Agricultural Policy Impacts on Farming Practices and Rural Livelihood Resilience: A Constraint‐Based Analysis in Northern Ghana

ABSTRACT Agricultural development in Ghana faces unique challenges due to its distinct agro‐ecological conditions, including erratic rainfall patterns, soil fertility issues, and limited irrigation infrastructure. These biophysical constraints intersect with socioeconomic factors such as limited access to inputs, credit constraints, and underdeveloped market systems to create a complex agricultural development context. This study evaluates the impact of major agricultural policy interventions using a comprehensive cross‐sectional survey of farmers across Northern Ghana. The research employs multiple analytical approaches, including propensity score matching, constraint profiling, and geographic analysis, to assess how these policies influence farming practices and outcomes. Findings reveal significant but heterogeneous policy effects, with yield increases of 27%–32% and income improvements averaging 28% among participants. However, substantial implementation quality gaps, particularly in input timeliness and extension adequacy, limit potential impacts. Using cluster analysis, the study identifies four distinct farmer typologies: input‐constrained (43%), knowledge‐constrained (28%), market‐constrained (20%), and multiple‐constrained farmers (10%), with significant spatial and demographic patterns. Only 47% of farmers' access policies aligned with their primary constraints, indicating substantial targeting inefficiencies. Policy responses vary significantly by constraint profile, with farmers showing the strongest adoption when interventions address their binding limitations. Female farmers demonstrate consistently lower benefits across all interventions, highlighting gender equity concerns. The research proposes a constraint‐based targeting approach to improve intervention alignment with farmer needs, enhance implementation quality measures, and bundle intervention packages addressing multiple limitations simultaneously. These findings provide evidence‐based recommendations for more differentiated, targeted, and responsive agricultural policy approaches.