DOI: https://doi.org/10.56669/FXSA7217
ABSTRACT
Taiwan's research and development of microbial pesticides began with pioneering commercialization studies in 1995. In 1999, the first microbial pesticide, Bacillus subtilis, more popularly known as BIOBAC, was successfully commercialized and launched. Farmers were still unfamiliar with microbial pesticides and relied heavily on chemical pesticides to control crop pests and diseases. Starting in 2013, the Council of Agriculture of the Executive Yuan (now the Ministry of Agriculture) convened meetings with the pesticide industry, academia, and agricultural research and extension stations to promote the development and industrialization of microbial pesticides. Several microbial strains with developmental potential were selected and entered “the Grand Talent Strategy Project.” From 2014 to 2017, the requirements for commercializing microbial pesticides were progressively fulfilled, and numerous strain technologies were transferred to enterprises and commercially registered. Meanwhile, most microbial pesticide strains at the time belonged to Bacillus amyloliquefaciens. This species was primarily chosen because it possesses multiple mechanisms for disease control and forms endospores, which have advantages in terms of storage duration and long-term preservation. Subsequently, in the second phase of microbial pesticide development, the primary control targets were nematodes and small pests. Many new microbial strains were developed, including Streptomyces, B. thuringiensis, and Paecilomyces javanicus. These technologies were successively transferred to enterprises for commercial registration. In reviewing the current domestic microbial pesticide products, fungicides are mainly B. amyloliquefaciens, while insecticides are primarily based on B. thuringiensis. Therefore, developing products from new microbial strains is necessary for future industries and markets. However, in recent years, there has been a slowdown in cases of microbial pesticide technology licensing. The main reasons are the relatively high licensing fees for microbial pesticide technologies, which require companies to consider the costs and the timeline for registration after licensing. Additionally, the current registration process and timeline still have not yet met the expectations of companies, and domestic microbial pesticide companies capable of undertaking such projects are limited to specific firms. These factors have led to a decrease in microbial pesticide licensing cases in recent years. Nevertheless, competitive advantages remain in targeting small pests or essential pests such as the lychee stink bugs.
Keywords: Microbial pesticides, Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, Commercial registration
INTRODUCTION
Previous research
Development of Taiwan's microbial pesticide industry
Taiwan has devoted itself to the research and development of microbial pesticides for nearly 30 years. In 1995, the Executive Yuan formulated the "Biotechnology Industry Promotion Plan," in which biological pesticides were selected as one of the five key biotechnology projects in national policy. Meanwhile, domestic universities, research institutes and experimental stations were involved in the development of microbial pesticides and successively transferred the technologies to enterprises. In 1995, BaiTai Biotechnology Co., Ltd. (parent company: Kuang Hua Chemical Co., Ltd.) collaborated with the Development Center for Biotechnology to jointly develop Bacillus subtilis Y1336. In July 1997, they obtained Taiwan's first license for a self-manufactured biological pesticide product. Moreover, they completed the commercialization of the fungicide named "BIOBAC," recommended for the control of powdery mildew on peas in 1999 (Chen and Lee, 2014). Over the past 20 years, the product has gradually expanded its registration for controlling various diseases in multiple crops. Subsequently, it has been approved and registered as a microbial agent for disease control in Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Turkey, and other countries, becoming the first microbial pesticide product registered in Taiwan.
Although a microbial pesticide product was developed and commercialized, farmers still relied heavily on chemical agents for field pest and disease management. Additionally, the effectiveness of microbial pesticides in the field did not meet farmers' expectations, and the application methods were not implemented properly. This has led to limitations on the use and promotion of microbial pesticide products. However, in 2014, the Ministry of Agriculture (then the Council of Agriculture) implemented the “Grand Talents and Strategies Project,” which was composed of industry representatives, various agricultural research and extension stations, and the Council of Agriculture. They selected potential microbial pesticide strains with commercialization potential and urgent industry needs, initiating a decade-long domestic boom in microbial pesticide research, and finally realized the commercialization of innovative microbial pesticide products. According to 2025 statistics, there are 58 microbial pesticide (fungicide, insecticide and acaricide) registration certificates in Taiwan. The fungicides account for 34 certificates, which include 15 strains and 1 metabolite, with Bacillus species being the most prevalent, accounting for 14. There are 23 insecticides registration certificates, containing 10 strains, with Bacillus thuringiensis being the most significant, comprising 8 strains (Table 1).
TYPES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF MICROBIAL PESTICIDES
(1) Types
Currently, the types of microbial pesticides registered in Taiwan are classified into two categories based on their modes of action: microbial fungicides and microbial insecticides. According to current regulations, the main active ingredients include bacteria, fungi, viruses, and protozoa. However, domestically registered microbial pesticide products only include bacteria and fungi. Among them, bacterial microorganisms constitute the majority, primarily Bacillus species and Bacillus thuringiensis. (Table 2).
(2) Characteristics:
The advantages of most microbial pesticides include the fact that they are relatively safe for humans, livestock, and other organisms. They have higher environmental compatibility and are safer for non-target organisms such as natural enemy species. They have diverse modes of action, and target pests are less likely to develop resistance than chemical agents. Additionally, research, production timelines, and registration procedures are more uncomplicated than chemical pesticides. The development and registration costs for microbial pesticides are lower than chemical pesticides, and the registration requirements are also simplified.
INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS OF MICROBIAL PESTICIDES
According to data from Markets and Markets (2025), the global biopesticide market value is expected to increase from USD$7.72 billion in 2024 to USD$15.66 billion by 2029, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 15.2% (Figure 1). Another research institution, Global Biopesticides Market Size, estimates that the global biopesticide market value is estimated at USD$7.15 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach USD$21.05 billion by 2031 (InsightAce Analytic, 2024), with a CAGR of 14.50% (Figure 2). The analyses from both research institutions are not far apart. The main reason for this growth is the growing global consensus on the harmful effects of chemically synthesized pesticides on human health and the environment, leading to an increasing demand for biopesticides. Additionally, since 2012, many multinational agricultural companies have begun a wave of acquiring biopesticide companies. For example, among the world's top three agrochemical companies:
- Bayer CropScience acquired the U.S. biopesticide company AgraQuest, the German microbial crop protection product supplier Prophyta GmbH, and the Argentine microbial seed treatment company Biagro.
- BASF acquired the biopesticide company Becker Underwood.
- Syngenta acquired the U.S. biotechnology company Pasteuria Bioscience and continues to develop microbial nematicides.
Under the trend of sustainable agriculture, governments around the world are promoting the use and development of agricultural biological products. For example, the Indian government has implemented the 7th five-year agricultural plan, providing financial subsidies to farmers to expand local biofertilizer production; the European Union offers measures to promote pest management and pesticide reduction, shifting the focus of traditional agricultural systems toward biological preparations.
Emerging markets in Latin America and regions like China, India, and Southeast Asian countries are increasing their willingness to use biological products due to government policies aimed at reducing carbon emissions and enhancing food regulation, as well as through subsidies or incentive measures for farmers. Apart from pest and disease control and microbial fertilizers, the development of biostimulants is also a current trend (Biologicals Latam, 2023). The First World Congress on Biostimulants in Agriculture held in France in 2012, was an important milestone (Saa Silva and Brown, 2012). Sources of biostimulants may include seaweed extracts, protein hydrolysates, humic substances, chitin, microorganisms, or inorganic elements like silicon. These products are characterized by their ability to regulate plant growth and enhance stress resistance but do not directly supply plant nutrients or act directly in plant disease defense (Roche and Pawlett, 2024).
However, their mechanisms of action involve many synergistic effects, and the verification of these mechanisms has not yet been completed. Products often contain mixtures of multiple ingredients. Although biostimulants can be distinguished from pesticides and fertilizers, domestic products have shown a gradual increase in recent years. However, the definitions and management regulations are still unclear, and the classification of biostimulant products has not yet been explicitly regulated (Yuan and Hsieh, 2021).
RESEARCH CONTENT
Taiwan's microbial pesticide research and registration process
Currently, Taiwan’s microbial pesticide research and development process flowchart for commercialization and industrialization is shown in Figure 3 (Chen and Lee, 2014). Jointly developed by many experts, scholars, and agricultural authorities, it includes the primary research and commercialization and industrialization stages, with their contributions accounting for 40% and 60%, respectively. The focus of the basic research stage is on strain screening and identification and evaluating microbial strains with pest control potential. At this stage, preliminary strain safety assessments can be conducted to ensure that the isolated microbial strains do not pose pathogenic risks to humans, animals, or plants. Suppose the strain is confirmed to be safe. In that case, it proceeds to strain activity testing and preliminary field trials to establish foundational data such as field application methods, dilution rates, and application frequencies. The possible mechanisms by which the test strains control pests were also analyzed.
During the preliminary field trials, initial small-scale shaker flask tests with culture media can be conducted for the mass production model of the strain. Subsequently, the benchtop fermentation and process testing at a scale of 5-10 liters proceeded. At this stage, the components of the culture medium can be replaced with industrial or food-grade raw material formulations to reduce the cost of cultivation and fermentation. Once the culture conditions are stabilized, the process moves into 100–200-liter pilot-scale mass production fermentation tests to fine-tune the formulation and preparation.
After stabilized the fermentation process, the project can proceed to the commercialization and industrialization stage. At this point, it is necessary to conduct tons-scale fermentation and formulation verification tests, as well as at least five batches of product quality control tests to confirm the concentration of active ingredients. Product storage stability tests are also performed to ensure that the fermentation formulation, under room temperature conditions are within the specified time frame and maintains consistent microbial concentrations, with analyses conducted every 1 to 2 months. Simultaneously, the strain must undergo animal toxicology and physicochemical property tests to comply with Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) standards. Finally, an Experimental Use Permit (EUP) field efficacy trial protocol was drafted based on the results obtained from preliminary field trials. Once the review is complete, field trials can be conducted to establish application methods. The test reports obtained for the strains above can be provided to licensed technology transfer companies to fulfill the registration requirements for commercializing microbial pesticides and complete the registration data commercialization process. Taiwan’s microbial pesticide R&D process is very similar to that abroad.
SWOT ANALYSIS OF TAIWAN’S MICROBIAL PESTICIDES
Below is a SWOT analysis of the Taiwan’s microbial pesticide industry.
Strengths:
- Geographical advantage: Taiwan is located in regions, rich in natural resources and diverse microorganisms. This provides an advantage in screening and developing beneficial microorganisms.
- Established research and development capabilities: Taiwan has long been committed to the research and development of microbial agents. Universities, agricultural research and extension stations, and biopesticide companies possess significant R&D capabilities. Additionally, the Agricultural Technology Research Institute has recently enhanced its facilities with microbial fermentation equipment, further improving liquid fermentation technology.
Weaknesses:
- Price and acceptance: Microbial pesticide products, including microbial agents, natural materials, and biochemical formulations, are generally more expensive than traditional chemical pesticides. Farmers have historically shown less acceptance of these products. Although government subsidies and the increasing acreage of organic and eco-friendly farming in recent years have bolstered demand for microbial pesticides, pricing remains a key barrier to broader adoption by farmers.
- Limited pest control spectrum: Current microbial pesticide products primarily focus on disease control. However, small pests such as thrips, whiteflies, aphids, and mites have become more prevalent, increasing the demand for pest-targeting products. Despite this growing need, there is a lack of suitable microbial pesticide products in the market for this type of pest.
- Limited fungal strains and development challenges: Currently, the available fungal microbial pesticides in Taiwan are mostly limited to Trichoderma spp. and Beauveria bassiana. Internationally, various fungal products have been developed, including Paecilomyces lilacinus, Metarhizium anisopliae, and Lecanicillium lecanii. While several institutions in Taiwan are engaged in R&D of these fungi, significant progress is still needed, especially regarding product shelf life and formulation development.
Opportunities:
- Global focus on developing eco-friendly agricultural inputs and microbial pesticide products: The global agricultural sector prioritizing eco-friendly inputs, including microbial pesticides. Taiwan’s long-term research and application of microbial products provide a solid foundation for future commercialization and industrialization.
- Multiple modes of action to reduce the risk of resistance: Microbial pesticides typically employ multiple mechanisms of action, which reduces the likelihood of pests and diseases developing resistance compared to chemical pesticides.
- Increase in organic and eco-friendly farming: The expansion of organic and eco-friendly farming practices in Taiwan has created a growing demand for sustainable pest and disease control solutions, presenting opportunities for microbial pesticide products.
- Alignment with Taiwan's agricultural policy: Taiwan’s policy to reduce chemical pesticide use by 50% over the next decade underscores the urgent need for alternative pest control solutions. This shift opens new opportunities for the research, development, and commercialization of microbial pesticides, offering farmers more sustainable options for pest management.
Threats:
- Multiple applications are required: Microbial pesticides often require repeated applications to exert their effectiveness. Additionally, due to lower microbial concentrations, these products need higher dilution rates and provide slower pest and disease control compared to chemical pesticides.
- Limited diversity and increased competition: Most microbial pesticides, including fungicides and insecticides, are still primarily based on Bacillus species, especially B. amyloliquefaciens and B. thuringiensis. This has led to abundant similar products in the market, increasing competition (Kuo et al., 214).
- Competition from unregistered plant protection materials: Recently, many companies have shifted to developing plant protection materials that are exempt from registration. Compared to microbial pesticides, these products have lower registration thresholds and research and development costs, and no field efficacy trials are required before commercialization. This gives farmers more options for pest control materials, making it harder for microbial pesticides to compete.
CHALLENGES FACING THE INDUSTRIALIZATION OF MICROBIAL PESTICIDES IN TAIWAN
- An assessment of Taiwan’s situation reveals a lack of microbial insecticide products for controlling small pests such as thrips, whiteflies, aphids, and spider mites. Control methods still rely on chemical pesticides or oil-based plant protection materials exempt from registration, but these pests have not been completely overcome. Especially during severe outbreaks in the harvest period, even when using oil-based products, attention must be paid to temperature limitations in the application environment; using them under high temperatures can cause phytotoxicity.
- Most of the microbial formulations available on the market are concentrated on Bacillus spp. The industry hopes for novel control strains that can be commercialized. Additionally, at the current stage, biopesticide companies desire that the microbial pesticides introduced by various agricultural research stations can, besides targeting the intended pests, also control multiple other diseases. This would be beneficial for the companies' future commercialization and marketing strategies (Kuo et al., 214).
- Additionally, licensing fees are also one of the factors considered by the industry. Between 2014 and 2016, the technology transfer fees for microbial pesticides and mass production technologies introduced by agricultural improvement stations and academic units ranged from approximately USD$150,000 to USD$276,000. For many small companies in Taiwan, this is still a significant investment. However, major domestic pesticide manufacturers and biotechnology companies, besides obtaining microbial formulation products through technology transfer from agricultural research stations, have also invested in the development of microbial resources themselves. They have established research departments to collect and screen potential domestic microbial strains and conduct R&D testing. Therefore, they remain in the wait-and-see phase regarding microbial formulation technology licensing cases with excessively high fees.
- Another primary reason is that the registration timeline of microbial pesticides is still not as fast as the industry expected. This has led companies to lean toward registering effective microbial formulations as phosphate-solubilizing or potassium-solubilizing microbial fertilizers (which have lower registration thresholds, faster registration times, and fewer registration documents required). However, this approach loses the original intention of developing microbial pesticides.
- At the current stage, the industrialization of microbial pesticides still faces several challenges. These include the need to improve the stability of microbial populations after scaling up production, breakthroughs in formulation development and storage conditions for entomopathogenic fungi, high product costs, slower efficacy, insufficient knowledge and experience among farmers, improper application timing, susceptibility to weather conditions that affect effectiveness, and reduced control efficiency when products are mixed. Therefore, in addition to enhancing the development of microbial formulations, long-term farmer education and guidance are necessary. This includes providing alternative pest control materials and application methods beyond chemical pesticides.
CONCLUSION
Taiwan's microbial pesticide industry has made significant strides over the past three decades, evolving from initial research efforts to commercializing innovative products. The development began in 1995 with the "Biotechnology Industry Promotion Plan," which positioned microbial pesticides as a key focus area. The subsequent commercialization of Bacillus subtilis Y1336 marked a milestone, laying the foundation for further advancements. Despite these achievements, the adoption of microbial pesticides remained limited due to farmers’ reliance on chemical agents and challenges in field effectiveness. However, the implementation of the “Grand Talents and Strategies Project” in 2014 revitalized the industry by fostering collaboration between academia, government, and enterprises, leading to the registration of numerous microbial pesticide strains.
Currently, Taiwan's microbial pesticide products are predominantly fungicides based on B. amyloliquefaciens and insecticides derived from Bacillus thuringiensis. These strains are favored for their diverse mechanisms of action, environmental safety, and ability to form endospores for prolonged storage. Nonetheless, the industry faces several challenges that hinder its growth. High licensing fees for microbial pesticide technologies pose financial barriers for smaller companies, while lengthy registration processes discourage commercialization efforts. Moreover, there is a shortage of microbial insecticide products targeting small pests such as thrips and aphids, which remain reliant on chemical pesticides or oil-based plant protection materials.
The global biopesticide market is expanding rapidly due to increasing awareness of the environmental and health risks associated with chemical pesticides. Taiwan's microbial pesticide industry has aligned with this trend by focusing on sustainable solutions for pest and disease management. However, further innovation is required to develop novel microbial strains that can address broader pest control needs and enhance market competitiveness. Additionally, simplifying registration procedures and reducing technology transfer costs could incentivize more companies to invest in this sector.
Taiwan’s microbial pesticide research has established a robust framework for strain screening, safety assessments, field trials, and commercialization processes. This systematic approach has enabled the development of effective products that address soil-borne diseases and reduce pesticide residues in agricultural outputs during harvest periods. Despite these successes, achieving industrialization requires overcoming barriers related to cost, regulatory timelines, and limited product diversity.
In conclusion, Taiwan's microbial pesticide industry holds considerable potential for growth within the global biopesticide market. By addressing existing challenges such as high licensing fees, slow registration processes, and limited product offerings, the industry can expand its impact on sustainable agriculture domestically and internationally. Continued collaboration among government agencies, research institutions, and enterprises will drive innovation and foster a competitive ecosystem for microbial pesticides.
REFERENCES
Biologicals Latam. (2023). The drivers behind the growing biostimulant market in Latin America.
Chen, R. L., & Lee, G. C. (2014). Promotion and strategies for industrialization of microbial pesticides and microbial fertilizers. In Proceedings of the Conference on Development of Agriculture Biological Materials Industry (pp. 23–32).
InsightAce Analytic. (2024). Biopesticides market size, share & trends analysis report by type (bioinsecticides, biofungicides, bionematicides, bioherbicides), crop type (cereal & grains, oilseeds & pulses, fruits & vegetables), formulation, source, and mode of application, by region, and segment forecasts, 2024–2031. https://www.insightaceanalytic.com/report/biopesticides-market/1619
Kuo, C. C., Chen, C. W., Liao, C. T., Chen, W. L., & Tsai, Y. F. (2014). Development and application of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens on plant diseases biocontrol. In Proceedings of the Conference on Development of Agriculture Biological Materials Industry (pp. 69–88).
Markets and Markets. (2025). Biopesticides market by type (bioinsecticides, biofungicides, bionematicides), crop type (cereals & grains, oilseeds & pulses), formulation (liquid and dry), source (microbials, biochemicals), mode of application, & region – global forecast to 2029. https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/biopesticides-267.html
Roche, D., Rickson, J. R., & Pawlett, M. (2024). Moving towards a mechanistic understanding of biostimulant impacts on soil properties and processes: A semi-systematic review. Frontiers in Agronomy, 6, Article 1271672. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2024.1271672
Saa Silva, S., Ponchet, M., & Brown, P. (Eds.). (2012). Proceedings of the First World Congress on the Use of Biostimulants in Agriculture. International Society of Horticultural Science
Yuan, C. I., & Hsieh, F. C. (2021). Characteristics of plant biostimulants and current regulations in Europe and the United States. Taiwan Pesticide Science, 11, 1–27.
Current Research Status of Taiwan's Microbial Pesticide Industry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.56669/FXSA7217
ABSTRACT
Taiwan's research and development of microbial pesticides began with pioneering commercialization studies in 1995. In 1999, the first microbial pesticide, Bacillus subtilis, more popularly known as BIOBAC, was successfully commercialized and launched. Farmers were still unfamiliar with microbial pesticides and relied heavily on chemical pesticides to control crop pests and diseases. Starting in 2013, the Council of Agriculture of the Executive Yuan (now the Ministry of Agriculture) convened meetings with the pesticide industry, academia, and agricultural research and extension stations to promote the development and industrialization of microbial pesticides. Several microbial strains with developmental potential were selected and entered “the Grand Talent Strategy Project.” From 2014 to 2017, the requirements for commercializing microbial pesticides were progressively fulfilled, and numerous strain technologies were transferred to enterprises and commercially registered. Meanwhile, most microbial pesticide strains at the time belonged to Bacillus amyloliquefaciens. This species was primarily chosen because it possesses multiple mechanisms for disease control and forms endospores, which have advantages in terms of storage duration and long-term preservation. Subsequently, in the second phase of microbial pesticide development, the primary control targets were nematodes and small pests. Many new microbial strains were developed, including Streptomyces, B. thuringiensis, and Paecilomyces javanicus. These technologies were successively transferred to enterprises for commercial registration. In reviewing the current domestic microbial pesticide products, fungicides are mainly B. amyloliquefaciens, while insecticides are primarily based on B. thuringiensis. Therefore, developing products from new microbial strains is necessary for future industries and markets. However, in recent years, there has been a slowdown in cases of microbial pesticide technology licensing. The main reasons are the relatively high licensing fees for microbial pesticide technologies, which require companies to consider the costs and the timeline for registration after licensing. Additionally, the current registration process and timeline still have not yet met the expectations of companies, and domestic microbial pesticide companies capable of undertaking such projects are limited to specific firms. These factors have led to a decrease in microbial pesticide licensing cases in recent years. Nevertheless, competitive advantages remain in targeting small pests or essential pests such as the lychee stink bugs.
Keywords: Microbial pesticides, Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, Commercial registration
INTRODUCTION
Previous research
Development of Taiwan's microbial pesticide industry
Taiwan has devoted itself to the research and development of microbial pesticides for nearly 30 years. In 1995, the Executive Yuan formulated the "Biotechnology Industry Promotion Plan," in which biological pesticides were selected as one of the five key biotechnology projects in national policy. Meanwhile, domestic universities, research institutes and experimental stations were involved in the development of microbial pesticides and successively transferred the technologies to enterprises. In 1995, BaiTai Biotechnology Co., Ltd. (parent company: Kuang Hua Chemical Co., Ltd.) collaborated with the Development Center for Biotechnology to jointly develop Bacillus subtilis Y1336. In July 1997, they obtained Taiwan's first license for a self-manufactured biological pesticide product. Moreover, they completed the commercialization of the fungicide named "BIOBAC," recommended for the control of powdery mildew on peas in 1999 (Chen and Lee, 2014). Over the past 20 years, the product has gradually expanded its registration for controlling various diseases in multiple crops. Subsequently, it has been approved and registered as a microbial agent for disease control in Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Turkey, and other countries, becoming the first microbial pesticide product registered in Taiwan.
Although a microbial pesticide product was developed and commercialized, farmers still relied heavily on chemical agents for field pest and disease management. Additionally, the effectiveness of microbial pesticides in the field did not meet farmers' expectations, and the application methods were not implemented properly. This has led to limitations on the use and promotion of microbial pesticide products. However, in 2014, the Ministry of Agriculture (then the Council of Agriculture) implemented the “Grand Talents and Strategies Project,” which was composed of industry representatives, various agricultural research and extension stations, and the Council of Agriculture. They selected potential microbial pesticide strains with commercialization potential and urgent industry needs, initiating a decade-long domestic boom in microbial pesticide research, and finally realized the commercialization of innovative microbial pesticide products. According to 2025 statistics, there are 58 microbial pesticide (fungicide, insecticide and acaricide) registration certificates in Taiwan. The fungicides account for 34 certificates, which include 15 strains and 1 metabolite, with Bacillus species being the most prevalent, accounting for 14. There are 23 insecticides registration certificates, containing 10 strains, with Bacillus thuringiensis being the most significant, comprising 8 strains (Table 1).
TYPES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF MICROBIAL PESTICIDES
(1) Types
Currently, the types of microbial pesticides registered in Taiwan are classified into two categories based on their modes of action: microbial fungicides and microbial insecticides. According to current regulations, the main active ingredients include bacteria, fungi, viruses, and protozoa. However, domestically registered microbial pesticide products only include bacteria and fungi. Among them, bacterial microorganisms constitute the majority, primarily Bacillus species and Bacillus thuringiensis. (Table 2).
(2) Characteristics:
The advantages of most microbial pesticides include the fact that they are relatively safe for humans, livestock, and other organisms. They have higher environmental compatibility and are safer for non-target organisms such as natural enemy species. They have diverse modes of action, and target pests are less likely to develop resistance than chemical agents. Additionally, research, production timelines, and registration procedures are more uncomplicated than chemical pesticides. The development and registration costs for microbial pesticides are lower than chemical pesticides, and the registration requirements are also simplified.
INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS OF MICROBIAL PESTICIDES
According to data from Markets and Markets (2025), the global biopesticide market value is expected to increase from USD$7.72 billion in 2024 to USD$15.66 billion by 2029, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 15.2% (Figure 1). Another research institution, Global Biopesticides Market Size, estimates that the global biopesticide market value is estimated at USD$7.15 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach USD$21.05 billion by 2031 (InsightAce Analytic, 2024), with a CAGR of 14.50% (Figure 2). The analyses from both research institutions are not far apart. The main reason for this growth is the growing global consensus on the harmful effects of chemically synthesized pesticides on human health and the environment, leading to an increasing demand for biopesticides. Additionally, since 2012, many multinational agricultural companies have begun a wave of acquiring biopesticide companies. For example, among the world's top three agrochemical companies:
Under the trend of sustainable agriculture, governments around the world are promoting the use and development of agricultural biological products. For example, the Indian government has implemented the 7th five-year agricultural plan, providing financial subsidies to farmers to expand local biofertilizer production; the European Union offers measures to promote pest management and pesticide reduction, shifting the focus of traditional agricultural systems toward biological preparations.
Emerging markets in Latin America and regions like China, India, and Southeast Asian countries are increasing their willingness to use biological products due to government policies aimed at reducing carbon emissions and enhancing food regulation, as well as through subsidies or incentive measures for farmers. Apart from pest and disease control and microbial fertilizers, the development of biostimulants is also a current trend (Biologicals Latam, 2023). The First World Congress on Biostimulants in Agriculture held in France in 2012, was an important milestone (Saa Silva and Brown, 2012). Sources of biostimulants may include seaweed extracts, protein hydrolysates, humic substances, chitin, microorganisms, or inorganic elements like silicon. These products are characterized by their ability to regulate plant growth and enhance stress resistance but do not directly supply plant nutrients or act directly in plant disease defense (Roche and Pawlett, 2024).
However, their mechanisms of action involve many synergistic effects, and the verification of these mechanisms has not yet been completed. Products often contain mixtures of multiple ingredients. Although biostimulants can be distinguished from pesticides and fertilizers, domestic products have shown a gradual increase in recent years. However, the definitions and management regulations are still unclear, and the classification of biostimulant products has not yet been explicitly regulated (Yuan and Hsieh, 2021).
RESEARCH CONTENT
Taiwan's microbial pesticide research and registration process
Currently, Taiwan’s microbial pesticide research and development process flowchart for commercialization and industrialization is shown in Figure 3 (Chen and Lee, 2014). Jointly developed by many experts, scholars, and agricultural authorities, it includes the primary research and commercialization and industrialization stages, with their contributions accounting for 40% and 60%, respectively. The focus of the basic research stage is on strain screening and identification and evaluating microbial strains with pest control potential. At this stage, preliminary strain safety assessments can be conducted to ensure that the isolated microbial strains do not pose pathogenic risks to humans, animals, or plants. Suppose the strain is confirmed to be safe. In that case, it proceeds to strain activity testing and preliminary field trials to establish foundational data such as field application methods, dilution rates, and application frequencies. The possible mechanisms by which the test strains control pests were also analyzed.
During the preliminary field trials, initial small-scale shaker flask tests with culture media can be conducted for the mass production model of the strain. Subsequently, the benchtop fermentation and process testing at a scale of 5-10 liters proceeded. At this stage, the components of the culture medium can be replaced with industrial or food-grade raw material formulations to reduce the cost of cultivation and fermentation. Once the culture conditions are stabilized, the process moves into 100–200-liter pilot-scale mass production fermentation tests to fine-tune the formulation and preparation.
After stabilized the fermentation process, the project can proceed to the commercialization and industrialization stage. At this point, it is necessary to conduct tons-scale fermentation and formulation verification tests, as well as at least five batches of product quality control tests to confirm the concentration of active ingredients. Product storage stability tests are also performed to ensure that the fermentation formulation, under room temperature conditions are within the specified time frame and maintains consistent microbial concentrations, with analyses conducted every 1 to 2 months. Simultaneously, the strain must undergo animal toxicology and physicochemical property tests to comply with Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) standards. Finally, an Experimental Use Permit (EUP) field efficacy trial protocol was drafted based on the results obtained from preliminary field trials. Once the review is complete, field trials can be conducted to establish application methods. The test reports obtained for the strains above can be provided to licensed technology transfer companies to fulfill the registration requirements for commercializing microbial pesticides and complete the registration data commercialization process. Taiwan’s microbial pesticide R&D process is very similar to that abroad.
SWOT ANALYSIS OF TAIWAN’S MICROBIAL PESTICIDES
Below is a SWOT analysis of the Taiwan’s microbial pesticide industry.
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Threats:
CHALLENGES FACING THE INDUSTRIALIZATION OF MICROBIAL PESTICIDES IN TAIWAN
CONCLUSION
Taiwan's microbial pesticide industry has made significant strides over the past three decades, evolving from initial research efforts to commercializing innovative products. The development began in 1995 with the "Biotechnology Industry Promotion Plan," which positioned microbial pesticides as a key focus area. The subsequent commercialization of Bacillus subtilis Y1336 marked a milestone, laying the foundation for further advancements. Despite these achievements, the adoption of microbial pesticides remained limited due to farmers’ reliance on chemical agents and challenges in field effectiveness. However, the implementation of the “Grand Talents and Strategies Project” in 2014 revitalized the industry by fostering collaboration between academia, government, and enterprises, leading to the registration of numerous microbial pesticide strains.
Currently, Taiwan's microbial pesticide products are predominantly fungicides based on B. amyloliquefaciens and insecticides derived from Bacillus thuringiensis. These strains are favored for their diverse mechanisms of action, environmental safety, and ability to form endospores for prolonged storage. Nonetheless, the industry faces several challenges that hinder its growth. High licensing fees for microbial pesticide technologies pose financial barriers for smaller companies, while lengthy registration processes discourage commercialization efforts. Moreover, there is a shortage of microbial insecticide products targeting small pests such as thrips and aphids, which remain reliant on chemical pesticides or oil-based plant protection materials.
The global biopesticide market is expanding rapidly due to increasing awareness of the environmental and health risks associated with chemical pesticides. Taiwan's microbial pesticide industry has aligned with this trend by focusing on sustainable solutions for pest and disease management. However, further innovation is required to develop novel microbial strains that can address broader pest control needs and enhance market competitiveness. Additionally, simplifying registration procedures and reducing technology transfer costs could incentivize more companies to invest in this sector.
Taiwan’s microbial pesticide research has established a robust framework for strain screening, safety assessments, field trials, and commercialization processes. This systematic approach has enabled the development of effective products that address soil-borne diseases and reduce pesticide residues in agricultural outputs during harvest periods. Despite these successes, achieving industrialization requires overcoming barriers related to cost, regulatory timelines, and limited product diversity.
In conclusion, Taiwan's microbial pesticide industry holds considerable potential for growth within the global biopesticide market. By addressing existing challenges such as high licensing fees, slow registration processes, and limited product offerings, the industry can expand its impact on sustainable agriculture domestically and internationally. Continued collaboration among government agencies, research institutions, and enterprises will drive innovation and foster a competitive ecosystem for microbial pesticides.
REFERENCES
Biologicals Latam. (2023). The drivers behind the growing biostimulant market in Latin America.
Chen, R. L., & Lee, G. C. (2014). Promotion and strategies for industrialization of microbial pesticides and microbial fertilizers. In Proceedings of the Conference on Development of Agriculture Biological Materials Industry (pp. 23–32).
InsightAce Analytic. (2024). Biopesticides market size, share & trends analysis report by type (bioinsecticides, biofungicides, bionematicides, bioherbicides), crop type (cereal & grains, oilseeds & pulses, fruits & vegetables), formulation, source, and mode of application, by region, and segment forecasts, 2024–2031. https://www.insightaceanalytic.com/report/biopesticides-market/1619
Kuo, C. C., Chen, C. W., Liao, C. T., Chen, W. L., & Tsai, Y. F. (2014). Development and application of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens on plant diseases biocontrol. In Proceedings of the Conference on Development of Agriculture Biological Materials Industry (pp. 69–88).
Markets and Markets. (2025). Biopesticides market by type (bioinsecticides, biofungicides, bionematicides), crop type (cereals & grains, oilseeds & pulses), formulation (liquid and dry), source (microbials, biochemicals), mode of application, & region – global forecast to 2029. https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/biopesticides-267.html
Roche, D., Rickson, J. R., & Pawlett, M. (2024). Moving towards a mechanistic understanding of biostimulant impacts on soil properties and processes: A semi-systematic review. Frontiers in Agronomy, 6, Article 1271672. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2024.1271672
Saa Silva, S., Ponchet, M., & Brown, P. (Eds.). (2012). Proceedings of the First World Congress on the Use of Biostimulants in Agriculture. International Society of Horticultural Science
Yuan, C. I., & Hsieh, F. C. (2021). Characteristics of plant biostimulants and current regulations in Europe and the United States. Taiwan Pesticide Science, 11, 1–27.