PESTICIDE INDUSTRY SALES AND USAGE:
1988 MARKET ESTIMATES
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS BRANCH
BIOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS DIVISION
OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
DECEMBER 1989
CVl
CM
HEADQUARTERS LIBRARY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
-------
INTRODUCTICW
This report provides an overview of the pesticide industry for 1988.
It contains a series of tables with estimates of U.S. and world pesticide
markets for 1988. The following page presents a number of highlights of
this year's report.
Economists with the Economic Analysis Branch (EAB) have prepared
similar studies in previous years. With the exception of Tables 10 and 11,
the figures presented are only approximate values, since available data do
not support precise projections. In addition to 1988 estimates, this
report includes two new tables which review the pesticide market from 1979
to 1988. Drawn from previous EAB reports, Tables 12 and 13 offer a look at
the U.S. pesticide market, in terms of total annual pesticide volume and
user expenditures. Two accorapanying graphs complement these new tables.
OVERVIEW
Overall pesticide industry sales have been relatively stable during
recent years. The agricultural share of pesticide usage (see Table 8)
appears to have stabilized and may even decline in the coming years after
increasing steadily throughout the 1960's and 1970's. A number of factors
contribute to this trend: lower application rates due to the introduction
of more potent pesticides, more efficient use of pesticides, and lower farm
commodity prices. It is not unusual to see maximum application rates for
new agricultural pesticides equal to one to two ounces per acre, whereas
application rates for older pesticides often reach several pounds per acre.
This trend is particularly pronounced in the insecticide market and to a
lesser degree in the market for herbicides. Also, the efficiency of
pesticide use has improved as a result of more and better certification
programs, more widespread use of integrated pest management programs, and
the pesticide producers' provision of better information to farmers.
Increased interest in lew Input Sustainable Agriculture (USA) will
probably tend to further reduce the quantity of pesticides used in future.
Finally, low commodity prices over the past few years have lessened
farmers' willingness to apply pesticides.
If you have questions regarding this report or need further
information, please contact this office. Feel free to contact Jeff Doidge,
Economist, at (703) 557-0837 or Arnold Aspelin, Chief of the Eccnomic
Analysis Branch, at (703) 557-7600.
-------
HIGHLIGHTS OF REPORT
..table no. in parenthesis)
- U.S. t^esticide sa^as represent about one quarter of the world market
(1).
- Annual U.S. pesticide user expenditures totalled approximately $7.4
billion in 1988 (2).
- Agriculture accounts for over two-thirds of pesticide user expenditures
and roughly three-fourtj ? of the quantity used annually (2 & 3).
- Herbicides are the 1; -iding type of pesticides, in terms of both user
expenditures and volume? used (2 & 3).
- About 1.1 billion pen. ids active ingredient of conventional pesticides
are used in the U.S. (4)
- Total U.S. pesticide -isage in 1988 approached 2.7 billion pounds of
active ingredient. (Thl-:. figure includes wood preservatives,
disinfectants, and sulfur.) (4)
- Fanners' expenditures on pesticides represent slightly less than 4% of
total farm production e> jenditures (5).
- Total pesticide R & t expenditures represent in the neighborhood of 10%
of pesticide expenditure s by user community (6).
- The two most widely v. ;ed pesticides by volume are alachlor and atrazine
(9).
- There were 11 new act ive ingredients registered under FIFRA in calender
1988 (10).
- There are about 1.2 ir.rllion certified pesticide applicators in the U.S.
(11).
-------
TABLE 1: U.S. and World Market Conventional Pesticide Sales at
Basic Producer level, 1988 Estimates.
U.S. Market
($ Million) (%)
Herbicides
Insecticides
Fungicides
Other
Total
2,770
1,200
580
420
4,970
56%
24%
12%
8%
100%
World Market
($ Million)
7,700
6,100
3,500
1,200
18,500
(%)
42%
33%
19%
6%
100%
U.S. % Of
World Mkt
36%
20%
17%
35%
27%
Note: U.S. market is sales for domestic use only, net of imports
and exports.
Source: EPA estimates based on NACA annual surveys and other sources.
-------
U
CO
o\° o\° o\°
CT> ua in
0\°
o
O
O O O O
rH O> CO 00
rH rH O f»
in rH rH (-»
iff
O c*>
o o o
in 10
ds."
o
o
o
CO
o o o o
in O rH VD
in CNJ rH co
ro -H
m CM
000
*T UD
•* in
o\°
CO
0\°
o o o
oo o m
o in m
o
o
o
CO
4->
r-t
BS^
r™1
I
u
•8
»1H
B
w
(U
B
§
a
I
•H
U
•H
+J
U)
2
0)
n
£
4-1
s
w
4J
o>
3
w
•H
•d
0)
I
VI
*
•H
O
1
to
«
•r-l
U
H
CO >4H
0) rH
*Q ^3
9 w
m ^c
-------
-p
"+J
00
CO
w
u
i
0)
O
•rH
tf
5
CO
ft
U
U
c\° o\° o\°
in oo r~
r- rH
»n in o
^1*000
00 CM
tf>° o\° o\°
O O O
O
o\°
O
O
0
O
o o o o
rH O CT> O
VD rO C3
O O CM CM
oo 'i* iH n
o
o
in in oo oo
rH CM
o\° o\° o\° oN°
r- oo in o
f- rH O
o o o o
rH CM m ID
in rH VO
flj ^
eS"
rd
M £
U
w
0)
- «4H
a
w
0)
I
w
+J
•a
•H
w
"€)
3
0)
w
^
U
•rH
U
fd to fo
S >
w c -H w
ii t3 t)
§ s i i
ro fo V-i tP
rH 4->
-------
00
.2 CO
CD
O
eo
co
2 —
|oo
*-• ^.
s*
°-«5
**~ -<
O 3
E^
-3 0)
<
«
4)
C.
**
o
0
*
Ol
c
o>
^
««
o
0
n
«
«I
Z
O
o
CO
o
o
O
o
to
o
o
10
o
o
o
o
eo
o
o
CM
o
o
-------
TABLE 4: Extended U.S. Annual Pesticide Consunption, 1988 Estimates.
Type
Billion Pounds A.I.
Conventional Pesticides
Wood Preservatives
Dis: nf ectants
Sulfur
Total
1.1
1.0
0.4
0.2
2.7
Source: EPA staff estimates.
<#—
-------
5: Importance of Conventional Pesticide Expenditures to U.S. Fanners,
1988 Estimates.
($ bil)
Farm Pesticide Expenditures(1) 5.1
Total Farm Production Expenditures(2) 132.0
3.9
100.0
(1) Excludes wood preservatives, disinfectants, and sulfur.
(2) OSDA, 1989.
Source: USDA and EPA staff estimates.
-------
TABLE 6: Coiparison of the Cost of EPA Data Requirements Relative to
Conventional Pesticide User Expenditures in U.S.
1987 Estimates(1)
Pesticide User Expenditures
Total Pesticide R&J Expenditures
EPA Registration-Related R&D
Expenditures
$ Million
6,850
682
173
Percent
100.0
10.0
2.5
Source: EPA staff estimates, based on Agricultural Statistics. 1986
(USDA), the NACA survey (1987), and other sources.
(1) Re-estimated for 1987 based on data from NACA member firms only.
R&D figures for 1988 are not available.
-------
TABLE 7: U.S. Pesticide Production and User Sectors—Key Profile Parameters, 1988. (1)
(Approximate Values)
Basic Production
Level
Marketing
Level
User
Level
30 Major Basic
Producers
3,300 Fonnulators
0.8-1.0 M. Farms
100 Other Producers 29,000 Distributors 90,000,000 Households
& Establishments
-~~~ 40,000 Commercial Pest
Control Firms
1,200 Active Ingredients 37,000 Formulated Products (Several Other Industry/
Registered Registered at Fed- million) Government Users
eral Level
850 Active Ingredients
in Production
200 Leading Active
Ingiadients in
Proc uction
11 New Active Ingre-
dients/Calender Year
11,000 Employment
200 Firms Registering
Pesticides per Year
U.S. Production
U.S. Exports
U.S. Imports
U.S. Supply
Value of Sales
(bil Ibs) (bil Ibs)
1.43 Domestic Usage 1.13
0.45
0.15
1.13
(bil S)
Agricultural Share
Ind/Com/Govt Share
4.97 Home/Garden Share
75%
18%
7%
Value of U.S.
Purchases
Agricultural Share
Ind/Con/Govt Share
Home/Garden Share
(bil $)
7.38
69%
16%
15%
Source: EPA staff estimates.
(1) Estimates for registered active ingredients and products varied little from 1987
to 1988. However, due to FIFRA '88, some of the above figures will change
significantly in 1989.
10
-------
TABIE 8: United States Conventional Pesticide Usage, Total and Estimated
Agricultural Sector Share for 1964-1988
Year
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
Total U.S.
M-i 1 1 ir-iT-i TH-r
540
610
680
735
835
775
740
835
875
910
950
990
1,030
1,075
1,110
1,150
1,175
1,205
1,100
953
1,080
1,112
1,096
1,085
1,130
Agricultural
Sector
ST
*vL
320
335
350
380
470
430
430
495
525
560
590
625
660
720
780
840
846
860
880
733
850
861
820
815
845
Agricultural
Sector
Share
TtoTt— Q +-
59
55
51
52
56
55
58
59
60
62
62
63
64
67
70
73
72
71
80
77
79
77
75
75
75
Note: Excludes wood preservatives, disinfectants, and sulfur.
Source: EPA staff estimates.
il
-------
00
CO
05
0) O
O)"1"
Si o
CO i_
— ) «
.c
O CO
T)
c
CO
0
c
o
\\XVW^^
o
o
o
o
CM
O
o
o
o
o
CO
00
CO
CD
CO
IO
GO
CO
CM
CO
£n.\\s\v.\o^w^\v\^\\\\ff^^
•••••••iHMIHH
*Aw\\v'\^\w\\\\vvwvYi;v^x^j Q
o
o
-------
TABLE 9: Annual Usage Estimates of the Largest Agricultural Pesticides in U.S. 1
(approximate values, 1987)
Pesticide Usage in Million Pounds
Active Ingredient
Alachlor
Atrazine
2,4-D
Butylate
ffetolachlor
Trifluralin
Cyanazine
Carbaryl
Halathion
Metribuzin
Maneb/Mancozeb (4-6/8-12)
Glyphosate
Captan
Chlorpyrifos
Methyl Parathion 2
75
75
52
44
45
30
20
12
15
13
12
10
9
7
5
- 100
- 100
- 67
- 58
- 55
- 35
- 25
- 25
- 20
- 17
- 18
- 15
- 11
- 11
- 10
Source: EPA staff estimates based on a variety of sources.
1 The estimates represent all usage of the active ingredient
including noncrop usage.
2 The estimate does not include the estimated 4 -7 mil. pounds of
ethal parathion usage.
13
-------
I I
|
U
4J
CO
00
rd
EH w
2 J!
•H
VH
Q)
W
U)
rH
g
o
rH
ro o
rH rH
rg ro in
10
CM oo CM <*> CM
g
ti
•rH
s
I 0)
ooo>o rHCMrn-^m r~-ooi y
r^r-oo oaoooooooo ooooooi 3
rH<-H^H «-H^HrHr-HrH ^HrHrH|w5
14
-------
2*
"co
2
-------
1ABIZ 11: Number of Certified Applicators in the United States,
1988 Estimates(1).
EPA Region
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
U. S.(4>
Private (2)
7,797
19,377
52,344
248,582
147,784
227,187
144,707
63,367
31,483
50,292
992,920
Commercial (3)
7,529
.,-—— 31,995
18,268
40,724
41,739
28,895
23,053
14,073
21,011
26^787
254,074
Source: EPA staff estimates.
(1) the following page presents a map of EPA regions.
(2) Private refers primarily to individual farmers.
(3) Commercial refers to professional pesticide applicators.
(4) These estimates reflect some double counting, as some
applicators are certified injnore than one state.
16
-------
EPA
Regional Offices
Regions
4 —Alabama
10 —Alaska
9 —Arizona
6 —Arkansas
9— California
8 —Colorado
1 — Connecticut
3 — Delaware
3— D.C.
4—Florida
4—Georgia
9— Hawaii
10—Idaho
0 —Illinois
S—Indiana
7—Iowa
7—Kansas
4— Kentucky
0—Louisiana
Regions
1 —Maine
3— Maryland
1 —Massachusetts
S—Michigan
6—Minnesota
4—Mississippi
7—Missouri
8—Montana
7—Nebraska
9—Nevada
1 —New Hampshire
2—New Jersey
8 — New Mexico
2—New York
4 —North Carolina
8—North Dakota
5—Ohio
8 —Oklahoma
10 —Oregon
Regions
3— Pennsylvania
1—Rhode island
4 —South Carolina
8 —South Dakota
4 —Tennessee
8 —Texas
8—Utah
1 —Vermont
3 —Virginia
10 —Washington
3 —West Virginia
5 -Wisconsin
8 —Wyoming
9—American Samoa
9 — Guam
2 —Puerto Rico
2 —Virgin Islands
17
-------
co
oo
P— i
1
en
f1^.
^^
i-H
f>
L§
£
Q>
»
(0
a>
•8
•rl
U
4J
U)
Cl
o
rH
P
*•*
rH
1
0)
D
**
1-1
y
1
00
CO
rH
1
oo
cr>
to
oo
CT*
rH
in
CO
^J*
oo
r-t
co
CO
OvJ
CO
1-1
rH
CO
1-1
0
CO
cr>
rH
Cn
en
•H
0)
•d
•rH
CJ !
W H
ft
V-
f-
t.
J
r-
>t
c
I
f
I
•»•
r-
r-
*
o
VO
in
in
in
vO
o
r-
vO
*
H in
i r~-
C i.p
3
3
H in
3 r-
in
3
5
H
-1
H
'" In
o
r-
tn
in
in
in
O
in
W
0)
•H
u
•iH
a
IH
CO
vO
IN
O
rg
in
o>
CM
O
o
rn
o
r-
rg
in
m
fNj
_,
?1
in
o
in
m
00
m
a!
ID
»l_|
U
~4J
^
8
M
CSI O
f*! t^
rH
rH O
rH rH
rg o
O in
rg o
rH rH
VO VO
0 0
w
Q)
T3
u
g» 0
o
m
rH
rH
r-
00
0
rH
vO
vT*
rH
IN
rH
•-^
rH
0
OO
O
*
n
in
cr>
0
VO
rH
rH
in
o
rg
.H
in
p*.
""I
rH
O
in
rH
•H
H
Rl
$
fO
U
•rH
s
l/J
^J
2
^
o
VH
2
R
§
^
U
CD
y
1
18
-------
0) CO
DJOO
cd o>
O
C
C
0>
a
O
'4=
co
0
CO
CO
O)
CM
CO
O
CO
O)
O
00
en
0)
a
*o
a>
JC
O
O)
•o
5
c
a
6)
•o
U
O
o
a)
V
2
o
o2
19
-------
oo
00
O*
1
a
5^
H
£
0)
•H
U
•r-t
CO
g
w
VH
3
1
p
5?
jjj
}, i
0)
w
•"'
•H
5
g
<
w
•
f-*t
»*
m
i-H
p
oo
00
.—I
p^
00
^
10
oo
^
in
00
s
^J*
00
rH
m
oo
^
CM
00
0>
^J
1™^
f— I
oo
S
O
oo
fjl
•H
en
S
dj
"E
•p ><
w t-"
o o o o
rn ^H to oo
0^ r-H 00 ^f
m CM
in o o in
^i* cr* rn oo
r--^ o^ r» en
m rH
in o m o
CM OO r-l t^-
vo in rn
fO «H
O in in o
o r~ ^H r~
r^ o> in m
m ^
c/> o o oo in
i£t 00 CM rH
I«H CM CO -
K M 5 O
o
00
ro
^
0
in
00
v£
O
•^
U3
O
^O
in
-^T—
ro
00
J*N,
uT
0
m
o
10
o
^t*
•
o
•*r
_«T
0
o
00
*
tn
o
in
O^
in
3
g
«
Tj)
*J
U
•H
•r-l
to
^J
CO
CD
^
o
c/l
^
a
0)
<
p .
OJ
c^
*(
20
-------
CO
oo
0) h*.
D.O)
X "*"
UJ of
L_ P.
o >»
0) *~
Z>
-------
------- |