Mineral fertilizers have never been used as much as they are today, and in developing countries they are experiencing a renaissance. But the efficacy of mineral fertilizers and the problems they entail have long been a matter of contention. This study provides an overview of the economic and ecological potential as well as the limitations and negative impacts of mineral fertilizers in the tropics and subtropics. It focuses on the situation facing smallholder farmers. The study concludes, in part, that fertile soils are among our most important resources worldwide. Healthy soils store water, are home to a large share of biodiversity, and store carbon. Mineral fertilizer subsidies for smallholders have been common in developing countries for many years, and subsidy programmes are still popular. Current programmes show that food production can be increased significantly in regions where the food supply is short, though they fail to improve the soil fertility in the long term. Subsidies have a short-term effect, they do not result in sustainable food security, and they are of minimal importance to an economy’s profitability. What is more, subsidy programmes are a burden on national budgets. In some African countries, fertilizer subsidies account for up to 70 % of the funding assigned to agriculture. The negative effects of nitrogen fertilizers on the climate are undisputed. The production of nitrogen fertilizer uses a lot of energy, while fertilizing fields with nitrogen releases nitrous oxide – a gas that is 310 times more detrimental to the climate than carbon dioxide. And mineral fertilizer prices are linked to the price of oil because their production is so energy-intensive. Read More+: Available at http://www.boell.de/publications/publications-study-mineral-fertilizer-17343.html