Not only oil and gas, the crisis in Hormuz is set to trigger a global agri-food shock

A summer without air conditioning and a winter without heating or cooking gas? The fears of a West accustomed to such comforts fade in the face of another concern affecting the entire world: that on kitchen stoves (whether lit or not) there may be little to cook, and that little becoming increasingly expensive.

The blocking of the Strait of Hormuz (or its intermittent reopening) is not just an energy issue, but over a longer and less visible cycle, also a food issue.

A significant share of chemical fertilizers used to grow wheat and rice around the world passes through this corridor. The consequences will not be immediate they will appear in the harvests of the coming months but they will be far more difficult to recover from than current markets reflect.

Even if a stable political agreement is reached, the full reopening of the strait from mine clearance to the unblocking of heavy maritime traffic could take weeks, if not months. Meanwhile, the agricultural cycle cannot stop.

What has changed

Before February 28, up to one-third of global fertilizer trade passed through the Strait, with even higher shares in certain categories.

Around 36% of globally exported urea (the main nitrogen fertilizer directly affecting grain yields) comes from the Gulf region, along with 29% of ammonia and 26% of DAP (diammonium phosphate), which supplies phosphorus and nitrogen to major crops in Asia and the Americas.

Additionally, about 50% of global sulfur production, an essential input for phosphate fertilizers comes from this area. The link to gas is direct: it is the primary raw material for nitrogen fertilizer production, and when it becomes scarce or more expensive, prices rise across the entire chain.

Unlike oil, there are no large strategic reserves of fertilizers: a supply crisis translates into price increases within weeks.

Recent figures make this trend clear. Immediately after the strait’s closure, granular urea from the Middle East rose by 19% and Egyptian urea by 28%, with the crisis deepening afterward.

In the first week of April, the retail price of urea in the U.S. reached $847 per ton, 26% higher than a month earlier and 48% higher than a year before.

The Profercy nitrogen index reached its highest level since May 2022 on April 9 and shows no signs of decline, while India has launched an international tender to purchase 2.5 million tons for June, signaling low reserves in major importing countries.

Warnings from FAO and WFP

FAO warns that fertilizer prices could remain on average 15–20% above last year’s levels in the first half of 2026, a projection that already appears conservative given April data. The organization describes the situation as an “interconnected shock,” moving from energy to fertilizers and then to agri-food supply chains, with effects that are difficult to reverse quickly. The World Food Programme goes further, warning that up to 45 million additional people could face severe food insecurity in the event of a prolonged crisis.

Faced with these prices, farmers have three options, and none is without cost: absorb the increase by reducing profits; cut fertilizer use and accept lower yields (often with disproportionate consequences); or shift to crops requiring less nitrogen fertilizer, affecting global markets in the months ahead.

The cases of India and Brazil

Vulnerability is not only about poverty, but also dependence on imports. India, a major agricultural producer but reliant on imported gas for fertilizer production, and Brazil, which imports over 49 million tons of fertilizers annually, are among the most exposed.

Meanwhile, Sub-Saharan Africa remains the most at risk. Fertilizer use there is often below 20 kg per hectare, compared to 150–200 kg in Europe, and any price increase translates almost directly into lower production. According to IFPRI, economic losses in these countries could be 10 to 20 times greater than in developed nations.

If tensions ease quickly, the effect may be only a temporary price spike. But if the crisis extends into May or June, it will directly impact agricultural cycles in Europe, North America, Asia, and Brazil. In that case, the issue will no longer be just price, but also production volume. And a lost harvest cannot be recovered without waiting for an entire season.

A summer without air conditioning may be uncomfortable. But an autumn with weak harvests and sharply rising food prices would be a far more serious challenge.

“KORÇA BOOM”