Agricultural Soil Fumigants: Why Precision Application Is the New Licence to Operate

Executive summary. Soil fumigation is one of the oldest and most contested tools in high-value agriculture. Before a strawberry field, a potato crop, a tomato bed or an orchard is planted, a fumigant is injected into the soil to control nematodes, pathogens and weeds that would otherwise destroy yields. Few growers of these crops can do without it, and few products face more regulatory scrutiny. Strategic Revenue Insights estimates the global agricultural soil fumigant market at USD 2.45 billion in 2025, rising to USD 3.84 billion by 2035 at a 4.60 percent compound annual growth rate. The growth is moderate, but the industry beneath it is being reshaped by a single question: can fumigants be applied precisely enough, and with low enough emissions, to keep their licence to operate? In 2026 the companies moving first are answering it with drip application, barrier films, buffer-zone management, digital records and integrated programmes that combine chemistry with biology. This article sets out five lessons from the manufacturers, applicators and growers moving first, with takeaways for strategy, regulatory affairs, operations, research and revenue.

The structure of the market shows where change is concentrated. Strategic Revenue Insights' Agricultural Soil Fumigant Market research finds that 1,3-dichloropropene is the largest product type, ahead of chloropicrin, metam sodium and metam potassium, dazomet, dimethyl disulfide and methyl bromide for critical uses; that liquid formulations dominate, ahead of gas and solid or granular forms; that fruits and vegetables lead crop demand, followed by potatoes and tubers, tobacco, ornamentals and nurseries, and strawberries; that shank injection is the most widely used application method while drip application is the fastest growing; and that North America is the largest region while Asia Pacific is the fastest growing. The research identifies demand for high-quality produce and effective soil pest control, sustainable farming practices, integrated pest management programmes, advances in fumigation technology and precision agriculture as the drivers, and regulatory pressure, environmental concerns and raw material price fluctuations as the restraints.

The regulatory direction is clearest in California, the largest market for several fumigated crops. The state's Department of Pesticide Regulation reported a 29 percent decrease in 1,3-dichloropropene emissions attributable to the changes in fumigation methods required by its 2024 regulations protecting residential bystanders. A second rule, developed with the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to protect occupational bystanders such as farmworkers in neighbouring fields, took effect on 1 January 2026, adding buffer zones and annual occupational risk evaluations. And in March 2025 the department published the first phase of a state-funded study which found that no currently available alternative could serve as a universal replacement for 1,3-dichloropropene and chloropicrin. Regulators are tightening how fumigants are used rather than removing them, and that makes application technology the centre of the market.

Why the Agricultural Soil Fumigant Market Is Entering a New Phase

Three structural forces are converging.

Regulation is shifting from what to how. For two decades the fumigant story was one of substitution, most visibly the phase-out of methyl bromide under the Montreal Protocol, which today survives only for critical and quarantine uses. The current phase is different. The remaining fumigants, including 1,3-dichloropropene, chloropicrin, metam products, dazomet and dimethyl disulfide, are under registration review by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and California's rules regulate application method, buffer distances, timing and emissions rather than banning products. SRI's research names regulatory pressure as the main restraint; in practice, it is turning compliance capability into a competitive advantage.

There is no universal substitute. California's 2025 alternatives study is the clearest statement of a reality growers already know: non-chemical methods such as anaerobic soil disinfestation, steam, substrates, resistant rootstocks and biological products work in specific situations but cannot yet replace fumigation across the crops and soils that depend on it. That sustains demand, which SRI's research identifies through the need for effective soil pest and disease control, while raising the pressure to use fumigants more efficiently and in combination with alternatives.

Precision agriculture has reached the soil. SRI's research identifies precision agriculture and advances in fumigation technology as drivers, and drip application as the fastest growing method. Fumigants applied through drip lines under impermeable films, at rates matched to soil mapping and pest pressure, reduce emissions and product use while maintaining efficacy. The same logic is visible across farming, where precision has become the condition of the only profitable acre.

These forces explain SRI's forecast of a market that grows from USD 2.45 billion in 2025 to USD 3.84 billion by 2035, with growth concentrated in drip application, in high-value fruit and vegetable crops, and in Asia Pacific.

Five Lessons From the Companies Moving First

The manufacturers, applicators and growers keeping soil fumigation viable under tightening regulation share a recognisable pattern. We have distilled it into five lessons, each followed by a takeaway for a specific leadership function.

Lesson 1: Sell Stewardship, Not Gallons

The traditional fumigant sale was a volume sale: product delivered to a custom applicator, priced per gallon or pound, with application left to the applicator's practice. The companies moving first sell a stewardship system: product, application specification, emission-reducing films, buffer-zone planning, training, record-keeping and regulatory support. Corteva, AMVAC, TriCal, Trinity Manufacturing, Arkema, Certis Belchim and UPL, all named in SRI's research, compete increasingly on how well they help growers stay compliant and keep using their products.

The commercial logic is straightforward. A grower who cannot comply with buffer zones, application windows or emission requirements cannot fumigate at all, so compliance support protects volume. Stewardship also protects the product's registration: every incident, complaint or exceedance strengthens the case for further restrictions, while every documented reduction in emissions strengthens the case for continued use. California's reported 29 percent reduction in 1,3-dichloropropene emissions from changed application methods is the kind of evidence that sustains the category.

"In soil fumigation, the product that survives is the one that is used well. The companies leading this market have understood that their customer's compliance record is their own licence to sell."

Takeaway on strategy. Reposition the offer from product volume to stewardship systems that combine chemistry, application specification, emission control, training and compliance records. Measure success by compliant acres served and emissions per treated acre, and treat stewardship investment as protection of both volume and registration.

Lesson 2: Treat Regulation as a Design Input

California's 2026 occupational bystander rule adds buffer zones whose distance and duration depend on the application method and the crop, and requires annual evaluations of whether estimated air concentrations in any township exceed a defined threshold. The 2024 residential bystander rule set a separate target. Advocacy groups have challenged the relationship between the two. Federal registration review continues for the major fumigants. Each of these shapes where, when, how and how much fumigant can be applied.

The companies moving first treat this as a design input rather than a compliance burden. They engage early in rulemaking with field data, model the effect of proposed rules on their customers, and develop application methods and products that meet the most demanding requirements before they become mandatory. They also invest in emissions monitoring and modelling, because the rules are increasingly written around measured or modelled air concentrations rather than simple use limits.

SRI's research names regulatory pressure and stricter guidelines on chemical use as a restraint and identifies government promotion of fumigants within integrated pest management as a driver. Both are true at once: regulators want fumigation done less and better, not eliminated.

Takeaway on regulatory affairs. Build a regulatory science capability that generates field emissions data, models the impact of proposed rules and supports applicators through implementation. Engage early in federal registration review and state rulemaking, design products and application methods to meet the strictest likely standard, and track litigation and township-level air monitoring as leading indicators.

Lesson 3: Drip and Film Are the Growth Platform

Shank injection, in which fumigant is injected into the soil by tractor-mounted shanks, is the most widely used method in SRI's research. Drip application, in which fumigant is delivered through irrigation lines usually under plastic film, is the fastest growing. The reasons are emissions, precision and labour. Drip application under totally impermeable film keeps more fumigant in the soil, allows lower rates and reduces buffer-zone requirements; it uses irrigation infrastructure many high-value growers already have; and it reduces applicator exposure.

The shift has implications across the value chain. Formulations must be emulsifiable and compatible with drip systems. Film suppliers become strategic partners. Application services move from tractor fleets toward irrigation and injection expertise. And the grower's crop and bed design, from strawberries to vegetables, must accommodate the system.

Precision tools add a further layer. Soil mapping of pathogen and nematode pressure allows variable-rate application, treating only where needed, and digital application records simplify compliance. The companies moving first are building these capabilities alongside their chemistry.

"The future of soil fumigation is not a bigger tank on a tractor. It is a drip line under a film, delivering the right dose to the right bed, with a digital record of every gallon."

Takeaway on operations and application technology. Invest in drip-compatible formulations, impermeable film partnerships and applicator training for drip and film systems. Develop soil diagnostics and variable-rate application to match dose to pest pressure, and provide digital application records that satisfy buffer-zone and reporting requirements automatically.

Lesson 4: Combine Chemistry With Biology

California's alternatives study found no universal substitute, but it did not find that alternatives are useless. Anaerobic soil disinfestation, steam, soilless substrates, grafted and resistant plants, crop rotation and biological products each work under specific conditions. The companies moving first build integrated programmes that combine reduced-rate fumigation with these tools, which SRI's research identifies through integrated pest management and sustainable farming practices.

Integration has several commercial advantages. It lowers fumigant rates per acre, which reduces emissions and buffer requirements. It extends the useful life of fumigant products by reducing resistance and regulatory pressure. And it creates a broader portfolio, in which biologicals, seed treatments and diagnostics are sold alongside fumigants to the same growers. SRI's research names demand for effective yet environmentally friendly fumigants as an opportunity, and Corteva's launch of more environmentally friendly fumigant formulations, noted in the research, is one example.

The high-value crops that dominate fumigant demand also have demanding buyers. Retailers and food brands increasingly ask about pesticide use and sustainability, and growers supplying premium categories, such as the nut-based proteins built on orchard crops, need credible stories about how their soil is managed.

The capabilities that decide who captures this demand are specific:

• Stewardship systems that combine product, application specification and compliance support.

• Regulatory science that generates emissions data and shapes rules early.

• Drip, film and precision application capabilities that lower rates and emissions.

• Integrated programmes combining reduced-rate fumigation with biological and cultural methods.

• Regional strategies for Asia Pacific growth alongside mature North American markets.

Companies evaluating these competitive dynamics in greater detail can use SRI's Agricultural Soil Fumigant Market analysis to assess product, form, crop, application method and regional segments and the positioning of the leading manufacturers.

Takeaway on research and portfolio. Develop integrated soil health programmes that combine reduced-rate fumigation with anaerobic disinfestation, biologicals, resistant plant material and diagnostics. Invest in biological and lower-emission products as complements rather than replacements, and document programme outcomes for growers, regulators and food buyers.

Lesson 5: Grow Where High-Value Horticulture Is Expanding

North America is the largest region in SRI's research and Asia Pacific is the fastest growing. The difference reflects where high-value horticulture is expanding. In Asia Pacific, rising incomes and urbanisation are increasing demand for fresh fruits, vegetables and protected crops, and growers intensifying production face the same soil-borne disease pressures that drove fumigant adoption elsewhere. SRI's research identifies regional expansion, particularly in Asia Pacific, as an opportunity.

The companies moving first do not simply export the North American model. They adapt products and application methods to local crops, farm sizes and regulations, build distribution and applicator networks, and introduce stewardship practices from the start rather than after problems emerge. UPL, named in SRI's research, brings a strong position in emerging markets; others are building through distribution partnerships.

Mature markets require a different approach. In North America and Europe, growth comes from defending registrations, converting acres to lower-emission application methods and adding integrated programmes, rather than from expanding treated area. SRI's research names raw material price fluctuations as a restraint, and in mature markets cost efficiency in manufacturing and distribution matters as much as innovation.

Takeaway on regional growth. Build Asia Pacific strategies around local crops, farm structures and regulations, with stewardship and applicator training from the outset. In mature markets, focus on converting acres to drip and film, defending registrations with data and growing integrated programmes, while managing raw material and manufacturing costs tightly.

Where the Opportunity Is Concentrating

Value is moving toward precise application, toward high-value crops and toward Asia Pacific.

By product type, 1,3-dichloropropene is the largest segment, chloropicrin is central to combination products and disease control, metam products and dazomet serve specific soils and crops, dimethyl disulfide offers an alternative in some markets, and methyl bromide is limited to critical uses.

By form, liquid formulations dominate because they suit both shank and drip application, while gas and solid or granular forms serve specific uses.

By crop, fruits and vegetables lead demand, potatoes and tubers are a major segment, strawberries are among the most fumigant-dependent crops, and tobacco, ornamentals and nurseries are specialised markets.

By application method, shank injection remains the most widely used technique, drip application is growing fastest, and tarp and flat fume methods serve specific situations.

By geography, North America is the largest market, led by high-value horticulture in California and other states, Asia Pacific is the fastest growing on intensifying horticulture, and Europe is shaped by stricter registration and integrated pest management requirements.

At the Horizon: What to Watch Over the Next Three Years

Federal registration review. The Environmental Protection Agency's decisions on the major soil fumigants will set national conditions for use, from buffer zones to application methods. One indicator worth watching is whether federal mitigation measures converge with California's emissions-based approach.

California implementation and litigation. How the 2026 occupational bystander rule works in practice, and how the legal challenges are resolved, will influence regulators elsewhere.

Alternatives research. The second phase of California's alternatives study and broader research into biological and non-chemical methods will shape how integrated programmes develop. The strategic question is shifting from whether fumigants can be replaced to how far their use can be reduced while keeping crops viable.

"The next phase of competition in soil fumigation will not be decided by who sells the most product. It will be decided by who helps growers protect their crops with the lowest emissions, the cleanest records and the strongest case for continued use."

The Strategic Revenue Opportunity

For fumigant manufacturers, the task is to sell stewardship systems, invest in regulatory science, lead the shift to drip and film, and build integrated programmes. For applicators and service providers, the priority is to develop drip, film and precision capabilities and digital compliance records. For growers, the opportunity is to protect yields while reducing emissions and building credible sustainability stories. For investors, the signal is a market where regulatory capability and application technology increasingly determine value.

Market intelligence turns these questions into decisions. Segment-level sizing shows where demand is concentrating across products, forms, crops and methods, competitive benchmarking shows where manufacturers are strong, and regional analysis shows where horticultural expansion and regulation will shape demand. This is the path from market signals to strategic insight to revenue impact.

Takeaway on revenue. Treat the soil fumigant market as four revenue pools with different buyers and economics: core fumigant products sold on efficacy and registration, application systems and films sold on emissions and compliance, integrated soil health programmes sold on reduced rates and sustainability, and digital stewardship services sold on records and regulatory support. Each needs its own pricing, partner and proof model. Enter where high-value crops depend on fumigation and regulation rewards precision.

The Next Leg: Preparing for the Journey Ahead

The defining shift in soil fumigation is that the licence to operate now depends on how precisely and responsibly products are used. Regulation is focusing on application and emissions, alternatives cannot yet replace fumigants, and precision technology is making lower-emission use practical. The companies moving first sell stewardship, design for regulation, lead the move to drip and film, combine chemistry with biology and grow where horticulture is expanding.

The next three years will decide which companies keep the trust of regulators, growers and communities. Decision-makers should invest in stewardship, regulatory science, precision application and integrated programmes. Companies evaluating growth opportunities in this market can use Strategic Revenue Insights' Agricultural Soil Fumigant Market report to assess market size, competitive dynamics, regional opportunities and strategic growth priorities.

Sources: Strategic Revenue Insights, Agricultural Soil Fumigant Market report (2026); California Department of Pesticide Regulation (2025, 2026).

Frequently Asked Questions

How big is the agricultural soil fumigant market?

Strategic Revenue Insights estimates the global agricultural soil fumigant market at USD 2.45 billion in 2025, rising to USD 3.84 billion by 2035 at a 4.60 percent compound annual growth rate.

What are soil fumigants used for?

Soil fumigants are injected into soil before planting high-value crops such as strawberries, potatoes, tomatoes and orchards to control nematodes, pathogens and weeds that would otherwise destroy yields.

Which soil fumigant segments lead?

1,3-dichloropropene is the largest product type and liquid formulations dominate. Fruits and vegetables lead crop demand, shank injection is the most used method and drip application is the fastest growing.

Why is precision application important for soil fumigants?

Fumigants face heavy regulatory scrutiny over emissions. Drip application, barrier films, buffer-zone management and digital records help companies keep their licence to operate.

---

About the authors: This article was prepared by the Strategic Revenue Insights research team, which combines market intelligence, competitive analysis and strategic advisory for growth-stage, mid-market and enterprise organisations across the agriculture sector. Sector analyst: Sandeepa Kulkarni, Research Analyst. Our market estimates combine primary research (interviews, surveys and expert panels) with secondary data (industry reports, databases and public disclosures); read more about how Strategic Revenue Insights works. To discuss this market with our analysts, contact our team.