How to Solve Nigeria’s Fertiliser Problem

Fertiliser remains one of the most critical agricultural inputs for sustainable food production. In Nigeria, it is even more important as farmlands across the country continue to suffer from nutrient depletion and soil degradation.

According to the Minister of State for Agriculture and Food Security, Dr Aliyu Sabi, approximately 33% of Nigeria’s soil is degraded, making it critical to supplement soil nutrients with fertilisers to boost crop yields.

This reality has made the use of NPK and urea fertilisers not only popular among farmers but necessary for achieving meaningful productivity gains. However, despite this glaring need, fertiliser use among Nigerian farmers remains very low.

Low Fertiliser Use in Nigeria: a Persistent Challenge

Nigeria has one of the lowest fertiliser application rates globally and within Africa. The average fertiliser usage of Nigerian farmers stands at approximately 19.7 kg per hectare. This is well below Ghana (29.4 kg/ha), South Africa (72.8 kg/ha), Morocco (74.9 kg/ha), China (393.2 kg/ha), Brazil (304.7 kg/ha) and other top food-producing countries. This level also falls short of the 50 kg/ha target set under the Abuja Declaration and other benchmarks commonly associated with improved yields.

This low application rate persists despite Nigeria’s growing fertiliser production capacity, creating a structural contradiction within the agricultural sector. And more surprisingly, with Nigeria’s fertiliser production rate, fertiliser use shouldn't be a problem for farmers.

Nigeria’s High Production–Low Use Fertiliser Paradox

Over the past decade, Nigeria’s fertiliser industry, especially the urea production industry, has expanded rapidly. Between 2010 and 2024, cumulative urea production capacity reportedly increased more than sixtyfold, transforming Nigeria from a net importer into a major global exporter. By 2024, driven by the investment and increased productivity of companies such as Dangote Fertilisers, Indorama Eleme, and Notore Chemicals,  installed urea production capacity had reached an estimated 6.5 million tonnes per year, with exports exceeding 3 million tonnes.

Ordinarily, such production levels would be expected to support widespread domestic use. However, domestic fertiliser consumption accounts for only about 26% of total output. This disconnect between national production and farm-level use has resulted in what can be described as a 'fertiliser–food paradox.'

Why Nigerian Farmers Use Little Fertiliser

Smallholder farmers dominate Nigeria’s agricultural landscape. Many operate in rural areas characterised by low incomes, limited access to credit, poor infrastructure, and weak extension services. These constraints combine to limit fertiliser adoption.

Affordability remains the most significant barrier. Fertiliser prices have surged beyond the reach of many farmers, with a 50 kg bag of urea selling for ₦47,000 to ₦50,000 and NPK fertilisers ranging from ₦48,000 to ₦55,000, often higher in remote areas due to transportation costs.

Beyond high prices, many farmers lack the disposable income or access to financing needed to purchase inputs at the right time. Subsistence-oriented farmers often struggle to break even, prioritising household needs over input purchases.

Structural issues further compound the problem. With high distribution costs, poor rural infrastructure, and dependence on imported raw materials, which expose fertiliser prices to exchange-rate volatility, it makes it difficult for farmers to predict input costs and plan with certainty.

Fertiliser use also becomes unwise and discouraging when input prices exceed output value. For example, a bag of maize may sell for ₦38,000 to ₦40,000, compared to ₦50,000 for a bag of urea, discouraging optimal application. This is currently the issue of farmers in Niger state who are struggling to break even with the fallen prices of food after spending a fortune on fertiliser

Additionally, persistent issues of adulteration, mislabeling, and underweight fertiliser bags have eroded farmer trust. Weak extension systems and limited access to soil testing mean farmers often lack accurate information on the appropriate type, quantity, and timing of fertiliser use, relying instead on inefficient blanket formulations.

Impact on Farmers and Food Security

Low fertiliser use is directly affecting farmer livelihoods and national food production. Many farmers are abandoning fertiliser-intensive crops such as maize and rice in favour of lower-input alternatives, including millet, sorghum, beans, groundnut, soybeans, sesame, and cassava. Some farmers have even exited farming entirely.

This shift is occurring despite Nigeria’s estimated annual maize demand of 21 million metric tonnes, while production has reportedly fallen to roughly 10.5 million metric tonnes. For farmers who continue cultivating high-input crops, reduced fertiliser application leads to lower yields, with cereal productivity often remaining below 2.0 tonnes per hectare, far below the 5 to 6 tonnes per hectare feasible under improved nutrient management.

Even farmers who invest heavily in fertiliser face financial distress, as production costs per hectare can exceed ₦1 million, while market prices remain too low to ensure profitability.

How to Solve Nigeria’s Fertiliser Use Problem

Addressing Nigeria’s fertiliser challenge requires coordinated reforms across policy, markets, and agronomic practice. Policy priorities should be rebalanced from export maximisation toward domestic agricultural intensification, including clear domestic supply targets and minimum local allocation requirements during periods of global price volatility. Fertiliser-producing companies can be strategically guided or incentivised to create pocket-friendly fertiliser for Nigerian farmers.

Affordability can be improved by reforming subsidy programmes. While the Presidential Fertiliser Initiative (PFI) already attempted this, there is a need for a shift from blanket subsidies to more strategic solutions. Targeted distribution through digital voucher systems linked with extension services and agricultural credit, particularly for resource-poor farmers. Hopefully, with the takeover of PFI by the Ministry of Finance Incorporated, which is expected to be completed in January 2026, innovations like these can be implemented.

Expanding soil-testing infrastructure and subsidising diagnostic services would enable the production of tailored fertiliser blends that address region-specific nutrient deficiencies. This would accelerate the transition from generic formulations to soil- and crop-specific nutrient management.

Finally, regulatory enforcement must be strengthened through full implementation of the National Fertiliser Quality Control Act, the adoption of digital traceability systems, and strict penalties for adulteration and fraud. Protecting product quality is essential to restoring farmer confidence and improving fertiliser uptake.