Shipping disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz are hitting more than oil tankers — they are choking the global fertilizer supply. Nearly half of traded urea, the most widely used nitrogen fertilizer, and about one‑fifth of global liquefied natural gas move through the Gulf. The Haber‑Bosch process that makes ammonia, the basis for nitrogen fertilizers, requires hydrogen from natural gas, so interruptions to LNG flows ripple straight into fertilizer production. Whether a recently reached temporary ceasefire will ease the blockage enough to matter remains unclear.
Fertilizer and LNG plants from Qatar to Bangladesh have already curtailed operations or shut temporarily. The scale of lost supply is unusual and, if prolonged, could push food prices higher and hit the poorest countries hardest. Policymakers and farmers face a range of imperfect choices to blunt the impact.
Governments look for quick fixes. Some countries can tap reserves: India holds large rice and wheat stockpiles, while China, the world’s largest fertilizer producer, maintains substantial fertilizer inventories. Wealthier governments can cushion farmers by absorbing higher fertilizer costs; after the 2022 fertilizer shock linked to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, India sharply increased subsidies. Export restrictions, used periodically by major suppliers like China, can conserve domestic supply but are essentially zero‑sum — they shield local farmers while worsening shortages and prices abroad. Poorer countries often lack the fiscal room for big subsidies or stockpiles.
Farmers can also change what they plant. Legumes such as soybeans and pulses fix atmospheric nitrogen and need far less synthetic nitrogen than crops like corn. US planting intentions already showed a modest tilt toward soybeans and slightly less corn even before the current crunch escalated. But switching crops is not always feasible: in South and Southeast Asia, monsoon patterns, irrigation constraints and diets heavily dependent on rice limit how much farmers can pivot away from fertilizer‑intensive staples.
Where crop choices are constrained, farmers can change how they use fertilizer. Only around half of applied nitrogen is typically taken up by crops; the rest leaches into groundwater or escapes as nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas. Better timing, placement and dosing can raise nutrient use efficiency. Precision agriculture — using drones, sensors, cameras and AI to apply fertilizer only where and when needed — improves targeting but is costly and often out of reach for smallholders. Policy and price signals matter too: heavy subsidies blunt incentives to cut excessive use. Past price shocks, including in Bangladesh in 2022, showed that farmers can reduce application without large yield losses when motivated by prices or shortages.
Longer‑term responses aim to reduce dependence on synthetic nitrogen or produce it differently. Biological seed treatments and microbial products from firms such as Pivot Bio help plants access atmospheric nitrogen and have seen rapid adoption on millions of acres in the US. Green hydrogen and electrified Haber‑Bosch processes are other technological avenues that could decouple fertilizer production from fossil gas. But these options are medium‑ to long‑term; they cannot quickly replace large amounts of immediate supply lost during a crisis. Reestablishing shipping routes and restoring LNG flows remains the urgent priority for stabilizing physical fertilizer availability.
Analysts tracking fertilizer markets warn the disruption is close to a worst‑case scenario given how much supply is offline. In the near term, the degree to which countries weather higher prices and tighter availability will depend on a mix of government actions (reserves, targeted subsidies, trade policy), smarter and more efficient fertilizer use by farmers, and accelerated adoption of alternative technologies where feasible. Each approach has limits and trade‑offs, and poorer countries are likely to bear the brunt unless global supply and trade frictions are resolved.