<mark>Figure 1 graphically illustrates the nature of our data by comparing damaged area at the field level (in red) to public data from ACLED (in green)</mark> for one period, <mark>showing that the former are likely to contain more information on the intensity and location of damages that may be relevant for agriculture than the ACLED data. The spatial nature and time variation in the data, aggregated at the VC level, is illustrated for conflict incidence (figure 2) using official data (panel A) and ACLED data (panel B) for battles and explosions as well as intensity of damages (figure 3), based on satellite imagery (panel A) and ACLED data using the number of fatalities in battles and explosions (panel B). In all cases, VCs that were affected by the conflict before and after September 2022 are in red, and those affected by the conflict only before or after this date are in ochre or orange, respectively. W</mark> hile all the data sources point toward a large segment in the country’s northeast that was affected by fighting before September 2022 but not thereafter, comparing panel B in figures 2 and 3 to panel A in figure 3 suggests that ACLED includes violent events far from the front in the country’s interior, especially in cities, while providing less detail on it the incidence and severity of damages to agricultural fields close to the frontline.

<mark>Table 1 displays the resulting conflict measures for all two-week periods since the start of the war. Column 1 presents data on the share of VCs where some agricultural area was damaged; column 2, the mean area damaged per VC; column 3, the total extent of such crop damage; and column 4, an indicator of the share of VCs where publicly available data pointed to any type of conflict. This measure decreased from a high of 16.1% in period 2 to about 10% in the summer of 2022 and fluctuated at around 7%-8% for the remainder of the period. By comparison, the share of VCs experiencing field damage ranged from a maximum of 3% (in period 10) to a minimum of 0.4% (in periods 29 and 30), almost an order of magnitude smaller. With between 4,226 and 135,334 ha in periods 21 and 23, the total area damaged by conflict action at the national level in any two-week period remained small compared to a total cropped area of about 30 million ha. The correlation between this measure and the public information</mark> is low, suggesting that remotely sensed data contain information that is not captured by data from other sources.

<mark>To assess the effect of conflict-related damage on area cultivated with summer or winter crops, we match two-week periods to different phases of crops’ vegetative development (planting, growing, and, for winter crops, dormancy) to the data on conflict incidence and intensity by two-week intervals. Columns 5 and 6 in table 1 display the classification of these periods for summer and winter crops, respectively. Pa</mark> nel B provides the means over the planting or growing seasons for winter or summer crops in 2022 or 2023, which are the variables included in the relevant area regressions. The area damaged per VC dropped from about 550 ha per affected VC in 2022 to 236 and 306 ha per affected VC in the 2023 growing season for summer and winter crops, respectively. Aggregating information from ACLED in the same way, in columns 7 to 10, highlights that, with between 0.5% and 1% of VCs reporting (between 9.8 and 30.9) fatalities in any 7