Calling countries “winners” and “losers” can make El Niño sound more predictable than it really is.
The climate pattern changes rainfall and temperature in ways that depend on geography, season and crop.
A better approach is to identify where agricultural pressure is more plausible and then check actual weather and crop data.
Southeast Asia: rice and water are central
Countries such as Indonesia and the Philippines are closely watched because rice production depends strongly on rainfall and irrigation.
Reuters reported that Indonesia’s rice prices were expected to remain high as El Niño threatened the 2027 harvest, while the country’s limited irrigation coverage leaves some fields more exposed to dry conditions.
The Philippines is also preparing for El Niño-related water pressure. Officials have urged households to prepare without excessive water hoarding.
Australia: a mixed national picture
Australia’s crop outlook is not uniformly negative.
ABARES’ September report expects winter crop production to fall 12% to 61 million tonnes, but that would still be the fourth-largest winter crop on record.
Regional conditions explain the difference.
Southern cropping areas have performed better than some northern regions.
That is why a national “El Niño loss” number can be misleading.
India: monsoon timing matters
India’s agricultural exposure is especially sensitive to monsoon performance.
A strong El Niño can influence seasonal rainfall, but its final effect depends on the interaction with other climate patterns and local rainfall distribution.
The useful indicators are reservoir levels, soil moisture, rainfall and crop progress.
A climate forecast alone cannot tell us how much rice, wheat or another crop will be harvested.
Pakistan: heat, water and wheat
Pakistan combines major irrigated agriculture with exposure to extreme heat, floods and water stress.
El Niño can change seasonal weather, but the effect needs to be separated from other weather events.
Wheat, rice and other crops should be monitored independently.
Americas: potential rainfall shifts
Some parts of the Americas can experience wetter conditions during El Niño.
That does not mean every agricultural region benefits.
Excess rain can delay planting, increase disease pressure or damage crops.
As elsewhere, the crop outcome depends on timing.
Southern Africa and other regions
El Niño can also alter rainfall across parts of Africa and other regions.
The food-security effect depends on whether people are already vulnerable because of conflict, poverty or weak harvests.
A modest weather shock can therefore have a large humanitarian effect in one place and a small market effect in another.
What should count as evidence?
A stronger case for crop damage would include:
- observed rainfall deficits or excesses;
- high temperatures during sensitive growth stages;
- falling soil moisture;
- deteriorating crop-condition reports;
- and lower official production forecasts.
That evidence is stronger than simply citing the strength category of El Niño.
Why “winner” and “loser” are imperfect labels
One country can have a good wheat harvest and a poor rice harvest in the same year.
One province can receive beneficial rainfall while another floods.
One crop can benefit from higher rainfall while another suffers from disease.
The correct unit of analysis is therefore often region + season + crop, not country alone.
Bottom line
El Niño creates a map of changing agricultural probabilities, not a predetermined list of winners and losers.
Southeast Asian rice systems, Australian crops and South Asian water resources deserve close monitoring, but actual weather and crop observations will determine the food-market impact.