Trade grew — but the story is more complicated
This page is a summary dashboard. For full methodology, data sources, and detailed chart-by-chart analysis → Full Case Study
The EPA created a real tailwind: post-EPA average exports rose 40% vs the pre-EPA baseline (2014–2018 vs 2019–2023). If the window is extended to include 2024, the figure rises to +64% — the difference is that 2022 was a peak year that pulls the longer average up. The 2022 spike was followed by a sharp decline driven by Russia's airspace closure, which roughly doubled freight charges and delivery times to Japan. The EPA is still in force; logistics is currently the binding constraint.
Exports & imports — absolute values
Japan's share in Estonia's total trade
Japan vs partner countries
Growth index (2019 = 100) shows Japan's post-EPA trajectory against EPA peers and non-EPA benchmarks. Some countries dramatically outperform Japan on the index — Kazakhstan and Bulgaria, for instance — but their growth is driven by re-routing of Russian trade after 2022 sanctions, not by trade agreements. South Korea is the more honest comparison: it signed its EPA with the EU in 2011, a structurally similar agreement, and its full effect took 3–5 years to materialise. Japan is at year 5–6 of its own EPA — the trajectory may not be final.
Export growth index by partner country
How to read: 2019 = 100 is the baseline. A value of 150 means exports are 50% higher than in 2019. A value of 80 means 20% lower. All countries use the same baseline, making growth rates directly comparable regardless of absolute size.
What Estonia actually sells to Japan
CN44 Wood dominates at ~50% of exports — a pre-existing relationship that the EPA amplified, not created. CN85 Electrical machinery is the cleaner post-EPA signal: +58% on a stable base (9.2 M€ → 14.6 M€). The outlier is CN71 Precious metals & stones: essentially zero before 2019, it averaged 7.2 M€/year in the 2019–2022 window and 12.5 M€/year in 2020–2024 — a trade flow that did not exist before the agreement. Counter-cases — Fish (−42%, Spike group), Dairy (flat) — are a reminder that tariff removal doesn't override competition. The EPA opens a door, yet it doesn't push you through it.
Exports to Japan — top commodity groups
CN — Combined Nomenclature, the EU system for classifying goods in international trade. Each CN code is a product category: CN44 = wood and wood articles, CN85 = electrical machinery, CN84 = mechanical machinery, CN28 = inorganic chemicals, CN03 = fish, CN04 = dairy. Hover over a line to see the full group name.
Pre vs post-EPA: average annual exports (M€)
| Commodity group | Pre-EPA avg, M€ | Post-EPA avg, M€ | Japan % | World % (all destinations) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loading… | ||||
Three ways to look at the data
The treemap shows what 2023 exports looked like in one snapshot. The country comparison chart shows how the Japan channel performed vs other markets for the same commodity. The heatmap reveals growth patterns across all groups and years at once — green above 2018 baseline, red below.
Export structure — 2023 snapshot (Treemap)
Estonia → Japan vs. partner countries — CN85 Electronics (index 2018 = 100)
If Japan’s line diverges upward after 2019 while other markets stay near 100, that is Japan-specific growth — consistent with an EPA tariff effect rather than a global sector trend. Japan’s 2022 peak: index 339 vs Sweden 107, Finland 123, Germany 83.
Growth index heatmap (2018 = 100)
← Scroll the table right to see all years →
Note on extreme values: CN03 Fish shows very high index values in some years (e.g. 800+ in 2017) and very low in others. This reflects that 2018 — the baseline year — was an unusually poor year for fish exports to Japan (≈0.5 M€). Any year with normal volumes appears extreme relative to that depressed baseline. This is a data characteristic, not an error.
How to read the growth index: All values are growth indices with 2018 = 100. A number > 100 means export volume is higher than in 2018 (green = growth); < 100 means lower (red = decline). For example, 231 = 2.31 times the 2018 level (i.e. +131% growth), while 42 = only 42% of the 2018 level (–58% decline). The index shows the relative level, not the percentage change. Extreme values (e.g. 800+ or very low) often result from an unusually weak 2018 baseline for certain groups.
What the data says
EPA worked — moderately
Post-EPA export average +40% vs pre-EPA. Real growth in wood, chemicals, electrical machinery. Not transformative, but consistent with policy intent.
Logistics beats tariffs
Russia's airspace closure in 2022 hit Japan harder than any other partner. Trade peaked then declined even as the EPA remained in force.
Japan ≠ Asia
South Korea grew while Japan declined post-2022. Treating Asian markets as one block leads to wrong conclusions.
The Korea precedent
EU-Korea EPA (2011) took 3-5 years to show full effect. Japan is at year 5-6 — the trajectory may not be final.
Current conditions = opportunity
Declining volumes mean reduced competition for those who can navigate the logistics barrier. The moat works both ways.