Insecticide brand preferences and buying behaviour among tobacco farmers in Anand District of Gujarat

Introduction

Agrochemicals, a collective term for agricultural chemicals, play a critical role in enhancing crop productivity and protecting against pest-related damage. These chemicals include a broad range of pesticides such as insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, nematicides, and rodenticides, along with synthetic fertilizers and plant growth regulators. Among these, insecticides form the largest segment, accounting for nearly 60% of the Indian agrochemical market, reflecting their widespread use in pest-prone crops like paddy, cotton, and tobacco (TechSci Research, 2021) [9] . In a country where pests and diseases destroy nearly 20-25% of the agricultural produce annually, agrochemicals serve as a vital input in ensuring food security and crop profitability (Mohanti, 2021) [5] . India is the fourth-largest producer of agrochemicals globally, following the United States, Japan, and China. the Indian industry comprises approximately 125 technical grade manufacturers, 800 registered formulators, and over 145,000 distributors. Although India is a major exporter of pesticides, accounting for more than 50% of its total agrochemical output, the domestic consumption remains significantly low at just 0.58 kg/ha; much lower than developed countries like the USA (4.5 kg/ha) and Japan (11 kg/ha). Despite this, India holds substantial potential for both domestic expansion and export growth, particularly with the increasing demand for quality food, reduction in arable land, and frequent pest outbreaks. The demand for agrochemicals, especially insecticides, is higher in crops that are economically valuable and vulnerable to pest attacks. One such crop is tobacco, which is highly sensitive to a variety of insect pests such as caterpillars, whiteflies, and aphids. Gujarat contributes about 45% of India's total tobacco production, with Anand district being one of the most significant production zones due to its favourable black alluvial soil, well-established irrigation systems, and ideal climatic conditions. Insecticides thus play a crucial role in tobacco cultivation, and their application is critical for protecting both yield and quality. Over the years, the Indian agrochemical industry has witnessed significant changes, including the development of new molecules, increased focus on bio-pesticides, and the introduction of integrated pest management (IPM) strategies. However, challenges such as low R&D investment, distribution inefficiencies, the prevalence of spurious products, and limited farmer awareness continue to affect the sector's growth (Chemical Market Forecast, 2023) [1] . Additionally, long credit cycles, high inventory due to seasonal demand, and environmental concerns related to pesticide use have raised questions about sustainability and regulatory compliance. This study focuses on the brand preferences and buying behaviour of tobacco farmers in Anand district, aiming to www.extensionjournal.com explore the socio-economic background of farmers, their pesticide usage patterns, influencing factors in brand selection, and the key constraints they face in accessing or using insecticides.

Materials and Methods

Study area

Within Gujarat, Anand district was purposively selected as the research area due to its prominence in tobacco cultivation. The district is widely recognized as a hub for high-quality tobacco production and is home to a significant population of tobacco-growing farmers. The selection of Anand is also justified by the region's favourable agroclimatic conditions-well-drained loamy to clayey soils, moderate rainfall, and warm temperatures-which are highly suitable for tobacco crops. In addition, Anand has a well-established input supply network, active extension services, and accessible agricultural markets, making it a vibrant zone for commercial farming. These factors are crucial for the present study, as they directly influence farmers' exposure to various insecticide brands, their purchasing decisions, and usage patterns.

Research methodology

The study employed a descriptive research design to understand various attributes affecting farmers' behaviour. It involved both primary and secondary data collection methods. Primary data were gathered through structured interviews with 200 farmers from four selected talukas, while secondary data were sourced from company records and relevant literature. multi-stage sampling technique was used, focusing on areas with high tobacco production. Four talukas Anand, Anklav, Borsad and Petlad were selected, and within these, five villages were chosen randomly. In each village, ten farmers were sampled, resulting in a total of 200 participants. Data collection took place between March and May 2025. The analysis used tabular methods and statistical tools such as mean scores, percentages, Likert scales and garrett ranking. Out of 200 respondents, a significant majority of farmers are male, comprising 95.5 percent, while only 4.5 percent are female. Age-wise, the largest group of farmers (35.5 percent) falls within the 41-50 years age range, followed by 31 percent who are above 50 years, indicating a mature farming population. Regarding educational qualifications, www.extensionjournal.com 40.5 percent of farmers have education below SSC, while 30.5 percent have completed Higher Secondary Certificate (HSC), and only 7.5 percent hold a graduation degree, reflecting a moderate level of education among farmers. Family structure is predominantly nuclear, with 66.5 percent living in nuclear families, while 33.5 percent belong to joint families. When it comes to farming experience, 49.5 percent of farmers have 11-15 years of experience, suggesting a seasoned agricultural workforce. Farming remains the sole occupation for 57.5 percent of respondents, while others combine it with animal husbandry (15.5%), service (14%), or business (13%). Landholding patterns reveal that 39 percent are small farmers owning 1.01-2 hectares of land, followed by 34 percent medium landholders with 2.01-4 hectares. All respondents (100%) practice irrigated farming, showing a complete reliance on irrigation. Among irrigation methods, surface irrigation is most prevalent (78%), followed by drip (16%) and sprinkler systems (6%). Income-wise, the majority of farmers (34.5 percent) fall within the ₹2,00,001-₹3,00,000 annual income range, followed by 26.5 percent earning ₹3,00,001-₹4,00,000. These findings offer a comprehensive view of the demographic and socioeconomic profile of the farming community in the Anand district.

Results and Discussion

Socio-economic profile of tobacco farmers

Buying behaviour of tobacco farmers

Most of the farmers (158) preferred purchasing insecticides from local dealers, followed by cooperatives (47), FPOs (32), and online platforms (28). Despite promotional efforts to boost online sales, traditional outlets remain the dominant source due to trust and accessibility. In terms of information sources, farmer meetings played the most influential role, followed by advertisements, progressive farmers, field demonstrations, and agro service centers. This reflects the importance of personal interactions and community-based knowledge sharing in shaping purchase decisions.

Regarding payment modes, a significant proportion of farmers preferred credit-only transactions, while others used both cash and credit. Digital payments are gradually emerging, but the majority still rely on traditional methods, highlighting the credit-oriented mindset of rural farmers. Experience levels also influenced buying behaviour, with most farmers having 6 to 9 years of experience using insecticides, followed by those with 3 to 6 years, and fewer with over 9 or below 3 years of experience. Usage frequency was high, with many farmers applying insecticides five to six times a year or even more frequently.

Purchase frequency followed a similar trend, with most farmers buying insecticides three to four times a year, while some made purchases as per need or more than four times annually.

Brand preferences of insecticides

The study found that Bayer was the most well-known insecticide brand among the respondents, with 183 farmers reporting awareness of it. This was followed by Syngenta (135 farmers) and UPL (126 farmers), indicating their strong presence in the market. Other brands such as BASF (97), Tata Rallis (82), PI Industries (75), and Indofil (74) also showed considerable awareness. Moderate recognition was observed for Adama (68), Corteva (64), and Gharda (59), while fewer farmers were aware of Ayushi Crop Science (48), SML (42), and other smaller brands (36). This distribution shows that a few specific brands had higher penetration and visibility among the farming community, while others were known to a limited extent.

In terms of brand preference, Bayer remained the most favored, with 20% of the farmers choosing it as their preferred insecticide brand. Syngenta (13.5%) and UPL (10.5%) were also commonly selected, followed by BASF (9.5%) and Tata Rallis (7.5%). Indofil, Adama, and Corteva were preferred by 7%, 6.5%, and 5.5% of respondents respectively. Ayushi Crop Science and Gharda each accounted for 5% of the preferences, while PI Industries (4.5%) and SML (4%) had relatively lower selection rates.

A small percentage (1.5%) mentioned other brands. The data indicates that farmers' brand choices are influenced by familiarity and perceived effectiveness, with a few dominant brands leading both in awareness and preference. The analysis of factors influencing farmers' brand preference towards insecticides revealed that competitive pricing was the most influential factor, with the highest mean score of 3.81. This indicates that affordability plays a significant role in shaping farmers' choices. Product quality followed closely with a mean score of 3.76, suggesting that farmers prioritize effective and reliable products. Prior experience with the brand also had a strong impact, reflected by a mean score of 3.73, showing that familiarity and past performance influence repeat purchases. Recommendations from progressive farmers (mean score: 3.68) and influence from field officers or dealers (3.60) were also found to be important in shaping preferences. Timely availability of insecticides had a moderate influence with a mean score of 3.50, indicating that accessibility also affects brand selection. Meanwhile, brand loyalty (3.32), sales promotional activities (3.05), and advertisements (2.93) were less influential compared to other factors. Overall, the findings suggest that economic and performance-related attributes have a greater impact on farmers' brand preferences than promotional or branding efforts. www.extensionjournal.com Table 3 presents the factors influencing farmers' buying behavior towards insecticides. Among all the factors considered, past experience received the highest mean score of 3.89, indicating that previous satisfaction with a product greatly guides future purchasing decisions. The influence of progressive farmers ranked second (mean score: 3.82), emphasizing the importance of peer advice within the farming community. Quality of the product (3.65), competitive pricing (3.60), and the brand image of the company (3.58) also played substantial roles in shaping farmers' preferences. Dealers' recommendations (3.49) and timely availability (3.21) were moderately influential, suggesting that accessibility and local trust also factor into decision-making. In contrast, factors such as advertisement (3.11), packaging size (2.92), field demonstrations (2.85), offers or discounts (2.72), and credit availability (2.65) were found to be less influential.

Factors influencing farmers while buying insecticides

Constraints faced by tobacco farmers

Conclusion

Insecticides play a crucial role in modern agriculture, especially in crops like tobacco, where pest pressure is significant and directly affects yield and quality. For farmers, choosing the right brand of insecticide is vital, as it influences both crop health and profitability. In this study, 200 tobacco farmers from the Anand district were surveyed to understand their buying behaviour and brand preferences.

The majority of farmers were between 41 to 50 years of age, had education levels below SSC, and mostly belonged to the small and medium farmer category with an annual income of ₹2.01 to ₹4 lakh. It was observed that most farmers purchased insecticides from local agri-input dealers and relied on sources like farmer meetings and advertisements for information. Payment was commonly made through credit or mixed modes, and farmers preferred insecticide brands such as Bayer, Syngenta, and UPL, influenced by factors like past experience, product quality, and peer recommendations. However, challenges like high prices, fear of adulteration, and lack of technical knowledge were significant constraints, highlighting the need for affordable, authentic products and better field-level support to guide farmers in making informed decisions.

Suggestions

The high price of insecticide was reported to be the most important constraint by farmers. They often need to buy them on credit. To help them, companies should sell insecticides in small and low-cost packets, so even small and marginal farmers can afford them. Fear of adulterated or fake insecticides was the second biggest problem faced by farmers. To address this, companies should utilize secure packaging and QR codes, enabling farmers to verify the authenticity of the product.

There should be a proper system to track the product from the factory to the shop. Farmers also need training and awareness programs to help them recognize genuine products.

As per the data, local dealers were ranked highest among multiple response options for place of purchase, surpassing cooperatives, FPOs, and online platforms. Therefore, strengthening dealer engagement can directly improve product reach and sales performance. Lack of technical knowledge is a major constraint for many farmers. To address this, organizations should hold regular farmer meetings focused on training. These sessions should cover proper pesticide use, safety measures, and pest management techniques. Providing hands-on guidance will www.extensionjournal.com help farmers use insecticides more effectively and safely. This will improve crop health and farmer confidence in using these products.

Future scope

To build upon the findings of this study, future research could undertake comparative analyses across different districts or states to identify regional variations in insecticide brand preferences and buying behaviour. Since local dealers were found to play a significant role in influencing farmer choices, further studies can assess the extent of their influence and the impact of their training and ethical practices. With the gradual emergence of digital platforms in agriculture, research should also explore the potential of online tools and mobile applications in enhancing farmers' access to information and safe purchasing options. Moreover, evaluating the effectiveness of farmer training programs and awareness campaigns on the safe and rational use of insecticides could yield valuable insights, especially through longitudinal studies.

Investigating the psychological dimensions of brand trust, loyalty, and risk perception in rural settings would add depth to the understanding of purchasing patterns. As the agricultural sector increasingly emphasizes sustainability, exploring the adoption and challenges related to bioinsecticides among tobacco farmers would be timely and relevant. Additionally, policy-oriented research evaluating the effectiveness of government interventions, subsidies, and regulations in improving pesticide access and safety could guide future policymaking. Lastly, innovations in supply chain management and packaging, such as sachet sizes, tamper-proof seals, and QR code verification, should be studied for their potential to enhance product authenticity and purchasing confidence among farmers.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementI extend my sincere thanks to Prof. (Dr.) Mehul G. Thakkar (major advisor) for providing me with proper guidance throughout this research study.

References

1. Chemical Market Forecast. Indian agrochemicals market. 2023. https://chemicalmarketforecast.com/indianagrochemicals-market/
2. Gohel PR, Panigrahy SR, Zala S. Farmer's purchasing behavior and satisfaction level towards insecticide for cotton in Mangrol Taluka of Junagadh District, Gujarat. Pharma Innov J. 2023;12(6):5-8.
3. Harish M, Vani S, Sarada R, Kumari LP. Identifying the factors influencing brand preference for pesticides in Guntur district. Andhra Pradesh J Agric Sci. 2023;9(3):223-226.
4. Momin IA, Shaikh N. Farmers' buying behaviour for pesticides of vadodara district. Gujarat J Ext Educ. 2019;70-72.
5. Mohanti M. World's farming land at risk of pesticide pollution, India farmers have bigger problem. Indiatimes; 2021. https://www.indiatimes.com/technology/science-andfuture/world-agriculture-land-pesticide-pollutionindian-farmers-problem-537375.html
6. Patel H. A study on market potential and farmers' purchasing behaviour towards 'magic gro super' for banana and tobacco in selected talukas of anand district of Gujarat [Thesis M.B.A.(ABM)]. Anand: Anand Agricultural University; 2017. 63 p.
7. Prajapati VV, Gohil CA, Tunvar MA. Constraints faced by farmers in purchase of agrochemicals in vegetable crops. Gujarat J Ext Educ. 2016;27(1):63-66.
8. Sahoo A, Dudhagara CR. Purchasing behaviour and problems faced by farmers and dealers related to insecticide. J Exp Agric Int. 2023;45(8):118-125.
9. TechSci Research. India Pesticide Market By Product Type (Herbicide, Insecticide, Fungicide, Plant Growth Regulator…). TechSci Research; 2021. https://www.techsciresearch.com/report/india-pesticidemarket/3118.html