IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprwp/176165.html

The emerging one-stop shop in agricultural value chains: Agro-input retailers in Myanmar

Author

Listed:
  • Goeb, Joseph
  • Minten, Bart
  • van Asselt, Joanna
  • Reardon, Thomas
  • Aung, Zin Wai
  • Htar, May Thet

Abstract

With the intensification and modernization of agriculture in Myanmar, farmers are increasingly dependent on purchased agro-inputs—such as seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides—to enhance productivity. These inputs are typically acquired from small and medium-sized agro-input retailers. Despite their growing significance in agrifood value chains, limited research has examined the roles these retailers play. Drawing on large-scale, nationwide surveys of farmers and agro-input retailers in Myanmar, we explore their operations and implications in this context. Key findings include: 1. There is widespread and increased use of agro-chemicals in Myanmar. Among dry season crop farmers, pesticides were the most commonly purchased input, reported by 73 percent of respondents, closely followed by fertilizers at 72 percent. While fertilizer usage has remained relatively stable compared to nearly a decade ago (75 percent in 2016), pesticide use has increased significantly—rising by 13 percentage points since 2016. 2. The expansion of pesticide use is reflected in official data. In 2017, just over 500 pesticide products were registered; by 2024, this number had increased eightfold. Similarly, pesticide imports in 2023 were five times higher than in 2013. 3. Many agro-input retailers provide complementary services beyond product sales, offering services such as credit, agricultural extension advice, mechanization facilitation, transportation, crop buying, and emergency loans. These complementary services integrate them more deeply into agricultural value chains. 4. Only 12 percent of retailers provided none of the aforementioned complementary services, while 16 percent offered four or more. Competition is a driver of service provision—retailers located near competitors are more likely to offer extension and credit services. 5. Retailers in insecure areas are equally engaged in delivering complementary services as those in more secure regions. 6. Agro-input retailers are a vital source of credit, with nearly half of the farmers purchasing inputs on credit—typically at a monthly interest rate of 2 percent. Larger farmers are more likely than smaller ones to access credit through retailers. 7. Nearly half of the farmers reported receiving agricultural extension advice from their main retailer. This advice often pertains to retailer-sold products but can also address broader agronomic issues. Larger farmers are more likely to use these services than smaller ones. Given the limited availability of public extension services in Myanmar, agro-input retailers are an important, yet often overlooked, source of agricultural knowledge. 8. Despite their advisory role, farmers generally trust retailers’ advice less than other sources. Trust in agro-input retailers ranks below that in other farmers, public, and private extension agents, and only above trust in mills. Notably, medium and large farmers exhibit higher relative trust in retailers compared to smaller farmers. 9. Policy Implications: • The rapid increase in pesticide use by farmers in the country raises a number of health, safety, and environmental concerns, especially in a situation where oversight is limited given insecurity and travel concerns. • The decline in public agricultural service delivery, such as extension and credit, in the country also underscores the need for increased attention from stakeholders focused on agricultural productivity and equity. • While agro-input retailers play crucial, multifaceted roles, their services are not universally accessible. Over-reliance on private providers may risk marginalizing smaller farmers from critical services like credit. • The dependence on retailers for extension advice raises concerns about accessibility and credibility. Low trust in retailer-provided information may hinder behavior change and contribute to product misuse, especially regarding inputs with health and environmental risks like pesticides. • Further research is needed to understand the nature and impact of the advice given by private retailers. Complementary policy efforts—such as training, certification programs, and trust-building initiatives—may help enhance service quality and farmer confidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Goeb, Joseph & Minten, Bart & van Asselt, Joanna & Reardon, Thomas & Aung, Zin Wai & Htar, May Thet, 2025. "The emerging one-stop shop in agricultural value chains: Agro-input retailers in Myanmar," IFPRI working papers 70, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprwp:176165
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/10568/176165
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jayne, T. S. & Govereh, J. & Wanzala, M. & Demeke, M., 2003. "Fertilizer market development: a comparative analysis of Ethiopia, Kenya, and Zambia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 293-316, August.
    2. Fan, Shenggen, ed. & Otsuka, Keijiro, ed., 2021. "Agricultural development: New perspectives in a changing world: Synopsis," IFPRI synopses 9780896293854, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Rocco Macchiavello & Thomas Reardon & Timothy J. Richards, 2022. "Empirical Industrial Organization Economics to Analyze Developing Country Food Value Chains," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 193-220, October.
    4. Ben Belton & Ame Cho & Michael Hall & Bart Minten & Thomas Reardon, 2025. "Wholesalers and the transformation of Myanmar's maize value chains," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 125-153, March.
    5. Minten, Bart & Fang, Peixun & Naing, Phyo Thandar & Aung, Zin Wai & Ei Win, Hnin, 2024. "Farm commercialization: A transformation on hold or in reverse?," IFPRI book chapters, in: Myanmar’s agrifood system: Historical development, recent shocks, future opportunities, chapter 10, pages p. 245-27, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Christopher B. Barrett & Thomas Reardon & Johan Swinnen & David Zilberman, 2022. "Agri-food Value Chain Revolutions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(4), pages 1316-1377, December.
    7. Nilar Aung & Hoa‐Thi‐Minh Nguyen & Robert Sparrow, 2019. "The Impact of Credit Policy on Rice Production in Myanmar," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 426-451, June.
    8. Marcel Fafchamps & Bart Minten, 1999. "Relationships and traders in Madagascar," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(6), pages 1-35.
    9. Otsuka, Keijiro & Fan, Shenggen, 2021. "Agricultural development: New perspectives in a changing world," IFPRI books, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), number 9780896293830, enero-mar.
    10. Bell, Clive & Srinivasan, T N, 1989. "Interlinked Transactions in Rural Markets: An Empirical Study of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar and Punjab," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 51(1), pages 73-83, February.
    11. Jeffrey D. Michler & Steven Y. Wu, 2020. "Relational Contracts in Agriculture: Theory and Evidence," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 111-127, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gnangnon, Sena Kimm, 2026. "Effect of Agricultural Transformation on the Working Poverty in Developing Countries," EconStor Preprints 336730, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    2. Mac Clay, Pablo & Feeney, Roberto & Sellare, Jorge, 2024. "Technology-driven transformations in agri-food global value chains: The role of incumbent firms from a corporate venture capital perspective," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    3. repec:lic:licosd:28811 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Huang, Jikun & Shi, Pengfei, "undated". "IFAD Research Series 90: Rural Transformation, Income Growth and Poverty Reduction by Province in China in the Past Four Decades," IFAD Research Series 335374, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
    5. Keijiro Otsuka, 2021. "Changing Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity and Its Implications for Philippine Agriculture," Discussion Papers 2102, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
    6. Ambler, Kate & de Brauw, Alan & Herskowitz, Sylvan & Pulido, Cristhian, 2023. "Viewpoint: Finance needs of the agricultural midstream," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    7. Minten, Bart & Reardon, Thomas & Vandeplas, Anneleen, 2009. "Linking urban consumers and rural farmers in India: A comparison of traditional and modern food supply chains," IFPRI discussion papers 883, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Huang, Kainan & Cheng, Baodong & Chen, Moyu & Sheng, Yu, 2022. "Assessing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on China’s TFP growth: Evidence from region-level data in 2020," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 362-377.
    9. Palatnik, Ruslana Rachel & Freer, Mikhail & Levin, Mark & Golberg, Alexander & Zilberman, David, 2023. "Algae-Based Two-Stage Supply Chain with Co-Products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    10. Keijiro Otsuka, 2021. "Strategy for Transforming Indonesian Agriculture," Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(3), pages 321-341, September.
    11. Balisacan, Arsenio, 2022. "Competition, Antitrust, and Agricultural Development in Asia," MPRA Paper 112650, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Goeb, Joseph & San, Cho Cho & Belton, Ben & Synt, Nang Lun Kham & Aung, Nilar & Maredia, Mywish & Minten, Bart, 2025. "Traders and agri-food value chain resilience: the case of maize in Myanmar," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    13. Gina Porter & Fergus Lyon & Deborah Potts, 2007. "Market institutions and urban food supply in West and Southern Africa," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 7(2), pages 115-134, April.
    14. Sarah Ephrida Tione & Dorothy Nampanzira & Gloria Nalule & Olivier Kashongwe & Samson Pilanazo Katengeza, 2022. "Anthropogenic Land Use Change and Adoption of Climate Smart Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-29, November.
    15. Janvier D. Nkurunziza, 2005. "Reputation and Credit without Collateral in Africa`s Formal Banking," Economics Series Working Papers WPS/2005-02, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    16. Sanktjohanser, Anna & Hörner, Johannes, 2022. "Too Much of A Good Thing?," TSE Working Papers 22-1327, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    17. Shiferaw, Bekele A. & Obare, Gideon A. & Muricho, Geoffrey, 2006. "Rural institutions and producer organizations in imperfect markets: experiences from producer marketing groups in semi-arid eastern Kenya," CAPRi Working Papers 50066, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    18. Felipe Brugués, 2026. "Take the Goods and Run: Contracting Frictions and Market Power in Supply Chains," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 116(2), pages 582-626, February.
    19. Glauben Thomas & Svanidze Miranda, 2023. "Globaler Agrarhandel: robustes Sicherheitsnetz zur Reduktion von Hungerrisiken in Krisenzeiten," Wirtschaftsdienst, Sciendo, vol. 103(7), pages 491-499, July.
    20. Minten, Bart, 1999. "Infrastructure, Market Access, And Agricultural Prices: Evidence From Madagascar," MSSD Discussion Papers 100154, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    21. Yonas Alem & Mintewab Bezabih & Menale Kassie & Precious Zikhali, 2010. "Does fertilizer use respond to rainfall variability? Panel data evidence from Ethiopia," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(2), pages 165-175, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprwp:176165. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.