Overview of the Research Process
The study follows a structured research process that combines secondary research, primary research and quantitative modelling. The process begins with a definition of the market and its segmentation, followed by collection of data on product registrations, company portfolios, crop areas, pest incidence, and government locust control activity. Market size estimates are developed through top-down and bottom-up approaches and reconciled through data triangulation. The resulting estimates are validated with industry participants and used as the basis for the forecast to 2032.
Secondary Research
Secondary research was used to build an understanding of the product landscape, regulatory status, demand patterns and competitive environment. The main source types were:
Industry associations: biocontrol and biostimulant industry bodies such as the International Biocontrol Manufacturers Association (IBMA), the Biological Products Industry Alliance (BPIA) in the United States, and national crop protection associations, for information on biological market trends and policy positions.
Government and regulatory bodies: the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Health Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency, the European Commission and the EU Pesticides Database, the Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAPA), India's Central Insecticides Board and Registration Committee, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, and national plant protection organisations.
Intergovernmental organisations: the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, including the Desert Locust Information Service and regional locust commissions, for data on locust control operations and biopesticide use.
Company filings and publications: annual reports, investor presentations, product labels, technical data sheets and press releases of biological crop protection companies and their parent groups.
Trade journals and scientific literature: agricultural trade media and peer-reviewed research on Metarhizium strains, formulation technology, field efficacy and production methods.
Paid databases: company, trade and agricultural statistics databases for crop area, production and input-use data.
Primary Research
Primary research was conducted through in-depth interviews with participants across the value chain to validate secondary findings and fill information gaps. On the supply side, respondents included business development, product management and technical managers of biological crop protection manufacturers, formulators, contract fermentation providers and distributors. On the demand side, respondents included agronomists of sugarcane mills and farming groups, horticultural growers and greenhouse operators, crop advisers, cooperative managers, and officials involved in plant protection and locust control programmes.
The objectives of primary research were to validate market size and segment splits, understand pricing and application rates by formulation and crop, assess adoption barriers and purchase criteria, confirm the competitive positioning of suppliers, and test growth assumptions for the forecast period.
Market Size Estimation
Top-down approach: The overall biopesticide and bioinsecticide market was used as a starting point. The share of entomopathogenic fungi within bioinsecticides, and the share of Metarhizium within fungal bioinsecticides, were applied by region and country, using product registration counts, company portfolio information and expert inputs to derive the Metarhizium anisopliae market.
Bottom-up approach: Treated area for key crop and pest combinations, such as spittlebugs in sugarcane and pasture, white grubs and soil pests in field and vegetable crops, vine weevil in nursery stock, and locust treatment areas reported in government campaigns, was multiplied by application rates and average product prices. Revenues of leading suppliers attributable to Metarhizium products were also aggregated where information was available.
Data triangulation: Results from both approaches were compared and reconciled. Differences were investigated through further secondary research and primary interviews, and the final estimates were aligned so that segment, regional and country values sum consistently to the global total.
Forecasting Methodology
The forecast for 2026–2032 was developed by projecting each country and segment on the basis of historic trends and the expected influence of market factors. The factors considered include:
Regulatory developments affecting both biological and synthetic insecticides, including approvals, renewals and restrictions.
Crop area and production trends for sugarcane, soybean, maize, rice, pasture, fruits and vegetables.
Pest pressure, including the frequency of locust and grasshopper outbreaks and the spread of invasive pests.
Adoption rates of integrated pest management and organic production, and retailer residue requirements.
Formulation and production technology improvements affecting product cost, shelf life and efficacy.
Pricing trends, distribution reach and the competitive activity of leading suppliers.
Macroeconomic conditions, including farm income and currency movements.
Country-level forecasts were aggregated to regional and global totals, and segment forecasts were reconciled with country totals in each year.
Base Year, Forecast Period and Currency
Base year: 2025
Historic period: 2022–2024
Forecast period: 2026–2032
CAGR period: 2026–2032
Currency: USD Million, at constant exchange rates
Assumptions and Limitations
Market value is measured at manufacturer and first-seller level and excludes on-farm production for own use.
Exchange rates are held constant over the forecast period; currency fluctuations, particularly of the Brazilian real and Indian rupee, may affect reported values.
The forecast assumes no major reversal in regulatory policy towards biological crop protection in key markets.
Locust and grasshopper demand is assumed to follow a pattern of periodic outbreaks; an unusually large upsurge or a prolonged recession period would affect actual demand in individual years.
Many suppliers are privately held and do not report product-level revenues; company-level positioning is therefore based on qualitative assessment.
Taxonomic revisions of the genus Metarhizium mean that some products are registered under species names other than M. anisopliae; these are included where they belong to the product category defined in this study.
