Armenia will need at least three years before it is ready to export to the European Union steadily and at scale, economist Gagik Makaryan said. Removing tariffs and opening the EU market to Armenian goods is only part of the task. The country also needs to change its approach to exports and address logistics, packaging, certification and product quality, as well as state oversight and business advice.
According to Makaryan, removing customs duties does not in itself mean Armenia is ready to make full use of the opportunity.
The GSP+ opportunity was not fully used either
Opportunities to export from Armenia to the EU are not new, Makaryan said. Armenia used the GSP system for about ten years and later benefited from GSP+ preferences. Under GSP+, around 6,400 product categories could enter the EU duty-free or at reduced rates. The list later grew to roughly 7,200 categories.
Armenia did not take full advantage of those preferences. Product quality and difficulties meeting certification requirements were among the reasons. At one stage, Makaryan said, the total value of customs duties saved for Armenia’s economy through GSP+ was only about $50–70 million.
The tariff removal announced today, described in the article as covering around 80% of products, also encompasses goods previously included in the GSP+ list. While the earlier main list included around 6,400 products, zero tariffs are now possible for approximately 5,000 of them, with agricultural goods also added. The central question, Makaryan argued, is whether Armenian companies can make practical use of the opportunity.
Three years are needed to change export practices
Makaryan singled out agricultural exports. He said Armenia exported 51,000 tonnes of apricots last year, but companies shipped only around 11,000 tonnes under comparatively organised arrangements. Individuals exported the remaining roughly 40,000 tonnes, using different vehicles, their own resources and private agreements.
That system cannot compete in the EU market, he argued. Transport, paperwork, certification, crates and packaging all present difficulties. In his assessment, Armenia therefore needs at least three years to change export practices, establish the necessary companies and, for example, renew its fleet of suitable vehicles.
A seven-day journey is about more than cost
Makaryan disagreed with describing EU-bound logistics simply as a longer and more expensive journey. If a product reaches Russia in about three days but takes seven days to reach the EU, transport costs are only one consideration. Exporters must know whether the same product will retain its marketable appearance after seven days in the same refrigerated vehicle.
Even fruit and vegetables kept in a household refrigerator can lose their original appearance after several days. Maintaining a constant temperature alone is insufficient. A longer journey and vibration on the road also require different transport and packaging conditions. Packaging adequate for a three-day trip may not work for seven days.
Armenia currently lacks sufficient data on how long each type of agricultural product can retain its marketable appearance, Makaryan said. Such information should be gathered with the help of international experts and experience from other countries.
“Strawberries, for example, would have great difficulty surviving a seven-day journey. Apricots are more resilient and can be picked before they are fully ripe. These differences must be considered when planning exports of each product,” he said.
The EU also has producers to protect
Makaryan was a member of a civil society monitoring platform for Armenia’s comprehensive agreement with the EU for several years. During that period he worked with EU experts and officials, met ministers, the head of the EU delegation and other specialists, and visited Brussels.
He asked European partners whether specific quotas could be set for Armenia to help its products enter the EU market and diversify the country’s exports.
Some European partners viewed the idea positively, he said. Yet when discussions turned to informing companies about Armenian producers or promoting information about Armenian products in European markets, various obstacles were cited, including workloads and shortages of staff and specialists.
Makaryan believes a political factor is also involved and should not be concealed. In his view, the EU does not necessarily stand to gain economically from the process. On one hand, it is providing around €52 million in compensation and support. On the other, European producers would have to make room for Armenian goods in their home market, potentially causing discontent.
Armenia can respond through flexible diplomacy, he said: avoid provoking disputes while seeking whatever benefits are available to the country. This is particularly important for agriculture, where many farmers have loans and farms provide essential income for numerous families.
The full €52 million in support may not be used
The state has already provided some compensation for each kilogram of exported produce. By Makaryan’s calculation, if exports had reached their full potential, the government would have had to allocate up to an additional $220 million from the budget for compensation. Those export volumes did not materialise.
He gave several reasons: some producers never applied, some produce spoiled, and in other cases producers tried to sell it domestically or found local solutions. Makaryan also suggested that the approximately €52 million provided by the EU might not be spent in full because fewer problems arose than expected.
Product quality is a major obstacle
Makaryan said he had worked on international certification for many years and that Armenia’s difficulties extend beyond logistics. Practices that might sometimes have gone unnoticed or been tolerated in the Russian market will not necessarily be accepted in the EU.
He pointed to changes in the quality of Armenian brandy. According to Makaryan, demand for cheaper products in Russia contributed to a decline in quality during a certain period. Changing economic conditions reduced purchasing power in Russia, while brandy is not an everyday purchase for everyone. This created demand for a less expensive product.
All relevant state bodies need to work together, especially the Ministry of Economy and the Food Safety Inspection Body, he said. Makaryan criticised what he sees as excessively optimistic figures presented by officials. He cited claims that 95% of Armenia’s orchards have GlobalGAP certification and can export freely; he said that figure does not reflect reality.
The same issue exists among food processors, in his view. Many do not have HACCP systems or apply them only formally.
Produce inspections paint a different picture
Makaryan also addressed food safety inspections. He said figures published shortly before the interview showed a problem in approximately every second tested fruit or vegetable sample. The issues concerned residues of fertilisers, chemicals and pesticides, or improper methods of applying them.
He argued that farmers alone should not bear the blame. If a farmer uses a product without suitable advice, the performance of oversight and advisory bodies must also be examined. The veterinary system has similar weaknesses, he said, and animal diseases can affect milk safety.
Makaryan contrasted this with Germany, where laboratory tests are conducted regularly and the results are supplied to milk producers and farmers. Antibiotic levels in milk, for example, are checked. Laboratory oversight therefore serves a preventive purpose as well as an enforcement one.
220 exporting companies are not enough
Armenia’s export strategy adopted in 2025 refers to 220 exporting organisations.
Makaryan said 220 companies is a very small number for an economy seeking substantial export growth. At the same time, the state could work much more closely with those companies: understand each firm’s difficulties, discuss the steps required and help strengthen its capabilities.
He also criticised state bodies for presenting “good figures” that, in his view, lack a firm basis or do not match conditions on the ground.
For several days, officials might present an optimistic picture of major export potential, he said, only for data to emerge suggesting safety problems with roughly half of agricultural produce. In his assessment, this is an issue for both public information and state management, because such information also reaches the country’s leadership.
Export capacity starts with education
Producing quality goods requires qualified workers, Makaryan said. In his assessment, Armenia’s education system does not currently train enough of the specialists needed. He criticised repeated changes to curricula and content: one programme is replaced before its results have been assessed. Citing PISA results, he warned that the situation could be worse in ten years unless it changes.
According to Makaryan, the Education Ministry previously attributed the problems to old standards and expected new ones to improve the situation. But he said there has been insufficient assessment to establish whether the old and new standards produced substantially different results. Constant changes without proper evaluation also create institutional gaps, in his view.
Product quality, certification, logistics, food safety, state oversight and a shortage of specialists all affect Armenia’s export prospects. That is why, Makaryan concluded, it is still too early to speak of large-scale exports to the EU, the United States or even Arab markets, where halal certification may also be required.