Biostimulants: From manufacturer optimism to farmer trust

If you develop, position or sell biostimulants, the next market phase will not only be about having a promising product. It will be about helping farmers, advisors and retailers understand which products work, under which conditions, with what level of proof and with what practical value for the farm.

Biostimulants are becoming more relevant as active ingredients disappear, climate pressure increases and crops face more stress from heat, drought, diseases, pests and extreme weather events. At the same time, many manufacturers believe their portfolios are now stronger than a few years ago: more targeted, more application-specific and often supported by improved formulations or combination approaches.

But the market situation makes this difficult. The category has become crowded. There are many products, many claims and not all products deliver reliably. This makes it harder for farmers, advisors and retailers to find orientation — and harder for strong products to stand out.

That combination was my key takeaway from recent conversations at the DLG Feldtage and PotatoEurope / SugarBeetExpo in Springe: optimism about product development, but sober realism about market credibility.

For manufacturers, this creates the strategic challenge: how do you turn a stronger product into a trusted choice in a market that still lacks orientation?

The category does not need less ambition. It needs proof, orientation and trust.

The challenge is shifting. It is no longer only about introducing the category. It is about helping farmers understand which products are worth using, how they should be applied and what result can realistically be expected.

This is especially important for manufacturers with well-developed products. If farmers try a product that does not work under their conditions, or if they receive poor guidance, disappointment may not stay with one product. It can affect the perception of biostimulants more broadly.

So the commercial question becomes:

How do you help farmers recognize why your product deserves trust?

One point came up repeatedly in Springe: the need for meaningful, standardized and realistic testing procedures.

Biostimulants are not always comparable to classical fertilizers or chemical crop protection products. Some contain living organisms. Some depend strongly on timing, moisture, temperature, oxygen exposure, crop condition or stress situation.

If they are handled like conventional inputs in official trials, the result may not reflect their real potential.

Farmers and retailers need independent, credible evidence. But test designs must also reflect how the products actually work. If the protocol is not suitable, a product may fail not because the concept is wrong, but because the handling does not match the biological mechanism.

If testing does not create orientation, manufacturers need other ways to build credibility: better trial design, clearer application guidance, stronger regional evidence and a better understanding of what farmers consider convincing proof.

Recent farmer conversations confirm that many farmers are not simply waiting to be convinced. Some are already testing biostimulants actively. They compare treated and untreated areas, observe plant development, check yield data and try to understand whether an effect is real, repeatable and economically relevant.

One farmer described a practical rule: the untreated strip should not be pointed out to him. He wants to find it himself in the field. If he can see where the product was not used, then the product has done something meaningful.

This is a powerful reminder.

Trust in biostimulants is not built by claims alone. It is built when farmers can relate proof to their own farm reality.

That also explains why inconsistent results are such a challenge. Farmers may ask: Was the effect caused by the product? Or was it the year, the weather, the soil, the crop, the application timing — or normal field variation?

For manufacturers, the important question is not only:

Does the product work?

It is also:

Under which conditions will farmers believe that it worked?

For biostimulants, efficacy and application are closely linked. If a product contains living organisms or depends on specific environmental conditions, handling is not a technical side note. It can decide whether the product works at all.

That means application guidance must be realistic, practical and specific:

• How sensitive is the product to timing or weather?

• What happens if conditions are not ideal?

• Which mistakes reduce efficacy?

• How easily can the product be integrated into existing farm operations?

Every unclear instruction creates risk: wrong use, disappointing results and lost trust. For manufacturers, user-friendliness is therefore not secondary. In this category, ease of application can become a trust factor.

The same applies to the trade. Retailers and advisors may remain cautious as long as farmer demand is not strong enough or the category feels too difficult to explain. They will be more willing to support products when they see clear demand, reliable results and convincing proof.

For manufacturers, market research should therefore not only look at farmers. It should also ask what retailers and advisors need in order to recommend a product with confidence.

The market does not only need better products. It needs better orientation.

For manufacturers, the farmer perspective points to a few practical rules:

• Proof must be relatable: farmers trust evidence they can connect to their own fields, crops and conditions.

• Context must be clear: weather, soil, timing and stress situation shape whether a product works.

• Application must be practical: sensitive handling, tight windows or extra complexity raise the adoption barrier.

• Fit matters: products that integrate into existing machinery and routines have a stronger chance of regular use.

• Trust needs support: retailers, advisors, official trials, brands and neighbour experience all help farmers navigate the category.

The next phase of the biostimulants market will be won by understanding how farmers, advisors and retailers find orientation in a crowded and sometimes confusing market.

For manufacturers, three questions become especially important:

• What makes farmers use a biostimulant regularly?

Which evidence, application experience and economic argument are needed before a product becomes part of the farm system?

• What enables retailers and advisors to support a product with confidence?

Which trial results, application guidance and positioning help them recommend it credibly?

• What helps the market choose the right product for the right situation?

How can farmers, advisors and retailers understand which solution fits which crop, stress situation, timing or farm context?

With the P+M Submarine, we speak directly with farmers and explore the questions that matter for product development, positioning, communication, advisory concepts and market access.