U.S. dollars on an FOB basis, ensuring comparability across countries and years. For each country and year, the following were extracted: (a) total exports of HS 0803, (b) the breakdown by destination country to compute geographic concentration, and (c) the world value of HS 0803 exports together with the world total of all exports, which are required inputs for the RCA. Data processing and consistency checks were conducted in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets.

Regarding indicator construction, the HHI was computed over the distribution of HS 0803 exports by destination markets for each country and year, so that higher values reflect greater geographic concentration and, by implication, lower diversification. In parallel, Balassa’s RCA was estimated by comparing the share of bananas in a country’s exports with its share in world trade; additionally, the normalized RCA in the interval [−1, +1] was employed to facilitate interannual and cross-country comparisons, mitigating the asymmetry of the original metric. Given the study’s univariate nature, no dependent or independent variables are modeled: the objective is to describe the levels and dynamics of both indices and to compare them across countries, without estimating causal effects or structural relationships.

The choice of HHI and RCA entails acknowledging their limitations. For the HHI, levels may be affected by classification granularity or by the entry and exit of destinations with marginal shares; consequently, the analysis emphasizes temporal trajectories and prudent comparisons across countries with different export structures. For the RCA, the approach assumes faithful representation of global trade flows and recognizes sensitivity to market size and to the measure’s asymmetry; therefore, the normalized version is also reported, and the evidence is interpreted as indicative of revealed specialization rather than proof of underlying technological advantage. Moreover, because this is a purely descriptive study, no macroeconomic controls are introduced and no causal statistical inferences are performed; comparisons are limited to variations in the indicators, consistent with practices documented in high-impact empirical studies linking concentration/diversification to aggregate performance without imposing a causal structure [26,27].

Research ethics standards were observed throughout, including responsible handling of information, explicit acknowledgment of sources, and documentation of the procedures employed.

3. Results

Table 1. Banana exports of the Andean Community of Nations in billions of U.S.D.

Importers	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
World	13.98	13.447	13.399	14.406	15.221
Andean Community	4.859	4.701	4.762	4.859	5.231
Ecuador	3.682	3.5	3.523	3.789	3.856
Colombia	0.99	1.017	1.073	0.915	1.225
Peru	0.15	0.145	0.119	0.11	0.117
Bolivia	0.036	0.038	0.047	0.044	0.033

Note. Data taken from International Trade Center (2025) [31].

shows that the Andean Community (CAN) accounts for slightly more than one-third of the global banana market, with a share ranging from 33.73% to 35.54% between 2020 and 2024. Stability predominates, with a temporary decline in 2023 (33.73%) when the global market grew faster than the bloc; in 2024, the share slightly recovered to 34.37%, following a 7.66% annual increase in export value. Within the bloc, Ecuador dominates, concentrating between 73.73% and 78.04% of total sales, further intensifying its weight in 2023. In contrast, Colombia rebounded and expanded its contribution after the 2023 decline, reaching 23.43% in 2024, with an annual surge of 33.88% that significantly contributed to the bloc’s overall growth. Peru and Bolivia remain marginal players, staying below 3.10% and 1.00%, respectively, with downward trends that lessen their relative significance. Overall, the results indicate a robust yet concentrated external position: Ecuador’s leadership ensures scale, though it heightens exposure to idiosyncratic shocks; Colombia’s acceleration creates room to diversify the export base; and the contraction of Peru and Bolivia suggests the need to reassess productivity, phytosanitary standards, and logistical integration.

3.1. Ecuador

Table 2. Ecuador’s exports of bananas in millions of U.S.D.

Importers	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
Russia	673.6	698.9	779.8	757.8	665.4
United States of America	595.4	511.1	570.1	561.3	651.9
Netherlands	139.3	200.9	266.4	290.6	314.8
Saudi Arabia	111.9	99.1	119.7	123.5	172.1
Türkiye	284.8	199.2	185.3	171.5	156.7
Others	1877.5	1791.1	1602.2	1884.8	1895.2
Total Exports	3682.4	3500.3	3523.4	3789.5	3856

Note. Data taken from International Trade Center (2025) [31].

shows moderate growth in banana exports between 2020 and 2024, accompanied by a reshaping of destination markets. The group labeled as “other destinations” accounts for 49.15% of export value in 2024 and serves as a stabilizing anchor, as it changes little over the five-year period (+0.94%). Among individual buyers, Russia and the United States converge at comparable market sizes, with 17.26% and 16.91%, respectively, reducing dependence on a single market hub. Notably, the Netherlands more than doubles its share compared to 2020 (+125.99%), now reaching 8.16%, signaling stronger traction in Western Europe; Saudi Arabia also increases its share significantly (+53.80%) to 4.46%. In contrast, Türkiye shows a marked decline (−44.98%), dropping to a 4.06% share, while Russia remains below its 2022 peak.

The net increase of USD 173.60 million is primarily driven by the Netherlands (101.09% of the total increase), the United States (32.55%), and Saudi Arabia (34.68%), offsetting declines in Türkiye (−73.79%) and, to a lesser extent, Russia (−4.72%). Overall, the pattern suggests strengthening logistics toward Europe and the Gulf region, sustaining recovery in the United States, and managing geopolitical risks in Eurasia, while maintaining the broad base provided by the group of other destinations.

Ecuador’s export HHI (

Table 3. Diversification of Ecuador’s exports of bananas.

Years	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
HHI in Value	816.6	804.3	946.3	826.1	802.6

Note. Own elaboration.

) consistently stays below 1000, averaging 839.18 with a population standard deviation of 54.24, signaling structurally low concentration and stable market diversification. The 2024 low of 802.6 marks the most diversified year, whereas 2022 posted the peak (946.3), a temporary concentration that did not alter the underlying trend. The decline from 2023 to 2024 suggests a favorable rebalancing of shares that expands the effective number of destinations and dampens idiosyncratic risk; overall, the index supports a sufficiently broad geographic portfolio to absorb single-market shocks without spilling excessive volatility into the aggregate.

Ecuador’s revealed competitiveness by destination (

Table 4. Competitiveness of Ecuador’s exports of bananas to its main destinations.

Importers	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
Russia	0.6	0.68	0.77	0.74	0.74
United States of America	–0.19	–0.25	–0.26	–0.23	–0.09
Netherlands	0.15	0.38	0.57	0.47	0.42
Saudi Arabia	0.68	0.75	0.81	0.77	0.79
Türkiye	0.68	0.74	0.8	0.75	0.75

Note. Own elaboration.

) outlines firm advantages and improving gradients: Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye stay high and stable, around 0.74–0.81 in 2024, with a peak in Saudi Arabia in 2022 (0.81), underscoring the pull of Gulf markets; the Netherlands shifts from intra-industry trade (0.15 in 2020) to a consolidated advantage (0.42 in 2024), consistent with strong flow dynamics; and the United States, though still a disadvantage (−0.09 in 2024), narrows the gap from the −0.26 trough (2022), implying a less adverse playing field. Overall, competitiveness is concentrated in extra-hemispheric emerging markets, with a gradual positive convergence in Europe and persistent structural challenges in North America.

3.2. Colombia

Table 5. Colombia’s exports of bananas in millions of U.S.D.

Importers	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
United States of America	167.9	176.6	218.6	194.9	243.3
Belgium	171.8	191.1	152.7	136.7	212.1
United Kingdom	160.8	147.3	159.9	136.3	184.5
Germany	64	97.7	95.8	76.4	150.1
Italy	120.2	110.5	124.8	109.9	146.3
Others	305.6	294.2	321.3	261	289.2
Total exports	990.3	1017.3	1073.1	915.2	1225.4

Note. Data taken from International Trade Center (2025) [31].

shows that Colombia’s banana exports rebounded strongly in 2024, rising by 33.89% compared to 2023 and standing 23.74% above 2020 levels. This surge is driven primarily by Europe, which accounts for 75.34% of the annual increase and expands its share from 50.19% to 56.55% (+6.37 percentage points). Within the European bloc, Belgium and Germany contribute nearly half of the growth (24.31% and 23.76%, respectively), closely followed by the United Kingdom (15.54%); the United States adds 15.60%. The pattern is clear: the core of demand fueling this expansion has shifted toward Europe, while “Other” destinations contribute minimally at the margin (9.09%) despite their overall size.

Germany’s leap is particularly noteworthy, with an almost twofold year-on-year increase (+96.47%) that reshapes the European market hierarchy, reducing portfolio concentration and easing historical dependence on Anglophone destinations. In contrast, the “Other” category grows only 10.80% and remains 5.37% below 2020 levels, indicating that diversification beyond major markets has yet to consolidate.

Taken together, the results suggest prioritizing the consolidation of trade channels in Europe—particularly in Belgium and Germany—ensuring logistical capacity and cost coverage, and relaunching diversification efforts toward destinations with demonstrated growth potential to sustain the export cycle.

Colombia’s HHI (

Table 6. Diversification of Colombia’s exports of bananas.

Years	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
HHI in Value	1142.1	1169.6	1182.4	1247.6	1304.4

Note. Own elaboration.

) averages 1209.22 (population standard deviation 58.87), within moderate concentration, rising from 1142.1 in 2020 (most diversified) to 1304.4 in 2024 (peak), and lowering the effective number of markets from 8.76 to 7.67. This shift points to a reallocation toward core destinations—consistent with the stronger roles of Europe and the USA—enhancing traction but raising relative dependence; still, levels remain well below high-concentration thresholds, indicating that expansion has not excessively compromised diversification.

Colombia’s competitiveness (

Table 7. Competitiveness of Colombia’s exports of bananas to its main destinations.

Importers	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
United States of America	–0.28	–0.24	–0.14	–0.14	–0.21
Belgium	0.85	0.86	0.86	0.86	0.86
United Kingdom	0.86	0.86	0.87	0.88	0.87
Germany	0.6	0.69	0.71	0.75	0.82
Italy	0.59	0.67	0.75	0.76	0.76

Note. Own elaboration.

) is anchored in Europe with high and persistent advantages: Belgium hovers at 0.85–0.86 almost unchanged; the UK peaks at 0.88 in 2023 (series high) and holds 0.87 in 2024; Germany advances from 0.60 to 0.82, and Italy from 0.59 to 0.76, consolidating a robust European front. By contrast, the United States remains a structural disadvantage (−0.28 in 2020; −0.21 in 2024) despite volume growth, suggesting enduring competitive frictions in price, standards, or logistics. The outcome is a virtuous European specialization with room to gain share, and a North American gap that, if unaddressed, may cap convergence with hemispheric leaders.

3.3. Peru

Table 8. Peru’s exports of bananas in millions of U.S.D.

Importers	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
Netherlands	46.6	43	35.1	34.2	42.7
United States of America	26.8	32.2	17.9	14.2	21
Italy	6.2	7.3	7.7	10	12.1
Panama	23.4	24.7	24.6	13.4	10.1
Republic of Korea	8.2	9.0	8.6	8.7	8.4
Others	38.3	29.1	24.9	29.2	22.7
Total exports	149.7	145.2	118.9	109.5	117

Note. Data taken from International Trade Center (2025) [31].

shows a contracting trend in export value between 2020 and 2024 (−21.84%), with a year-on-year rebound of 6.85% in 2024 that does not offset the accumulated loss. The Netherlands and the United States dominate, jointly accounting for 54.44% of export value in 2024 (36.50% and 17.95%, respectively), up from 49.01% in 2020; this increased concentration indicates a growing reliance on two logistical and commercial hubs. Italy stands out for its sustained growth since 2020 (+95.16%), reaching a 10.34% share in 2024, while Panama shows a structural decline (−56.84%). In addition, “Other” destinations contracted by 40.73%, suggesting erosion of a diversified base and potential loss of access to secondary markets. Overall, the pattern reflects partial recovery coupled with geographical concentration: it is advisable to deepen consolidation along the Netherlands–United States axis, while reopening and segmenting other destinations to identify high-potential niches and reduce the risk of over-concentration.

Peru’s HHI (

Table 9. Diversification Index of Peru’s Exports.

Years	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
HHI in Value	1771.3	1827.5	1720.4	1617.7	1966.5

Note. Own elaboration.

) averages 1780.68 (population standard deviation 115.76), fluctuating between moderate and high concentration: the 2023 low (1617.7) marks the most diversified year, while 2024 reaches 1966.5, firmly entering the high range and lowering the effective number of markets. The path suggests sales were increasingly anchored in fewer destinations, shoring up short-term volumes but raising idiosyncratic risk; reversing this tilt will require scaling markets where advantage already exists (Italy, Netherlands) and maturing nascent growth (Asia).

Peru’s competitiveness (

Table 10. Competitiveness of Peru’s exports of bananas to its main destinations.

Importers	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
Netherlands	0.79	0.8	0.83	0.84	0.83
United States of America	0.05	0.27	0.05	−0.05	0.17
Italy	0.54	0.62	0.75	0.78	0.8
Panama	0.94	0.89	0.91	0.85	0.83
Republic of Korea	−0.03	0.11	0.25	0.37	0.44

Note. Own elaboration.

) rests on clear and, in several cases, rising advantages: the Netherlands stays very high and stable, around 0.79–0.84, Italy climbs from 0.54 to 0.80 consolidating a European axis, and Panama—though high—shows a downward slope (0.94 → 0.83) consistent with shrinking flows. Korea improves from slight disadvantage (−0.03) to medium advantage (0.44), opening an Asian front with potential; the United States is the most volatile link, deteriorating to −0.05 in 2023 and recovering to 0.17 in 2024. Overall, the map suggests deepening Europe (The Netherlands–Italy) and cultivating Asia as a diversification vector while stabilizing the North American position.

3.4. Bolivia

Bolivia (

Table 11. Bolivia’s exports of bananas in millions of U.S.D.

Importers	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
Argentina	34.9	37.1	45.8	43.8	32.4
Uruguay	0.7	0.4	0.5	0.5	0.5
Chile	0.5	0.3	0.2	0.1	0.1
Total exports	36.1	37.8	46.5	44.4	33.0

Note. Data taken from International Trade Center (2025) [31].

) exhibits a highly fragile, concentrated pattern: after peaking in 2022 (USD 46.5 million), totals fall to USD 33.0 million in 2024 (−25.7% YoY; 2020–2024 CAGR −2.22%), with Argentina absorbing 98.2% of shipments (Uruguay 1.5%; Chile 0.3%). The recent decline stems essentially from Argentine contraction (−USD 11.4 million vs. 2023), while Uruguay and Chile remain residual and flat at very low levels. This near single-market architecture curtails adjustment elasticity to demand shocks or logistical frictions in the Río de la Plata and underscores the urgency of anchoring at least a second significant destination to cushion volatility from the main buyer.

Bolivia’s HHI (

Table 12. Diversification of Bolivia’s banana exports.

Years	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
HHI in Value	9339.1	9642.2	9698.9	9729.1	9669.1

Note. Own elaboration.

) averages 9615.68 (population standard deviation 141.31) and persistently reflects extreme concentration, ranging from 9339.1 in 2020 (least concentrated) to 9729.1 in 2023 (peak). The 2024 value (9669.1) implies an effective number of markets close to 1, confirming that banana exports hinge on a single destination. The index’s stability at such elevated levels indicates that, absent an explicit market-opening and demand-risk mitigation strategy beyond Argentina, volatility will remain high and structural growth capacity will stay constrained.

Bolivia’s competitive pattern (

Table 13. Competitiveness of Bolivia’s exports bananas to its main destinations.

Importers	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
Argentina	0.74	0.82	0.77	0.83	0.89
Uruguay	0.87	0.83	0.76	0.78	0.84
Chile	−0.17	−0.42	−0.56	−0.82	−0.68
Argentina	0.74	0.82	0.77	0.83	0.89
Uruguay	0.87	0.83	0.76	0.78	0.84

Note. Own elaboration.

) is clearly tilted toward the Río de la Plata: Argentina shows high and rising advantages (0.74 → 0.89, peaking in 2024), Uruguay remains robust (between 0.76 and 0.87), while Chile displays persistent disadvantages deepening to −0.82 in 2023 (series low) and only recovering to −0.68 in 2024. This triad explains the heavy reliance on Argentina as the natural destination and the difficulty scaling in Chile—likely due to price, standards, or local competition—framing an immediate agenda: sustain advantage in Argentina and Uruguay through stability arrangements and probe alternative corridors where quality and price differentials could overturn Chile’s negative sign.

The following table synthesizes the export dynamics, diversification levels, and competitive patterns of Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia, providing a detailed perspective on their respective positions within global banana trade. Table 9 reveals a clear gradient of diversification and competitiveness among Andean banana exporters. Ecuador displays a steady and well-distributed growth trajectory across destinations, with sustained advantages in Eurasia and the Middle East, and an increasingly prominent role for the Netherlands as a logistical platform, while the United States remains a lagging market. In contrast, Colombia combines dynamism with growing concentration: Western Europe serves as a competitive anchor, while the U.S. market introduces volatility that undermines portfolio stability. Peru exhibits structural fragility: the recent recovery does not offset prior contraction, and reliance on a limited number of markets is intensifying, with the Netherlands as a central hub and a slow expansion toward Italy and East Asia; instability in the U.S. continues to hinder takeoff. Bolivia, meanwhile, shows extreme concentration in a single buyer, translating demand into systemic vulnerability despite occasional support from a secondary destination.

Table 14. Comparative Overview of Banana Exports in the Andean Community.

Country	Export Trend (2020–2024)	Key Growth Markets	HHI Trend	Competitiveness
Ecuador	Exhibits a sustained upward trajectory with total exports growing from USD 3.68 billion in 2020 to USD 3.86 billion in 2024. Despite moderate growth, stability is ensured by large aggregate volumes, although dependence on “Others” shows structural concentration.	Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye stand out with strong growth and consistently high values. The Netherlands is consolidating as an intermediate market with gradual gains, while the U.S. remains weak.	HHI averages 839.18, ranging between 802.6 (2024) and 946.3 (2022). This reflects low concentration and stable diversification, with only slight fluctuations.	Strong competitive advantages in Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye (+0.6 to +0.81). Netherlands shows a gradual shift from neutrality to advantage, while the U.S. market remains structurally disadvantageous, though with slight improvement.
Colombia	Shows a dynamic but volatile profile, with exports rising from USD 990 million in 2020 to USD 1.22 billion in 2024. However, 2023 reflected a contraction. Growth is sustained overall, driven mainly by the U.S. and European hubs.	Belgium and the United Kingdom are the anchors, showing consistent strength. Germany and Italy emerge with upward recovery trends. The U.S. remains unstable with recurrent declines.	HHI increases progressively from 1142.1 (2020) to 1304.4 (2024), indicating moderate concentration and a gradual loss of diversification.	Strongest competitiveness lies in European markets (Belgium, UK, Germany, Italy), where indices range from +0.59 to +0.88. Conversely, the U.S. maintains a structural disadvantage, with persistent negative values across the period.
Peru	Characterized by fragility and contraction: exports declined from USD 149.7 million in 2020 to USD 109.5 million in 2023, with only a slight rebound to USD 117 million in 2024. Dependence on a few markets makes the structure vulnerable.	Netherlands remains the primary destination, while Italy shows steady growth (from 6.2 M in 2020 to 12.1 M in 2024). The U.S. shows volatility with a severe decline but partial recovery in 2024. Emerging presence in the Republic of Korea signals new opportunities.	HHI fluctuates between 1617.7 (2023) and 1966.5 (2024), reflecting a shift from moderate to high concentration. The overall trend indicates growing dependence on fewer markets.	Netherlands, Italy, and Panama show consistent advantages (>0.5). The U.S. alternates between marginal advantage and disadvantage, while the Republic of Korea evolves positively, improving from −0.03 (2020) to +0.44 (2024).
Bolivia	Presents a highly concentrated and fragile profile, with exports averaging ~USD 33–46 million. After peaking in 2022 (USD 46.5 M), they contracted sharply to USD 33 M in 2024. Argentina is overwhelmingly dominant, with Uruguay and Chile irrelevant in scale.	Argentina absorbs nearly all exports, consolidating as the key market. Uruguay provides secondary but stable demand, while Chile consistently contracts, reaching negligible values (0.1 M by 2023–2024).	HHI extremely high, averaging 9615.68, with values consistently above 9300. This indicates very high concentration, one of the least diversified profiles in the region.	Competitive advantages are strong in Argentina and Uruguay (0.74–0.89), while Chile reflects persistent disadvantages, deepening to –0.82 in 2023. This reinforces Bolivia’s structural vulnerability to reliance on Argentina.

synthesizes the export dynamics, three practical implications emerge. First, diversification is the cornerstone of resilience: Ecuador illustrates how a broad export basket mitigates shocks and stabilizes revenues, whereas Bolivia’s structure amplifies country–client risk. Second, the geography of comparative advantage is shifting toward Europe and Eurasia; Dutch hubs are solidifying their role as redistribution points, suggesting that deepening contracts and after-sales services at this gateway may prove more effective than persisting in the erratic U.S. market. Third, for Peru and Colombia, the priority is to halt the trend toward concentration by targeting high-value niches in the European Union and Asia, reinforcing differentiation through product attributes and logistical agreements that reduce exposure to single-market shocks. In sum, the evidence supports the view that the strategic management of market mix, rather than sheer volume, underpins export competitiveness and the ability to sustain stable export trajectories.

4. Conclusions and Discussion

Taken together, the findings show that the Andean Community (CAN) kept a broadly stable global share in a market that is structurally concentrated on both the supply and demand sides, which aligns with the characterization of bananas as a strategic export crop and with the fact that only a limited share of world output is actually traded internationally [1,2]. The near one-for-one co-movement between CAN and the world cycle over 2020–2024 is consistent with a structure where few exporters move most volumes and a handful of large buyers absorb demand, reinforcing the value of assessing competitiveness and concentration jointly rather than descriptively—especially in the Andean case, where Ecuador’s centrality heightens both influence and exposure [3,8].

Delving by country, Ecuador’s pattern—HHI consistently below 1000 and strong revealed advantages in Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye alongside gains in the Netherlands—supports the proposition that broader geographic portfolios dampen idiosyncratic shocks and aggregate volatility [26,27]. Moreover, the partial pivot toward Europe and the Gulf fits an import environment that is large, heavily reliant on external suppliers, and exacting on standards, which raises the bar for sustained cost competitiveness while rewarding diversified and resilient destination mixes [14,16]. Logistics fragilities at major gateways add to this calculus, implying that Ecuador’s wider spread of markets is a genuine risk mitigant rather than mere dispersion [18]. The persistent disadvantage in the United States, alongside consolidation in Europe, is also compatible with the differing regulatory and standards landscapes that have shaped market access over time [17].

Colombia, in turn, combines vigorous expansion with a gradual increase in the HHI into the moderate range. Its very high and persistent advantages in Europe (Belgium, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Italy) coexist with a structural disadvantage in the United States, a duality that matches Europe’s scale and standards “pull” and the broader lesson that geographic diversification cushions shocks provided the destination base is not overly narrowed [15,16]. From a risk perspective, the rising HHI suggests growth is being channeled through denser “cores,” which can heighten exposure to regulatory or logistical disruptions if redundancy is not preserved [18,26].

By contrast, Peru illustrates the canonical coexistence of elevated revealed advantage in specific markets with growing fragility via concentration: an HHI shifting from moderate to high, dependence on the Netherlands, and simultaneously rising advantages in Italy plus a positive trajectory in Korea that opens an Asian front with potential. This recapitulates evidence for other Latin American crops, where strong RCA can coexist with risky destination concentration that warrants targeted diversification even under apparent competitiveness [22,23]. Parallel findings for Mexico’s bananas and Chilean cherries underscore the portability of this diagnostic across contexts and the need to diversify when concentration rises despite healthy demand niches [24,25]. Regionally, Asia’s tension between production scale and tradability matters: massive producers absorb output domestically while a narrow set of exporters supplies international demand, which increases sensitivity to phytosanitary and weather shocks and creates windows for Andean repositioning if access and standards can be secured [8,12]. This makes Peru’s nascent Asian vector strategically relevant [13].

Bolivia presents the most vulnerable architecture: an HHI near the theoretical maximum—virtually a single destination—paired with very high advantages in Argentina and Uruguay and persistent disadvantages in Chile. Such near-monopsony dependence amplifies the impact of country-specific demand shocks or logistical frictions, the very scenario associated with volatility spikes when geographic specialization is excessive [26,27]. Given recurring port and corridor disruptions in the Southern Cone, maintaining a single anchor market constrains structural growth capacity and keeps volatility elevated [18].

Systemically, the 2020–2024 window was punctuated by biological and logistics shocks—TR4’s spread and COVID-19 disruptions—that accelerated rotations in market shares and routes; the Philippines’ 2020 decline illustrates how quickly losses can cascade when exporter bases are narrow [9,10]. This underscores the premium on diversified portfolios and destination-specific competitive monitoring [11]. In tandem, Europe’s large, import-dependent market continues to act as a central demand hub for Latin American suppliers, with standards and logistics acting as binding constraints that require ongoing capability upgrades [8].

Methodologically, the patterns align with the adopted framework: destination-level HHI captures the geographic dimension of concentration—more informative in interannual trajectories than in point-in-time cross-country contrasts—and the reported levels map cleanly to operational thresholds used in the literature (≈1000 for greater diversification; ≈1800 for high concentration) [26,27]. Using the normalized RCA removes scale asymmetries and is consistent with quantitative trade models that specify when RCA is informative about true comparative advantage and how to use it prudently for inference [28,29]. From a sustainability lens, lower HHI portfolios reduce exposure to price shocks and environmental regulation concentrated in one or few markets, while RCA over key food subsets provides a practical indicator of “green” competitiveness where institutional frameworks can help induce comparative advantages [26,30].

In terms of implications, priorities are differentiated but complementary. For Ecuador, the task is to preserve hard-won diversification—especially the Europe–Gulf axis—while narrowing the U.S. gap without eroding breadth, thereby reinforcing the ex-ante resilience that diversification theory prescribes [26,27]. For Colombia, the challenge is to prevent deepening in Europe from pushing the HHI higher, safeguarding geographic redundancy against standards shifts or port disruptions that have proven consequential in European corridors [14,18]. For Peru, evidence supports selective diversification: deepen niches with already high RCA (Netherlands–Italy) while scaling Asia—building on Korea’s positive path—to pull the HHI back toward safer territory [22,23]. For Bolivia, urgency lies in opening and anchoring at least a second significant destination to reduce near-total dependence on Argentina; in parallel, seek corridors where the mix of price, standards, and logistics can overturn Chile’s persistent disadvantage, leveraging institutional arrangements that can catalyze revealed advantages and greener performance in practice [26,30].