Mulubrhan Amare

Unpacking the effects of conflict on fertilizer use and maize yields: Empirical evidence From Nigeria

Conventional recommendations emphasize increasing the use of inorganic fertilizer to enhance maize yields in African countries south of the Sahara, but it is not clear how smallholders’ exposure to violent conflicts affect demand, yield responses, and the profitability of fertilizers. Our study tackles this question. We analyze how maize yield responds to fertilizer use and assess the profitability of fertilizer use in conflict-affected settings. We then investigate how conflict impacts the profitability of fertilizer, given that armed conflicts are likely to increase input costs, logistical difficulties, and market uncertainties. Our study reveals that yield responses to nitrogen are very low in Nigeria. We also show that exposure to conflict reduces input use rates and decreases the marginal physical productivity of nitrogen in maize production, making investment in fertilizer less profitable. Recognizing this effect of conflict on input use and maize yield response is crucial for targeting and resource allocation decisions among smallholders in similar conflict-affected regions. Moreover, the effect of conflict highlights how external factors, beyond the scope of agronomic practices, influence the economic incentives for fertilizer application and the resulting yield outcomes.

Climate-Induced Agricultural Productivity Shocks Undermine Child Nutritional Outcomes: Evidence from Nigeria

Internal displacement and the promotion of bundled agricultural technologies: Evidence from a fragile setting in Nigeria

Fragile regions within Nigeria face multiple, overlapping challenges including climate volatility, violent conflict, widespread displacement, and persistent malnutrition. These pressures can constrain agricultural production and compromise household welfare, particularly for internally displaced households, who face depleted assets and repeated exposure to shocks. Within the context of Nigeria, addressing these constraints requires interventions that improve access to agricultural technologies and strengthen food systems. This brief summarizes experimental evidence from Gombe State, Nigeria, where we implemented an intervention promoting the adoption of a bundle of agricultural technologies. The intervention specifically disentangled the effects of price discounts and information campaigns on bundle adoption. We collected data on the use of each of the bundle components as well as the implementation of agronomic practices recommended for achieving agricultural intensification benefits, enabling us to document adoption beyond the initial purchase of the bundle in a detailed way. The bundle—which includes biofortified seeds, fertilizers, crop protection products, and weather-risk insurance—was designed to generate an intensification response among farmers and address micronutrient deficiencies among adopting households. In principle, biofortified crops—such as vitamin A maize and high-iron millet—offer a dual benefit: improved crop productivity and improved access to nutritious foods. While Nigerian agricultural policies encourage biofortification, sustained adoption remains limited, and existing studies overwhelmingly focus on peaceful and stable settings. We aim to addresses existing knowledge gaps by implementing a randomized control trial in Gombe State, Nigeria—a fragile and conflict-affected setting with a relatively large displaced population. Existing evidence shows that bundled input packages, rather than interventions promoting a single agricultural input, can generate productivity gains associated with agricultural intensification. Adoption is often hindered by liquidity constraints, perceived risk, and weak extension systems. Moreover, displaced households can face additional barriers due to asset loss and insecure land tenure. This motivates us to specifically investigate whether displaced households respond differently to our intervention than households from the host population.