AS geopolitical tensions between the USA/Israel and Iran have continued to reshape global trade flows, a tightening fertiliser market is becoming of increasing concern to potato growers.
Fertiliser supply chains depend heavily on a small number of exporting regions and energy-intensive production, so when conflict disrupts energy pricing, shipping routes, or regional stability, it creates a chain reaction that potato growers feel almost immediately.
The conflict caused global fertiliser prices to skyrocket following the restriction of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, where roughly one-third of the world’s sea-borne fertiliser passes. The NFU reported that the conflict caused fertiliser costs to surge by up to 55% year-on-year while Oxford Economics’ Alpine Macro recently said urea and ammonia prices had surged by around 50% and 20%, respectively.
NFU President Tom Bradshaw has said the potato industry faced a double whammy when this was combined with the surging cost of heating storage facilities, combined with large increases to standing charges for energy use.
“Growers are having to shoulder increased costs of fuel and fertiliser, often only being made aware of the price they will pay once products have been delivered onto farm,” he said.
Some potato growers in the UK and US are reported to be considering lower application rates or switching to crops that require less nitrogen to cut costs.
With timing being crucial for potato planting and input decisions, higher fertiliser costs can lead to reduced application rates or shifts toward lower-yield crops and those decisions do not just affect growers themselves – they carry through to the supply chain and pricing.
Growers need transparency over pricing, Tom said – a factor recognised by the Competition and Markets Authority, which has been in discussion with suppliers and intermediaries to get further evidence and assess any consumer protection concerns.
The CMA’s CEO Sarah Cardell said: “We will work with relevant officials and regulators to identify and monitor sectors likely to be affected by price rises and disruption – including agricultural inputs such as fertiliser and red diesel, groceries and travel – so that both the CMA and wider government can respond swiftly to any evidence of harmful practices across the economy.”
Fertiliser companies are recognising the challenges faced by growers and are trying to work with them, along with agronomists, to help minimise over-spending by ensuring applications are properly targeted. But at the same time, they warn against scrimping, pointing out that this could lead to even costlier impacts further down the line.
Crop Nutrition Business Manager at Yara, Tom Decamp, said the arithmetic is “unambiguous”, pointing out that a 50-tonne pre-pack crop losing its quality premium of £40 to £50 per tonne represents up to £2,500 per hectare forfeited at the point of sale. Whereas the cost of correct soil-applied calcium nitrate fertiliser is less than £200 per hectare.
“Even allowing for today’s elevated input prices, the potential return far outweighs the cost,” he said.
Scott Baker, Business Growth Director Fortiflo, OMEX Agriculture, said in light of the current situation, growers needed to be optimising fertiliser and nutrient management for potato crops.
“We continuously advise growers to follow the 3R’s: Right product, right place, right time. Making full use of available technology, such as SAP analysis, allows farmers to make precise, timely nutrition decisions that support crop performance,” Scott said.
“As with any season, potato growers should focus on giving the crop exactly what it needs to thrive. Working closely with their agronomist and using data-driven insights from soil and SAP analysis helps ensure nutrition is applied efficiently and effectively.
“This year we’ve seen strong demand for our Fortiflo foliar nutrition range, particularly Bio 20, which growers rely on to support crop health and resilience under stress. Trials have also shown that blight control programmes can be significantly enhanced by incorporating the targeted nutrient treatment Zynergy.”
Scott also advised that growers consider using inhibitors within their bulk liquid fertiliser applications.
“These products help protect the return on investment by reducing nutrient losses through leaching or atmospheric emissions, keeping more nitrogen available to the crop,” he said. “Solutions such as NoXShield and NitroShield ensure fertiliser stays where it’s needed, feeding the growing potato crop.”
Simon Fox, CEO of Emerald Research Ltd, whose OptiYield system uses a data-driven approach to reduce fertiliser inputs, said: “The numbers coming out of the fertiliser market this spring have an uncomfortably familiar ring. UK-produced AN is around 30% above its pre-conflict level, granular urea is up nearer 40% and China’s suspension of DAP exports until August has put a firm floor under phosphate prices. Potash has held up better, but rising shipping costs through a contested Strait of Hormuz will feed through soon enough.
“For a potato crop, where offtake is substantial and margins are thin, this is not a year to apply nutrition on autopilot!”
“When inputs get expensive the temptation is to cut rates. That is almost always the wrong instinct. What matters is not how much is applied, but how much the crop actually captures – and what it needs, in what proportion and when. Luxury growth is now a luxury we can’t afford.”
Simon reminded growers that the 2022 spike had shown that growers who pulled back hardest, without a plan to compensate, harvested the smallest crops and the worst margins. Those who came through best treated fertiliser as a precision input, not a commodity, he said.
“Start with the soil. A current analysis, honestly interpreted, tells you what the reserve is really offering. On well-indexed ground, modest reductions in granular P and K are defensible. On weaker sites, false economy is waiting to happen,” he said.
