Insecurity is emerging as a major operational risk to Kaduna State’s efforts to expand agricultural production and attract agro-industrial investment, after at least nine farmers were killed and several others abducted in an attack on farmland in Birnin Gwari Local Government Area.
The July 4 attack occurred around Kakangi as farmers worked on their fields during the wet-season farming period. Security information cited in reports on the incident recorded at least nine deaths, while several people were also reported abducted.
The incident came as the Kaduna government intensified agricultural support, with Governor Uba Sani flagging off the distribution of 500 truckloads of free fertiliser to 150,000 smallholder farmers across the state’s 23 local government areas, alongside mechanisation support.
The intervention followed the distribution of 400 truckloads of fertiliser to 100,000 farmers in 2025, while the state government said more than 500 truckloads were distributed in 2024.
The scale of the intervention highlights the importance of agriculture to Kaduna’s economic strategy, but also exposes a central challenge: lowering farmers’ input costs will have limited effect if insecurity prevents them from consistently accessing their fields, completing production cycles and moving harvests to markets.
Agricultural production requires continuity. Farmers need access to their fields not only for planting but also for weeding, applying fertiliser and other inputs, monitoring crops and harvesting.
The Kakangi attack demonstrates the direct security risks facing farmers in some parts of Kaduna. It does not, however, establish how many hectares have been abandoned across the state or how much agricultural output has been lost as a result of insecurity.
An attack on a farming community demonstrates vulnerability but does not, on its own, establish a statewide decline in agricultural production or justify assigning a specific monetary value to the economic damage.
The more immediate concern for policymakers and businesses is production reliability.
Farmers operating under persistent security threats may face greater uncertainty over where and when they can cultivate. For aggregators and processors, the concern is whether sufficient volumes of agricultural commodities will reach collection centres and processing facilities when required.
For investors, repeated disruption can increase uncertainty around raw-material availability, logistics and operating costs.
The security challenge comes as Kaduna seeks to move agriculture beyond primary production through the Special Agro-Industrial Processing Zones (SAPZ) programme.
The Kaduna SAPZ initiative is designed to strengthen connections between farmers, aggregation centres, processors, infrastructure and markets, with the broader objective of increasing value addition and attracting private investment into agriculture.
The Kaduna programme has set targets of more than $200 million in investment, 20,000 direct jobs and 100,000 indirect jobs.
These are programme targets, not realised investment or employment figures.
The commercial success of processing infrastructure depends heavily on reliable agricultural supplies.
Processors need sufficient volumes of raw materials to maintain operations. Aggregators must be able to reach farming communities and assemble commodities. Transporters need to move produce from farms and collection points to processors and markets.
Farmers, in turn, need access to buyers and functioning markets.
Insecurity can disrupt those connections even where the underlying agricultural potential remains strong.
There is no verified statewide estimate of the financial losses suffered by Kaduna’s agricultural businesses because of insecurity. The risk should therefore be treated as an operational and investment constraint, rather than a quantified economic loss.
The Kaduna government has substantially increased its intervention in agricultural production.
Sani said the state purchased fertiliser at about N56,000 per bag but decided to distribute it free rather than sell it to farmers at a subsidised price of N20,000.
The governor also said agricultural funding increased from N1.48 billion in 2023 to N23.4 billion in 2024 and N74.02 billion in 2025, while more than N100 billion was allocated to agriculture and food security in the 2026 budget.
Sani further said improved security had allowed farmers to return to previously affected areas and that about 5,000 hectares of farmland had been reclaimed with community and Federal Government support.
The fertiliser price, agricultural spending figures and reclaimed farmland are government-reported figures and should be understood as official claims rather than independently audited outcomes.
The policy challenge for Kaduna extends beyond getting fertiliser and equipment to farmers.
The state is addressing one part of the production equation by reducing input costs. But agricultural output also depends on access to farmland, labour, transport, storage and markets.
Security therefore affects the effectiveness of agricultural spending.
A farmer who receives subsidised inputs but cannot safely access a farm may not be able to obtain the full benefit of that intervention.
Similarly, tractors and other mechanisation equipment can increase productivity only when farmers are able to use them throughout the production cycle.
The implication is that security and agricultural spending, although separate government responsibilities, are economically interconnected.
For businesses, insecurity can affect the agricultural value chain beyond the farm gate.
If farmers cannot reach production areas, supplies available to aggregators may fall or become less predictable. Processors dependent on local commodities can then face difficulties planning production.
Transporters may also encounter greater uncertainty when moving goods through insecure rural areas, while traders may become more cautious about sourcing from affected communities.
The result can be a less predictable supply environment.
For an agricultural processor, this matters because plant capacity is built around assumptions about the availability and timing of raw materials.
A processor that cannot secure sufficient commodities may operate below capacity, while higher procurement or transportation risks can increase operating costs.
The same principle applies to agricultural finance. Lenders and investors need confidence that farmers and agribusinesses can produce and sell enough commodities to sustain operations and meet financial obligations.
These are potential commercial effects. Available evidence does not establish a specific naira value for such losses in Kaduna.
The state government has linked improved security to the return of farmers to areas previously affected by attacks.
Sani said thousands of farmers had returned to their farms and that 5,000 hectares of farmland previously affected by insecurity had been reclaimed through cooperation between communities and government.
The figure remains a government-reported claim and has not been independently audited.
Its economic significance, however, lies in what happens after farmland is reclaimed.
For agricultural investment to generate returns, farmers must be able to cultivate the land throughout the season, harvest their crops and transport them to markets.
Simply restoring access to farmland does not guarantee sustained production if security threats return.
Kaduna’s agricultural performance also matters to food supply beyond individual rural communities.
The state has extensive farming activity and is pursuing greater commercialisation of agriculture. Disruptions in important production areas can therefore affect the availability of commodities for traders, processors and consumers.
However, available evidence does not establish that the Kakangi attack, or insecurity generally, has caused a specific increase in food prices in Kaduna.
Food prices are influenced by several factors, including input costs, transport expenses, weather, exchange-rate movements, storage, market demand and the availability of commodities.
The defensible economic argument is that insecurity introduces another source of uncertainty into food production and distribution.
Kaduna’s agricultural strategy combines two objectives: supporting smallholder farmers and attracting investment into processing and value addition.
The fertiliser programme targets 150,000 farmers, while the SAPZ programme targets more than $200 million in investment, 20,000 direct jobs and 100,000 indirect jobs.
The two initiatives address different stages of the same agricultural economy.
Input support is intended to strengthen production. Agro-industrial infrastructure is intended to create markets, processing capacity and additional value.
Security connects the two.
Farmers must be able to cultivate. Commodities must be aggregated. Transporters must move them. Processors must receive sufficient raw materials. Finished products must reach markets.
A disruption at any stage can weaken the commercial efficiency of the wider value chain.
For investors, security is therefore not simply a law-and-order issue. It is part of the operating environment that determines whether agricultural businesses can plan, invest and operate predictably.
The Kakangi attack does not establish that Kaduna’s agricultural output is declining, nor does it provide evidence for a specific financial loss to the state’s agricultural sector.
It does, however, demonstrate the vulnerability of farmers in communities where insecurity persists.
That vulnerability is particularly significant as Kaduna increases public spending on agricultural inputs while seeking private investment in agro-processing.
The success of those policies will ultimately depend on whether farmers can convert government support into sustained production and whether businesses can reliably move commodities from farms to processors and markets.
For Kaduna, the measure of its agricultural strategy should therefore extend beyond the number of farmers receiving fertiliser, hectares reclaimed or investment targeted.
It should include whether farmers can cultivate safely, harvest consistently, transport their produce and participate in functioning commercial markets.
Without a sufficiently secure operating environment around farming communities and the rural routes connecting farms to markets, Kaduna’s growing agricultural and agro-industrial investments will remain exposed to disruption.
