Abstract: In 2022, global sales of agricultural microbial preparations will increase from US$3.09 billion in 2017 to US$6.01 billion. The contribution of microbial preparations to agriculture and the environment is the main reason for the increase in sales of such products. Because the target of microbial preparations is more specific than chemical pesticides.Biological pesticides are generally natural compounds or genetic modifiers, mainly including biochemical pesticides (pheromone, hormones, plant regulators, insect growth regulators) and microbial pesticides (fungi, bacteria, insect viruses, protozoa, or genetically modified). The two parts of the microorganism, agricultural antibiotic preparations are not included. According to its composition and source, bio-pesticide in China can be divided into four parts: microbial live pesticide, microbial metabolite pesticide, plant-derived pesticide and animal-derived pesticide. According to the control object, it can be divided into insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, acaricides, rodenticides, plant growth regulators, and the like. As far as the target is concerned, biological pesticides are generally divided into two categories: direct use of living organisms and utilization of physiologically active substances derived from organisms. The former includes bacteria, fungi, nematodes, viruses and antagonistic microorganisms, and the latter includes agricultural antibiotics and plants. Growth regulators, sex pheromones, food intake inhibitors, juvenile hormones, and physiologically active substances derived from plants. However, in the practical application of agricultural production in China, biological pesticides generally refer to microbial pesticides that can be used for large-scale industrial production.The Ministry of Agriculture's Decree No. 10 regulates the registration of special new pesticides. The biological pesticides are classified into:(1) microbial pesticides(2) biochemical pesticides(3) genetically modified pesticides(4) plant-derived pesticides.Plant extracts pesticides refer to pesticides whose active ingredients are derived from plant organisms. The roots, stems, leaves, flowers, fruits and seeds of plants contain various natural active substances. Some active substances, plant volatiles and secondary metabolites have anti-feeding, bactericidal, inducing and avoiding effects, which can interfere with target organisms. Behavior.Botanical pesticidePyrethrum and nicotine are the main plant-derived pesticides with long history and high dosage. Pyrethrum dried flowers can be milled into powder directly as insecticides or as raw materials for mosquito incense. Pyrethrin can be extracted from the dried flower of pyrethrum and then compounded into medicaments. Tobacco contains nicotine which can be used as insecticide. Generally, waste tobacco leaves or tobacco stalks are used as raw materials. Nicotine is extracted by acid and then compounded into insecticidal preparations. The botanical insecticides in China include rote, Sophora flavescens, toosendanin and so on. Botanical pesticides are generally less toxic, harmless to plants,friendly to the environment and so on. However, because of their limited sources or cultivated land, it is difficult to produce them on a large scale and the variety is single.Number of registrations: A total of 11 active ingredients, 192 registrations, involving 124 manufacturing companies. The top three products with the largest number of registrations are matrine, rotenone and azadirachtin, accounting for 84% of the total (matrine products account for more than half, 57%).Microbial pesticideMicrobial pesticides can be produced on a large scale through microbial fermentation industry. If microbial metabolites are used, they can be regarded as chemical substances for microbial biosynthesis, essentially similar to chemically synthesized pesticides. Some people call them "biochemical pesticides". For example, avermectin is an effective insecticide and miticide brake; Jinggangmycin is a fungicide for controlling rice sheath blight. The use of living microorganisms as preparations, such as insecticide Bacillus thuringiensis, is essentially a biological control measure, and the dead worms will be infectious, strictly speaking, it does not belong to the category of chemical control. However, because its preparation and action methods are similar to pesticides, it is considered to be a pesticide. Microbial pesticides generally have the advantages of no harm to plants and friendly to the environment. Bacillus subtilis (Agriculture Fungicide) Beauveria bassiana (Agricultural Insecticide) A total of 22 active ingredients, 468 registered, and 205 manufacturing companies. The top three most registered products are Bacillus thuringiensis, Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus cereus, accounting for 73% of the total.In 2017, China's bio-pesticide industry achieved sales revenue of 31.93 billion yuan, a year-on-year increase of 5.7%. In 2018, the supervision of the entire pesticide industry has become stricter, and bio-pesticide has achieved better development results by virtue of its relative environmental protection. According to estimates, the sales revenue of bio-pesticides in China will be about 36 billion yuan in 2018, and the growth rate will reach 12.7%.As of March 2019, there were 468 microbial pesticides registered in China, involving 22 active ingredients and 205 production enterprises. The top three products with the largest number of registrations were Bacillus thuringiensis, Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus cereus, accounting for 73% of the total.The advantages of developing plant-derived bio-pesticides are self-evident. China is a large natural resource with a wide variety of plants, and its active substances contain immeasurable development potential. The low residue and easy degradation of bio-pesticides can reduce the pollution of soil and water bodies to a minimum. As consumer habits around the world change, foods grown from bio-pesticide will also be more acceptable and trusted by consumers.At the beginning of 2019, methyl bromide was banned from use in agriculture. Recently, the EU no longer approves the re-assessment application of chlorothalonil. carbendazim has once again called for ban because of excessive pesticide residues. It can be seen that China is paying more and more attention to pesticide safety issues, pesticides are becoming more and more banned, and the pesticide market is entering. The era of blood transfusion. Green, low-toxic, bio-pesticides with high safety to non-target organisms have attracted the attention of the majority of pesticide companies and the entire pesticide industry.

The second annual Indoor AgTech Innovation Summit to be held in New York City, June 19-20 2019, provides an opportunity for over 300 thought leaders to come together and advance the sustainability, profitability and health-focus of the indoor trend that’s changing the dynamics of fresh food production. Enza Zaden is participating in the event for the first time and offers insight into the value of seed breeding innovation for high-tech greenhouses and vertical farms.“Seed that’s bred specifically for controlled conditions is critical to meeting consumer demands and achieving desired business outcomes,” says Freek Knol, Greenhouse Business Manager North America, Enza Zaden USA.Enza Zaden currently offers 12 hydroponic varieties – including Cristabel ‘crispy’ lettuce – with 15 more to be released in the next few years. The unique lighting, mechanics, technical know-how, desired traits, yields and packaging requirements of each indoor growing operation help to inform ideal variety suggestions, and avoid the significant trial-and-error expense of seed bred for open-field growing.Enza Zaden’s dedicated breeding programs are informed by ongoing market trend and consumer preferences research across North America, the EU and Asia, as well as strong partnerships with retail organizations and produce platforms. Insights gained enable innovative adaption of fresh products in partnership with customers.“Technology stakeholders, led by widespread consumer demand for local produce, are setting an aggressive and inspiring pace for dedicated seed breeding and operational innovation that’s never been seen before in the fresh food industry. We’re excited to be part of this exciting, entrepreneurial chapter in fresh and healthy local food production,” says Knol.

Regulations add costs to the products we buy, and if a product is no longer novel, such as herbicide tolerant canola, then the regulations could be lifted, lowering the price of products to consumers.In Canada, new plant varieties are regulated based on the final product, not the process used to create the variety. A herbicide-tolerant canola variety is regulated based on the traits that make the new variety novel, not the breeding process used to create it, such as genetic modification.Canada uses a science-based risk assessment and has safely commercialized more than 100 crop varieties. Canada regulates these plants based on novelty, known as plants with novel traits (PNTs).The question that arises is how long is a specific plant trait novel? Herbicide tolerant (HT) canola was developed using both transgenic and mutagenic technologies, and for 25 years new HT canola varieties have been regulated as PNTs and safely grown. After 25 years, are HT canola varieties really still novel?Nearly all of the canola grown in Canada is herbicide tolerant: 95 percent in 2017. Regulations add costs to the products we buy and if a product is no longer novel, then the regulations could be lifted, lowering the price of products to us as consumers.Webster’s New World College Dictionary defines novel as “new and unusual; especially, being the first of its kind.” Based on this definition, it would be difficult to argue that HT canola or other genetically modified varieties of corn and soybeans could be viewed as novel. Ontario and Quebec are Canada’s largest corn-producing regions, with more than 70 percent of seeded corn being of GM varieties. As one of the six “founding biotech crop countries,” Canada’s 25 years of safe production no longer fits the definition of novel.When it comes to defining novel, Canada also has legal precedence. The issue at hand is that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency does not define novel. In a 1966 lawsuit, (Mihalchuk v. Ratke (1966) 57 DLR (2d) 269) regarding chemical drift from an aerial application, the judge observed that the method of applying chemical by plane was unusual and awarded damages. In other words, it was a new novel technology.A decade later, in an identical case (Cruise v. Niessen (1977) 82 DLR (3d) 190) the judge ruled that aerial application of chemicals was common, and awarded no compensation of damages. The Canadian courts have said that the use of a technology for a 10-year period results in the technology being viewed as a common practice. Why should plant breeding technologies be different?Based on these two court cases, it may be possible to develop an argument that Canada has a regulatory mandate to review if HT crops are still novel when they account for virtually all of the production. Scientific data from PNT variety approvals over the past 25 years demonstrate the technology is equivalent to conventional plant varieties. If there is no scientific rationale for supporting continued regulation of herbicide-tolerant varieties or insect-resistant varieties, then the regulatory oversight should be removed.Previous research I was involved with has shown a direct correlation between the length and uncertainty of regulation and innovation investment. Removing PNT regulations from herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant crops would be expected to improve innovation investment in Canada.With the legal aspect satisfactorily addressed, the sole remaining rational would need to be based on scientific risk assessment data.Based on 25 years of approval, the scientific risk assessment data would appear to support removing regulatory oversight on some of the transgenic and mutagenic traits presently being subject to additional regulatory oversight. Novel is not defined as something that is in perpetuity but as something that has a defined length.The time has come to deem herbicide tolerance and insect resistance as no longer novel.

By Kenrick Cai, ForbesAgtech founders and VC backers talked about the opportunities and challenges that automated robots bring to farming.MATT KANG FOR FORBESHow do you teach a computer what a good strawberry looks like? According to AgShift founder and CEO Miku Jha, whose company is innovating food inspections with deep learning, you do it the same way you train a three year old. “You give them a ping pong ball and an egg, and you keep telling them, ‘this is a ball, this is an egg, this is a ball, this is an egg.’ Both are white, but eventually you figure it out. That’s how our minds are wired,” she said.Training a strawberry-inspecting AI program follows that same logic: “We take hundreds of images of bruises in a strawberry, and we keep training the model that this is a bruise. ‘Good berry, bad berry, good berry, bad berry.’ That’s it,” she said.Jha was a part of a panel on automation moderated by Forbes associate editor Alex Knapp on Thursday at the 2019 Forbes AgTech Summit in Salinas, California. She spoke alongside George Kellerman, CEO and managing director of Yamaha Motor’s venture capital arm Yamaha Motor Ventures; Arama Kukutai, cofounder and partner of agtech-focused VC firm Finistere Ventures; and Thomas Palomares, cofounder and CTO of agricultural automation company Farmwise. Panelists discussed whether robots are stealing jobs, and the challenges of building AI, securing VC funding, and looking beyond the United States.The growing intersection between Silicon Valley’s technology and the Salinas Valley’s agriculture hasn’t extended to Silicon Valley’s VC money. Agtech struggles to find investment because it takes longer to grow companies, and also because most investors are “sheep,” Kellerman said. Traditional venture capitalists are opportunistic, following the crowd and chasing the “dumb money.” He argues that agtech companies need VC firms that understand “patient capital,” making a long term investment instead of expecting a quick profit.A major reason agtech can’t iterate as quickly as software is because companies can’t test their innovations year-round. They’re limited by harvesting periods that last only a few months per year. California, especially the Salinas Valley, is a prime location to counter this problem because the area has low seasonality, said Palomares, who made the 2019 Forbes 30 Under 30 Manufacturing and Industry List for Farmwise. The company uses robots with computer vision and deep learning capabilities to remove weeds with herbicides. Palomares said the company aimed for weeding first because it isn’t as limited by seasons.Companies bound by harvesting cycles do have other options. It’s a big reason why Kellerman and Kukutai have invested abroad, in such countries as New Zealand and Ireland. Kellerman recalled an early investment in Abundant Robotics, which creates robotic harvesters for apple, which have a mere two-month harvest window every year. “What was interesting is the first iteration of the product, they designed it specifically to fit in a shipping container so they could pack it up and take it to Australia and do another season,” he said.When it comes to agriculture and food-based AI, says Jha, an additional challenge is that datasets have to be built from scratch. “If you build an AI solution for a bank, for example if you’re trying to do fraud detection, you have patterns,” she noted. “It has existed for many decades, so you can use it to get a head start.”Practically speaking, this means today’s automated robots likely aren’t perfect—which can make it a hard sell to growers. “You create a broccoli harvester or a strawberry harvester, it might be 60% or 80% of what a human can do,” Kellerman said. “So, you may have to rethink your business model. If you’re just looking to swap [people] out, it’s not going to happen that way. Technology evolves at an iterative pace.”While automation involves computers doing the jobs that humans otherwise do, that doesn’t mean robots are stealing jobs, said Kellerman, because nobody’s filling those jobs in the first place. When he first plunged into agriculture amid California’s drought crisis, Kellerman said he assumed the biggest problem in the industry was water. Instead, every grower he spoke to told him, “my top three problems are: labor, labor, and labor.”This is one thing that drove Yamaha Motor Ventures’s decision to invest in agricultural automation, he said. It “wasn’t about taking humans out of the loop, it was about filling a gap that exists in the market. A gap that’s getting bigger and bigger every day.”Tech is “augmenting” not replacing the farming workforce, Jha agreed. “Imagine an inspector who has to inspect two pounds of cashews and look for 24 different kinds of physical defects in that cashew and make a decision in under three minutes,” she said. “Imagine the brain fatigue it leads to when you're doing it continuously.”As Silicon Valley furthers its imprint on the Salinas Valley and other agricultural centers, farmers are also getting fatigued by all startups approaching them, Kukutai said. The key for a fledgling agtech company is to target a problem with a market in need. He recalled a joint investment with Kellerman on Invert Robotics, a startup using automation to inspect and clean storage tanks. Invert had the “secret sauce” other companies didn’t, he said. “What was surprising was just how big the addressable markets are. So, going inside tanks and inspecting them or cleaning them was actually a multi-billion dollar market.”

The United States and 15 other countries launched a broadside of criticism at the European Union on Thursday, saying its "hazard-based" approach to regulating pesticides and other "critical tools" used by farmers was damaging livelihoods worldwide.Their statement, submitted to the World Trade Organization, said the EU's approach created great uncertainty and diverged from science-based risk assessments, creating disruption that threatened to escalate significantly in coming years.They called on the EU to re-evaluate its approach to product approvals, use internationally accepted methods of setting tolerance levels for potentially harmful ingredients, and stop "unnecessarily and inappropriately" restricting trade.The statement was backed by Australia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, the United States and Uruguay.They said farmers needed to be able to access the "full range of safe tools and technologies" in order to meet the challenge of producing more food."Yet, our farmers' choice of safe tools is increasingly undermined by regulatory barriers that are not founded on internationally agreed risk analysis principles and do not take into account alternative approaches to meeting regulatory objectives," they said."This is already having a substantial negative impact on the production, and trade of, safe food and agricultural products, an impact that is likely to increase in the future."The statement, sent for debate at the WTO's Council for Trade in Goods later this month, said the EU had effectively banned some substances that other WTO members regarded as safe."In implementing these measures, it appears that the EU is unilaterally attempting to impose its own domestic regulatory approach onto its trading partners," they said.Despite repeated requests at the WTO over the past four years, the EU had not explained what level of protection it was seeking or what risks it was trying to mitigate, and it had ignored comments on draft regulations, they said.The EU had suggested farmers could find "alternatives" to meet EU rules, but such demands rang hollow, the statement said, since many farmers had no such economically viable options, with a disproportionate effect on millions of agriculture-dependant families in developing economies and least developed countries.

In the same manner that nations collaborate to detect and stop human pandemics, a global surveillance system for crop diseases needs to be created to safeguard agricultural trade and food security, argues a team of experts in Science.More than 20 percent of the five staple crops that provide half the globe's caloric intake are lost to pests each year. Climate change and global trade drive the spread, emergence, and re-emergence of crop disease, and containment action is often inefficient, especially in low-income countries. A Global Surveillance System (GSS) to strengthen and interconnect crop biosecurity systems could go a long way to improving global food security, argues a team of experts in the June 28 issue of Science."As part of efforts to satisfy global demand for food - which could mean increasing agricultural production by as much as 70 percent by 2050 - we need a GSS to reduce food lost to pests," said Mónica Carvajal, a researcher at the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) and lead author. "A lot of collaboration and discussion is needed to rapidly take action and avoid outbreaks that could negatively impact food security and trade."Carvajal and colleagues hope the GSS framework they propose gains traction in 2020, which was designated International Year of Plant Health by the United Nations. The system would prioritize six major food crops - maize, potato, cassava, rice, beans, and wheat - as well as other important food and cash crops that are traded across borders. The GSS proposal is the result of a scientific meeting convened by CIAT and held in 2018 at the Rockefeller Foundation's Bellagio Center in Italy.Inspired by recent outbreaksIn 2015, Cassava Mosaic Disease (CMD) was discovered in Cambodia but the findings were not reported until 2016. By 2018, the disease had spread to Thailand and Vietnam, and is now estimated to be present in 10 percent of the surfaces cultivated in the region, threatening millions of smallholders who cultivate cassava and generate US$4 billion in export revenue.This year, agricultural authorities from four countries - Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Lao PDR -supported by research organizations including CIAT, published an emergency control plan for CMD in Southeast Asia.Carvajal, who studied the CMD outbreak after its initial report, says that a GSS would help expedite action for future outbreaks."The question I asked was why does it take so long to respond to crop diseases in some cases?" said Carvajal. "What is the limitation to responding faster from the outset?"The GSS proposal draws on lessons learned from the wheat blast outbreak that hit Bangladesh in 2016 and the bacterial outbreak of Xylella fastidiosa that started affecting olive trees in Europe in 2013. The proposal is from a multidisciplinary group of experts from academia, research centers, and funding organizations that work on issues related to plant health and human health.What would GSS do?The GSS would focus on tightening networks "active surveillance" and "passive surveillance" personnel who are on the front lines of disease outbreaks. Active surveillance consists of laboratories at agriculture inspection stations, and customs and phytosanitary inspectors at borders and ports of entry. Despite their formal infrastructure, only an estimated 2-6 percent of cargo can be effectively screened.The second group includes loose networks of farmers, extension workers with national agricultural organizations, scientists and agronomists at research centers and universities, and specialists in agriculture industries."For this infrastructure to be effective, connections between first detectors and downstream responders must be enhanced and actions coordinated," said the authors. "But diagnostic capacity, information sharing, and communications protocols are lacking or weakly established in some regions, especially in low-income countries. Our reflection on many disease outbreaks is that whether in high-income countries or low-income countries, the passive surveillance infrastructure has the most in-field monitoring eyes but the least coordination from local to global."The GSS would tap into cutting-edge technology for rapid disease diagnostics and take advantage of communications networks, including social media, to rapidly share information. The system would have regional hubs and consist of five formal global networks. These would include a diagnostic laboratory network, a risk assessment network, a data management network, an operational management network, and a communications network."Our team realized that there is a big issue with communication, even when we speak the same language and use the same technologies," said Carvajal. "One of the most relevant components is the communications network." The GSS team hopes to contribute to future efforts on strengthening pest outbreak response systems within the International Plant Protection Convention's (IPPC) 2020-2030 Strategic Framework."We encourage the annual G20 Agriculture Ministers Meeting, the World Bank Group, and FAO, among others, to join efforts toward enhancing cooperation for a multi-year action plan for the proposed GSS to more effectively reduce the impact of crop diseases and increase global food security," the authors conclude.Funding and supportThe authors acknowledge support from the Rockefeller Foundation, Gatsby charitable Foundation, BBSRC, BASF Plant Science, and GIZ, and thank Adriana G. Moreira from the IPPC Secretariat and FAO/UN for her thoughtful comments and feedback. The views and opinions in this paper are the product of a group discussion convened at the Bellagio Center Conference Program granted by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Institute of International Education (IIE). The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of their home institutions.

Crop protection chemical products play a pivotal role in controlling the pests and diseases that infect and damage overall farm produce, and can further reduce the quantity and quality of food production. Excessive and unsuitable applications of crop protection chemicals, such as pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides, among others, through traditional manual spraying, has resulted in an intensification of hazardous elements in the environment. Moreover, these crop protection chemicals demand high prices, leading to an increase in operational costs. Thus, incorporation of precision technologies for spraying of these chemicals has emerged as an ideal alternative to address the limitations faced by farmers. and to ensure ecological sustainability. This article covers the following points in detail about:- Major applications, use cases, and downsides of UAV/drones in the agriculture industry- Stakeholder Analysis: Effect of UAV Based Delivery System on the Adjuvant’s Supply Chain- Companies Producing Adjuvants Compatible with UAV Applications- UAV- The Future of Pesticide SprayingAgricultural UAV Market by ApplicationsThe advancement of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles/ Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAV/UAS) technology in a variety of industries, such as aerospace and defense, healthcare, retail, and others, is resulting in the proliferation of a number of uses across the globe, including the growing usage of UAVs/UAS in agriculture. These UAVs, in conjunction with image data analytics, are being widely used in the agriculture industry.  Figure 1. Mega Trends to Impact the Drone Industry in 2019Source: BIS Research AnalysisThe agriculture industry has become a favourite among interested businesses and consumers of drones, and is expected to witness a sharp uptake of drones in the next 5-10 years. There are various ways in which UAVs are effectively reshaping and assisting the overall crop life cycle, based on their imaging, real-time data gathering, processing, and analytical capabilities, including:- Providing precise 3D maps for early soil analysis, useful in planning seeds and nutrient status to further reduce the overall cost of plantation and other expenses- Adjusting the altitude, scanning farms, spraying appropriate amounts of liquid (fertilizers, adjuvants), and ensuring uniform coverage of the affected area- Precisely tracking and assessing the growth of crops and providing data about inefficiencies and deficiencies, as well as bacterial or fungal infections, and ensuring better crop management- Identifying areas of the farm which are dry, less irrigated, and need improvement, with the help of sensors, combined with UAVsUse Cases of UAV Delivery System and Application in the U.S., India, and Africa The U.S. is currently at the forefront of the global agricultural adjuvants market, with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) dictating the use of UAVs for farming operations in the country. The Yamaha RMAX, an unmanned helicopter developed by the Yamaha Motor Company, is being used in the USA. It consists of a two-bladed rotor and is remote-controlled by a line-of-sight user. Initially used only in Japan for agricultural spray applications, the UAV is now approved for operations in Japan, Korea, Thailand, Australia, New Zealand, and the U.S. Another renowned Chinese drone manufacturer, DJI, has introduced the Agras MG-1, designed for precision variable rate application of pesticides. The company is now working on automating these UAVs to apply chemicals to broadacre crops.Likewise, in India, a farmer from the state of Haryana deployed customized drones that can aerially spray pesticides on crops. These drones (still unnamed) are of two versions - manually operated and automatically operated, and can carry a 35 kg load.Even in Africa, some 26% of the countries have stringent regulations governing the use of UAVs. Countries such as South Africa, Mauritius, Rwanda, Morocco, and Tanzania, among others, have successfully deployed UAVs for inspecting crops. In Morocco, UAS is used primarily for efficient application of crop protection chemicals. Les Domaines Agricoles, the largest Moroccan agribusiness, is one such company, which is utilizing UAV technology and image data analytics to ensure effective fertilization.Stakeholder Analysis- Effect of UAV Based Delivery System on the Adjuvant’s Supply Chain UAV/Drone providers effectively contribute a large value to the entire crop supply chain. Spraying of crop protection chemicals for disease, weed, and pest control is currently one of the emerging applications of drones in the agriculture sector. Drone manufacturers are expanding their market capabilities in this industry by partnering with various farm cooperatives and agriculture consultants.Farmers use real-time information extracted with the usage of UAVs to plan their cropping cycle, and also for better decision making. Though the initial cost of implementation is high when compared to the benefits/returns received from this technology, UAVs as a viable technology is a justified investment.Adjuvant manufacturers and companies providing crop protection chemical products can reduce wastage of their stocks and pre-plan accordingly through this data-driven approach. Credit and insurance companies play an important role in the crop cycle, considering that majority of farmers’ livelihoods are largely dependent upon farm produce. Crop insurance protects farmers against any form of loss caused by crop failure, while credit institutions provide much-needed credit to them, to purchase technologically advanced products and utilize their efficient inputs. By analyzing the real-time information generated by UAVs from the field, these companies can judge the credit worthiness of farmers and pay out monetary compensation with a better degree of reliability. Agronomists and distributors operating in the market can also use extracted crop indicators and harvesting schedules to plan their distribution schedules and prevent losses.Figure 2. Stakeholder AnalysisSource: BIS Research AnalysisCompanies Producing Adjuvants Compatible with UAV ApplicationsAdjuvants are primarily used in the agricultural industry to improve the performance of insecticides, pesticides and herbicides, which further improve the effectiveness of the crop protection chemical and help in providing better distribution and drift reduction. As per a report by BIS Research, the global agricultural adjuvants market is expected to grow from $2.8 billion in the year 2016 to $3.6 billion by 2021 at a CAGR of 5.5% from 2016 to 2021. Companies such as Adjuvant Plus Inc., ORO AGRI, Helena Chemical Company, Wilbur Ellis Company LLC, Solvay AG, Nufarm Ltd., Momentive LLC, Akzo Nobel Inc., BASF SE, Evonik Industries, and Elkem Silicones, are the key players operating in the agricultural adjuvants market.Figure 3. Global Agricultural Adjuvants Market and Key Driving FactorsSource: BIS Research AnalysisSpray drift is presently considered to be the most challenging problem faced by applicators and pesticide manufacturers. It can damage plants, animals, and the environment, and can even affect human health. Companies have come up with adjuvants and formulations compatible with UAV applications. These formulations (with their wetting, spreading, sticking, reducing evaporating, and also spray drifting properties) have the ability to minimize or even eliminate spray application problems by controlling physical and chemical properties.The potential of adjuvants and formulations to reduce spray drift can be judged by measuring spray droplet sizes at different concentrations. Thus, ensuring the selection of the correct adjuvant for spraying though UAVs is one of the main practices adopted to reduce the negative effects of spray drift.Downsides of UAV Delivery System for Spraying Purposes One major downside of deploying UAVs on farms for spraying or other purposes is the exceptional high cost of fully equipped UAVs, including sensors, radars, and related hardware and software. The high prices further increase when combined with the cost of acquiring technical skills and knowledge of piloting UAVs. Though cheaper UAV options are also available, these are primarily ill-equipped and inadequate for farming operations. In the majority of cases related to UAV equipment, increases in the performance directly proportional to the rise in prices.Another key concern for users about UAVs is privacy. A UAV can gather data without being detected, leading to the risk of breach of privacy. There also exists certain safety concerns while dealing with UAVs, hence, these should be equipped with sensors-and-avoid systems to prevent potential collisions.Rules and regulations for the use of UAV/ UAS for agricultural purposes vary across countries. For instance, the use of UAVs for farming purposes is considered a commercial activity by the Federal Government of the U.S. Farmers need to undergo operator training from the FAA and receive a certification in order to qualify for a remote pilot license. It is mandatory for remote pilots to adhere to a specified altitude for UAVs flights, failure to which can lead to heavy fines and penalties.According to Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) by Health Canada, spraying a pesticide with the help of a drone/UAV in Canada is still not allowed under the Pest Control Products Act. One needs to apply to PMRA with data stating the added hazards and risks, in order to receive approval.UAV- The Future of Pesticide SprayingWith the help of current advancements in drone technology, spraying is the one application of UAV technology that is currently witnessing unprecedented growth in the agriculture industry. Deployment of drones in the agriculture sector is gaining at a high rate of acceptance by farmers across the globe. Drones have enabled farmers to gather invaluable data to further augment profits and productivity, along with alleviating environmental hazards. As per a report by BIS Research, the global agriculture drone/UAV market generated over $950 million revenue in 2018, out of which the spraying application of UAVs held approximately 9% of the market value. Figure 4. Agricultural UAV Market by ApplicationsSource: BIS Research AnalysisThe use of drones for various pesticide spraying applications leads to an efficient input of resources by farmers and allows for timely protection of crops from pests. The end users are rapidly identifying the benefits of the efficiency and affordability that drones provide to secure high yields and quality crops. The demand for drones for pesticide spraying is expected to further rise in the upcoming years. However, privacy and safety are still a cause of major concern for farmers. Addressing issues related to privacy, safety, and security can assist in the successful implementation of this technology.UAV technology has effectively bestowed upon users innumerable benefits, which makes it worth taking a risk. Farmers would be able to save time, energy, and money in crop production, along with drone technology effectively working in tandem with environmental protection and efficient degrees of productivity.About BIS ResearchBIS Research is a global B2B market intelligence and advisory firm focusing on those emerging technological trends which are likely to disrupt the dynamics of the market.Our in-depth market intelligence reports on the agriculture and food technologies focus on the market estimations, technology analysis, emerging high-growth applications, deeply segmented granular country-level market data, and other important market parameters useful in the strategic decision-making for senior management. What distinguishes BIS Research from the rest of the players is that we don’t simply provide data but also complement it with valuable insights and actionable inputs for the success of our clients.From: agropage