생물합리 농약 작물 보호 시장 : 제품 유형별, 작물 유형별, 제형별, 작용기전별, 원료별, 시용 방법별 - 세계 예측(2026-2032년)

The Biorational Crop Protection Market was valued at USD 21.56 billion in 2025 and is projected to grow to USD 22.92 billion in 2026, with a CAGR of 6.65%, reaching USD 33.85 billion by 2032.

A concise orientation to how biologically derived crop protection tools are reshaping agronomy, regulation, and commercial strategies for modern growers

Biorational crop protection is emerging as a cornerstone of sustainable agriculture, driven by the imperative to reduce chemical footprints while maintaining crop productivity and resilience. Innovations across biological and naturally derived solutions are reshaping pest, disease, and weed management practices, offering growers tools that align with regulatory shifts, consumer expectations for residue-free produce, and ecosystem health objectives. The industry is increasingly integrating scientific advances with practical deployment strategies, enabling growers to adopt alternatives that complement integrated pest management programs and modern agronomic systems.

This executive summary distills key dynamics shaping the sector, translating technological, regulatory, and commercial developments into actionable insights. It highlights the disruptive potential of next-generation biochemicals and microbials, examines application modalities and crop-specific adoption patterns, and outlines how regional regulatory trajectories and trade policy will influence supply chains. The narrative emphasizes pragmatic adoption levers-such as formulation innovation, delivery platforms, and grower engagement-that matter most to commercial decision-makers and R&D leaders.

Throughout the analysis, attention is given to how companies can align product portfolios with evolving agronomic needs, ensuring scalability and regulatory compliance while safeguarding margins. The introduction sets the stage for deeper exploration of transformative shifts, tariff impacts, segmentation intelligence, regional patterns, competitive positioning, and clear recommendations for industry actors seeking to lead in a rapidly changing landscape.

How scientific advances, regulatory evolution, and commercial partnerships are converging to redefine product innovation and go-to-market dynamics in biorational agriculture

The landscape for biorational crop protection is experiencing transformative shifts driven by converging scientific breakthroughs, shifting policy frameworks, and changing buy-side preferences. Advances in genomics, microbial ecology, and semiochemical chemistry are expanding the toolbox available to formulators and agronomists, enabling more precise modes of action, improved persistence under field conditions, and reduced non-target impacts. These technical strides are being translated into more robust product pipelines, with an emphasis on compatibility with integrated pest management and digital agronomy platforms.

Regulatory systems are also evolving; authorities in multiple jurisdictions are refining pathways for biologicals, simplifying registration for low-risk substances while imposing stringent data expectations for product claims and environmental safety. This regulatory recalibration encourages innovation but also raises the bar for evidence generation and post-launch monitoring. Simultaneously, procurement strategies among growers and distributors are shifting toward solutions that demonstrate clear return on investment, operational ease, and alignment with sustainability commitments, fostering demand for products that integrate seamlessly into existing crop protection programs.

Commercial models are transforming as well: partnerships between biotech developers, formulators, and distribution networks are becoming more common as players seek to accelerate market access and scale. Investment flows are increasingly targeting platform technologies that enable broad-spectrum applications across crop types, and companies are prioritizing formulation science and delivery mechanisms that enhance performance and user acceptance. Together, these forces are redefining competitive advantage in the sector and creating new opportunities for entrants capable of delivering validated, crop-ready solutions.

Assessing how 2025 tariff measures have reshaped supply chain resilience, sourcing strategies, and manufacturing footprints for biologically based crop protection

Tariff policy in 2025 has introduced a significant layer of complexity to supply chains for biologically derived crop protection inputs, affecting raw material sourcing, manufacturing economics, and distribution strategies. Increased duties on certain agricultural inputs and intermediary goods have raised landed costs for manufacturers that rely on cross-border procurement of microbes, biochemical precursors, and specialty excipients. As a result, manufacturers and distributors are reassessing supplier portfolios and logistics networks to mitigate cost exposure and maintain competitive pricing for end users.

The cumulative impact of tariff shifts has prompted an acceleration of nearshoring and regional manufacturing initiatives, with companies investing in localized fermentation capacity, formulation hubs, and warehousing closer to major demand centers. This trend reduces exposure to episodic trade friction and improves responsiveness to regulatory and quality requirements across jurisdictions. At the same time, firms with vertically integrated supply chains or flexible sourcing contracts have been better positioned to absorb tariff-related cost increases without immediate price pass-through to growers.

For trade-sensitive categories such as bulk microbial agents, essential oils, and semiochemical compounds, tariff-driven cost inflation has also incentivized product reformulation and packaging innovations that reduce freight weight or concentrate active ingredients. Downstream distributors and growers are responding by prioritizing vendor resilience, transparency in origin, and contractual terms that allocate trade risk. Overall, tariff-related disruptions in 2025 have underscored the importance of supply chain agility, supplier diversification, and strategic investment in regional manufacturing footprints to preserve access and control costs.

Deep segmentation insights integrating product type, application method, crop specificity, formulation science, biological mode of action, and source attributes for strategic portfolio design

A granular understanding of product, application, crop, formulation, mode of action, and source segmentation is essential for designing commercially viable biorational portfolios and targeting adoption pathways. Across product types, distinctions between biochemicals, microbials, and natural substances guide R&D priorities and regulatory dossiers; biochemicals encompass pheromones, plant extracts, and semiochemicals that offer targeted behavioral or physiological controls, while microbials span bacterial, fungal, protozoan, and viral agents with varying production platforms and field performance characteristics. Natural substances include essential oils, humic substances, and organic acids that often serve dual roles in plant health and pest suppression and are valued for low residue profiles and consumer acceptance.

Mode of application defines deployment strategy and influences formulation requirements; foliar sprays-delivered via aerial application or conventional sprayers-must balance coverage and retention, whereas seed treatments, whether dry seed treatment or seed coating, demand compatibility with seed physiology and planting equipment. Soil treatments, applied as drenches or through soil incorporation, require persistence and interaction with soil biology, and stem injection offers targeted delivery for high-value perennial crops. Crop type segmentation shapes product-market fit, as solutions tailored for cereals and grains-such as corn, rice, and wheat-differ in scale and tolerance compared with those for fruits and vegetables, which include fruits, leafy greens, and roots and tubers, or oilseeds and pulses like mustard, pea, and soybean, each with distinct pest complexes.

Formulation choices-emulsions, granules, liquids, and powders-affect handling, storage, and efficacy; within granules, dry granule and micro granule variants serve differing application systems, while liquid options such as emulsifiable concentrates and suspension concentrates cater to compatibility and tank-mix behaviors, and powders like water dispersible granules and wettable powders offer stability under varying environmental conditions. Mode of action segmentation highlights biological roles including biofungicides, growth regulators, and insect trapping solutions, with growth regulators further differentiated by auxins, cytokinins, and gibberellins that influence plant physiology and yield outcomes. Finally, source classifications-bacterial, fungal, and plant extract origins-inform regulatory pathways, production economics, and stewardship practices. Integrating these segmentation lenses allows companies to prioritize development investments, tailor go-to-market messaging, and design evidence generation programs that resonate with specific crop advisors and procurement buyers.

How regional agronomic priorities, regulatory pathways, and sourcing ecosystems are shaping adoption patterns across the Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific

Regional dynamics are shaping adoption trajectories and commercial strategies for biorational crop protection, with distinct drivers in the Americas, Europe, Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific. In the Americas, demand is being influenced by large-scale row-crop production systems, the prevalence of integrated pest management practices, and a growing emphasis on residue reduction for export markets. This environment favors scalable microbial platforms and formulations that can be deployed across broad hectares while meeting stringent supply chain requirements and buyer specifications.

Europe, the Middle East & Africa present a diverse regulatory and agronomic mosaic. Western Europe continues to push for lower-risk chemistries and accelerated approvals for biologicals, fostering innovation in niche high-value crops and protected cultivation. In parts of the Middle East & Africa, opportunities center on building infrastructure and market access for biologicals, with early adopters focused on water-efficient application methods and crop protection strategies compatible with arid environments. Across the region, regulatory harmonization and capacity-building initiatives are increasingly important for enabling cross-border product registration and distribution.

Asia-Pacific features both intensive horticultural systems and expansive commodity cropping, creating demand for a wide spectrum of biorational solutions. Rapid urbanization and consumer preferences in several APAC markets are propelling interest in residue-safe products for fresh produce, while large-scale commodity growers are exploring biological seed treatments and soil health interventions. The region is also a source of key natural substances and microbial diversity, making it strategic for sourcing raw materials and partnering on R&D. Understanding these regional nuances supports targeted investment in formulation, registration, and channel strategies that maximize adoption across diverse agricultural systems.

Competitive positioning lessons showing how scientific credibility, manufacturing reliability, and partnership strategies determine long-term leadership in biological crop protection

Competitive dynamics in the biorational sector reflect a mix of specialized innovators, diversified agrochemical firms, and entrepreneurial biotech entrants, each bringing different strengths in R&D, scale-up, and market access. Specialized innovators often excel in platform technologies and proof-of-concept demonstrations, converting scientific discoveries into niche products that solve specific pest or disease challenges. Diversified companies leverage existing distribution networks, formulation expertise, and familiarity with regulatory systems to accelerate commercialization and integrate biologicals into broader product portfolios. Entrepreneurial firms contribute catalytic innovation, experimenting with novel modes of action, delivery technologies, and data-enabled performance validation.

Across these company types, differentiation increasingly depends on the ability to demonstrate consistent field performance, provide stewardship and application guidance, and offer integrated solutions that reduce adopter friction. Investment in robust field trials, digital decision-support tools, and grower-facing education programs is proving decisive for commercial uptake. Strategic partnerships-whether licensing agreements, co-development programs, or distribution alliances-are common approaches to bridge gaps between discovery and scale. Intellectual property management around strains, formulations, and proprietary process technologies remains a critical asset for sustaining competitive advantage.

Operational excellence in manufacturing, quality assurance, and cold chain logistics for sensitive biologicals is another determinant of success. Firms that can combine scientific credibility with reliable supply and responsive customer service are best positioned to capture long-term relationships with large growers and cooperatives. Finally, reputation for regulatory compliance and transparent environmental stewardship enhances trust among buyers, advisors, and end consumers, reinforcing the importance of evidence-based claims and systematic post-launch monitoring.

Practical strategic moves for commercial and R&D leaders to scale biological solutions while strengthening supply chains, stewardship, and go-to-market velocity

Industry leaders can take specific, actionable steps to convert scientific promise into market impact while mitigating operational and regulatory risks. Prioritizing investment in formulation science and delivery systems that enhance field performance and user convenience will accelerate adoption among growers who require demonstrable efficacy and ease of integration with existing practices. Complementary investments in large-scale field validation and independent efficacy studies create the evidence base needed to support agronomist recommendations and distributor confidence.

Building resilient supply chains through regional manufacturing hubs and diversified sourcing agreements reduces exposure to trade shocks and tariff volatility while enabling faster time-to-market. Strategic partnerships with seed companies, agronomy service providers, and retail distributors can expand access pathways and create bundled offerings that simplify decision-making for growers. Companies should also invest in digital tools and training programs that help advisors and applicators optimize timing and application methods, translating product science into consistent on-farm outcomes.

From a regulatory and commercial standpoint, companies should engage proactively with regulators to shape practical data requirements and participate in stewardship initiatives that monitor long-term environmental effects. Protecting proprietary assets with pragmatic IP strategies, while also exploring collaborative licensing to broaden geographical reach, will unlock new revenue streams. Finally, aligning product narratives with sustainability metrics and supply chain transparency will resonate with value-chain partners and downstream buyers, supporting premium positioning and differentiated market access.

Description of a multi-source research approach combining primary stakeholder engagements, technical literature review, and scenario analysis to generate strategic insights

This research integrates a multi-source, evidence-driven approach combining primary stakeholder engagements, expert interviews, and systematic secondary research across technical literature, regulatory filings, and industry disclosures. Primary inputs include structured dialogues with R&D leaders, formulation scientists, regulatory specialists, and distribution executives to capture operational challenges, innovation priorities, and go-to-market strategies. These direct conversations provide qualitative context around adoption barriers, validation needs, and channel dynamics that complement documentary sources.

Secondary inputs encompass peer-reviewed scientific studies, patent filings, regulatory guidance documents, and public company disclosures that inform technology trends, safety considerations, and commercial strategies. Wherever possible, evidence from field trials and independent efficacy studies has been synthesized to evaluate product performance attributes and deployment constraints. The methodology emphasizes triangulation across diverse data sources to ensure robustness of insights and mitigate bias from any single information channel.

Analytical processes include segmentation mapping to align product attributes with crop and application needs, scenario analysis to assess supply chain resilience under trade policy shifts, and competitor profiling to identify capability clusters. Assumptions and limitations are documented transparently, and findings focus on strategic implications rather than numerical market estimates, enabling decision-makers to translate qualitative and quantitative signals into prioritized actions.

Synthesis of strategic implications showing how science, evidence generation, and resilient operations converge to enable scalable adoption of biological crop protection

The collective evidence points to a sector at the intersection of rigorous science and pragmatic commercialization, where validated biorational solutions can materially contribute to sustainable crop protection strategies. Technological advances in microbial discovery, semiochemical engineering, and formulation platforms are expanding the scope of viable interventions, while evolving regulatory frameworks and procurement preferences are shaping the pathways to adoption. Companies that align their R&D pipelines with practical deployment constraints, invest in field validation, and establish resilient supply chains will be best positioned to capture long-term value.

Adoption will be incremental and context-dependent, with high-value specialty crops and integrated row-crop systems serving as early-scale use cases. The interplay between formulation innovation and application technology will be decisive for on-farm performance, and partnerships across the value chain will accelerate market access and trust. Trade policy volatility underscores the need for geographic diversification in manufacturing and sourcing, while stewardship and transparent evidence generation are prerequisites for sustained acceptance among regulators, advisors, and consumers.

In sum, the pathway to leadership in biorational crop protection combines scientific differentiation, rigorous evidence generation, operational resilience, and targeted commercial strategies. Executives and investors that prioritize these elements can convert the current wave of innovation into scalable, sustainable, and commercially robust offerings for the agricultural sector.

Table of Contents

1. Preface

• 1.1. Objectives of the Study
• 1.2. Market Definition
• 1.3. Market Segmentation & Coverage
• 1.4. Years Considered for the Study
• 1.5. Currency Considered for the Study
• 1.6. Language Considered for the Study
• 1.7. Key Stakeholders

2. Research Methodology

• 2.1. Introduction
• 2.2. Research Design
  • 2.2.1. Primary Research
  • 2.2.2. Secondary Research
• 2.3. Research Framework
  • 2.3.1. Qualitative Analysis
  • 2.3.2. Quantitative Analysis
• 2.4. Market Size Estimation
  • 2.4.1. Top-Down Approach
  • 2.4.2. Bottom-Up Approach
• 2.5. Data Triangulation
• 2.6. Research Outcomes
• 2.7. Research Assumptions
• 2.8. Research Limitations

3. Executive Summary

• 3.1. Introduction
• 3.2. CXO Perspective
• 3.3. Market Size & Growth Trends
• 3.4. Market Share Analysis, 2025
• 3.5. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2025
• 3.6. New Revenue Opportunities
• 3.7. Next-Generation Business Models
• 3.8. Industry Roadmap

4. Market Overview

• 4.1. Introduction
• 4.2. Industry Ecosystem & Value Chain Analysis
  • 4.2.1. Supply-Side Analysis
  • 4.2.2. Demand-Side Analysis
  • 4.2.3. Stakeholder Analysis
• 4.3. Porter's Five Forces Analysis
• 4.4. PESTLE Analysis
• 4.5. Market Outlook
  • 4.5.1. Near-Term Market Outlook (0-2 Years)
  • 4.5.2. Medium-Term Market Outlook (3-5 Years)
  • 4.5.3. Long-Term Market Outlook (5-10 Years)
• 4.6. Go-to-Market Strategy

5. Market Insights

• 5.1. Consumer Insights & End-User Perspective
• 5.2. Consumer Experience Benchmarking
• 5.3. Opportunity Mapping
• 5.4. Distribution Channel Analysis
• 5.5. Pricing Trend Analysis
• 5.6. Regulatory Compliance & Standards Framework
• 5.7. ESG & Sustainability Analysis
• 5.8. Disruption & Risk Scenarios
• 5.9. Return on Investment & Cost-Benefit Analysis

6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025

7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025

8. Biorational Crop Protection Market, by Product Type

• 8.1. Biochemicals
  • 8.1.1. Pheromones
  • 8.1.2. Plant Extracts
  • 8.1.3. Semiochemicals
• 8.2. Microbials
  • 8.2.1. Bacterial
  • 8.2.2. Fungal
  • 8.2.3. Protozoan
  • 8.2.4. Viral
• 8.3. Natural Substances
  • 8.3.1. Essential Oils
  • 8.3.2. Humic Substances
  • 8.3.3. Organic Acids

9. Biorational Crop Protection Market, by Crop Type

• 9.1. Cereals & Grains
  • 9.1.1. Corn
  • 9.1.2. Rice
  • 9.1.3. Wheat
• 9.2. Fruits & Vegetables
  • 9.2.1. Fruits
  • 9.2.2. Leafy Greens
  • 9.2.3. Roots & Tubers
• 9.3. Oilseeds & Pulses
  • 9.3.1. Mustard
  • 9.3.2. Pea
  • 9.3.3. Soybean
• 9.4. Turf & Ornamentals

10. Biorational Crop Protection Market, by Formulation

• 10.1. Emulsion
• 10.2. Granule
  • 10.2.1. Dry Granule
  • 10.2.2. Micro Granule
• 10.3. Liquid
  • 10.3.1. Emulsifiable Concentrate
  • 10.3.2. Suspension Concentrate
• 10.4. Powder
  • 10.4.1. Water Dispersible Granule
  • 10.4.2. Wettable Powder

11. Biorational Crop Protection Market, by Mode Of Action

• 11.1. Biofungicide
• 11.2. Growth Regulator
  • 11.2.1. Auxins
  • 11.2.2. Cytokinins
  • 11.2.3. Gibberellins
• 11.3. Insect Trapping

12. Biorational Crop Protection Market, by Source

• 12.1. Bacterial
• 12.2. Fungal
• 12.3. Plant Extract

13. Biorational Crop Protection Market, by Mode Of Application

• 13.1. Foliar Spray
  • 13.1.1. Aerial Application
  • 13.1.2. Conventional Sprayer
• 13.2. Seed Treatment
  • 13.2.1. Dry Seed Treatment
  • 13.2.2. Seed Coating
• 13.3. Soil Treatment
  • 13.3.1. Soil Drench
  • 13.3.2. Soil Incorporation
• 13.4. Stem Injection

14. Biorational Crop Protection Market, by Region

• 14.1. Americas
  • 14.1.1. North America
  • 14.1.2. Latin America
• 14.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
  • 14.2.1. Europe
  • 14.2.2. Middle East
  • 14.2.3. Africa
• 14.3. Asia-Pacific

15. Biorational Crop Protection Market, by Group

• 15.1. ASEAN
• 15.2. GCC
• 15.3. European Union
• 15.4. BRICS
• 15.5. G7
• 15.6. NATO

16. Biorational Crop Protection Market, by Country

• 16.1. United States
• 16.2. Canada
• 16.3. Mexico
• 16.4. Brazil
• 16.5. United Kingdom
• 16.6. Germany
• 16.7. France
• 16.8. Russia
• 16.9. Italy
• 16.10. Spain
• 16.11. China
• 16.12. India
• 16.13. Japan
• 16.14. Australia
• 16.15. South Korea

17. United States Biorational Crop Protection Market

18. China Biorational Crop Protection Market

19. Competitive Landscape

• 19.1. Market Concentration Analysis, 2025
  • 19.1.1. Concentration Ratio (CR)
  • 19.1.2. Herfindahl Hirschman Index (HHI)
• 19.2. Recent Developments & Impact Analysis, 2025
• 19.3. Product Portfolio Analysis, 2025
• 19.4. Benchmarking Analysis, 2025
• 19.5. Andermatt Group AG
• 19.6. BASF SE
• 19.7. Bayer AG
• 19.8. Biobest Group NV
• 19.9. Corteva, Inc.
• 19.10. FMC Corporation
• 19.11. Isagro S.p.A
• 19.12. Koppert Biological Systems International B.V.
• 19.13. Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.
• 19.14. Sumitomo Chemical Co., Ltd.
• 19.15. Syngenta AG
• 19.16. UPL Limited
• 19.17. Valent BioSciences LLC