With more than 1 billion people around the world living in fragile or conflict-affected situations, establishing food security is an increasing challenge.
Agriculture is often seen as a central way to improve access to a secure food source, as well as alleviating poverty and creating livelihoods and stability for those impacted by conflict.
But new research by academics from the University of Adelaide has found such interventions may indirectly benefit non-target groups.
Ph.D. candidate Angus Davidson, from the Center for Global Food and Resources and School of Economics and Public Policy, analyzed the unintended consequences of agricultural improvements in Bamyan Province, Afghanistan following the fall of the Taliban in 2001.
The findings have been published in the journal Global Food Security.
“We found the Afghanistan Agricultural Support Programme (ASP), which began in December 2011 and ended in 2017, improved wheat yields during the intervention period and beyond for the 866 members who participated,” says Davidson.
“The farmers who used the improved wheat seed and diammonium phosphate (DAP) fertilizer on their crops had a 37.2% higher yield than non-adaptors who used the improved seed.”
The ASP was rolled out to 64 farmer cooperatives comprising 866 members in the southern and western areas of the province to improve their wheat crops—the dominant crop in the area.
“The districts in the north of the province were excluded based on security assessments and operational requirements, which is central to interpreting the implications of the spillover in excluded districts,” says Davidson.
Davidson and the research team analyzed the data from 110 farmers in 2021, as well a 10-year time series of normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) imagery, capturing seasonal mean peak values calibrated to wheat-growing periods and examining yield patterns among target and non-target populations.
“The NVDI uses photosynthetically active vegetation and can validate the crop yields by measuring the difference between linear red radiance or reflectance and photographic infrared radiance or reflectance obtained from satellite imaging,” says Davidson.
“We also used five separate wheat yield datasets to provide benchmarks and context for the ASP results.
“There was only a 0.86% difference in yield between the target and nontarget populations for 2016/17, which shows the improved seed, or improved practices spilt over.”
In stable environments, spillover into nontarget areas is generally regarded as beneficial. However, in Afghanistan, prior to August 2021, it is plausible that spillover extended into areas controlled by nonstate actors, including the Taliban.
“In a severely food-insecure country, increased wheat yields in target areas could have bolstered nonstate actors’ legitimacy or operational capacity,” says Davidson.
“Integrating geographic information systems, early-warning monitoring, and conflict-sensitive evaluation frameworks could support real-time detection of spillovers on both sides of a conflict.
“Improved comprehension of program repercussions enhances the potential to anticipate and mitigate unintended consequences, particularly in FCAS.”
More information:
Angus Alexander Davidson et al, Striving for food security in a fragile and conflict-affected situation: The unintended consequences of delivering intended outcomes in Afghanistan, Global Food Security (2025). DOI: 10.1016/j.gfs.2025.100890
Provided by
University of Adelaide
The content is provided for information purposes only.