Evaluating a safe pesticide use training programme

What is shaping chemical

Chemical and specialty materials companies sell to formulators, manufacturers and procurement teams who need technical support, consistency and safe handling as much as price.

• Technical service is a key reason buyers stay
• Procurement teams compare total cost, not just price
• Safety and regulatory compliance shape supplier choice

An agrochemical company’s stewardship team, working in Andhra Pradesh & Maharashtra. Client identity is withheld to protect confidentiality.

Organisation

An agrochemical company’s stewardship team

Sector

Chemical

Team engaged

Market Research

Services

Government research, Quantitative research, Offline data collection

The company trained farmers on safe handling and spraying but did not know whether practices changed in the field.

• Deliver on the brief: evaluating a safe pesticide use training programme.
• Understand the views, needs and behaviour of farmers.
• Measure how widespread each pattern is, and explain the reasons behind it.
• Give the client evidence it can act on within 8 weeks.

The work focused on 1,200 farmers.

• farmers1,200

Audiences we typically reach in chemical

Formulators and R&D teamsProcurement managersPlant and production headsDistributorsSafety officers

Coverage: Andhra Pradesh & Maharashtra. Market: India.

• India

A mixed-method design: structured research measured how widespread each pattern was, and qualitative conversations explained why.

1. 1Brief
2. 2Farmer survey with observation
3. 3Comparison group
4. 4Insight

We surveyed trained and untrained farmers about protective equipment, mixing, spraying and container disposal, and observed spraying practices on a sample of farms.

Government researchQuantitative researchOffline data collection

farmers

1,200

• Respondents were selected across Andhra Pradesh & Maharashtra using quotas set in advance for each location and respondent type, so no single area or group dominated.
• Qualitative participants were recruited purposively to cover the full range of experiences that mattered, rather than for statistical representation.

• Trained local-language interviewers conducted interviews in person, supervised in the field.
• Interviews and discussions were led by experienced moderators using a guide agreed with the client.
• Auditors and mystery shoppers followed a standard checklist, recording evidence at each visit.

• Back-checks on a share of completed interviews
• Time and location checks on field interviews
• Supervisor accompaniment in the field
• Recordings and transcripts for every session
• Re-screening of qualitative recruits
• Photo or document evidence for audit points
• Second-reviewer checks on scores
• Logic and range checks on the final data
• Work carried out under our ISO 20252 quality procedures

• Cross-tabulation by key groups and locations
• Significance testing on the differences that mattered
• Thematic coding of interviews and discussions
• Journey and decision mapping

• Trained farmers were more likely to use gloves and masks, but container disposal practices rarely changed.

Observation showed gaps that self-reported answers overstated.

• Build on the core insight: observation showed gaps that self-reported answers overstated.
• Focus effort where the evidence was strongest: trained farmers were more likely to use gloves and masks, but container disposal practices rarely changed.
• Re-measure after the changes to confirm the effect.

• The company added a container collection scheme to its programme.

What changed in the business as a result of the work. Impact is described qualitatively.

• Insight report and management presentation
• Cleaned data file and data tables
• Evaluation findings with programme recommendations

• Repeat the measure after changes are in place to track progress.
• A natural follow-on question: why do formulators choose one supplier over another?