Do not engage in "face engineering" for pesticide packaging

Not long ago, the Industry and Commerce Bureau of Yuanping City, Shanxi Province, in examining the agricultural capital market, discovered that some pesticides that were packaged very beautifully were placed on the counters of rural supply and marketing cooperatives. When a farmer who came here to buy pesticides was asked to like not to like this type of packaging, he did not expect him to be very disgusted with it. He said that such a package must be thrown away and it is worth noting that this money is worth it. He hopes that pesticide companies will do less "face engineering" on packaging. This situation does not exist only in Shanxi.

According to the author's understanding, over-packaging of agricultural materials has become a trend, and some pesticides are being packaged in a modest approach to luxury. Printing has also become increasingly gentrified.

Why are pesticide manufacturers facing the rural market keen to over-packaging? Some industry analysts believe that there are many domestic pesticide companies and the market is fierce. In order to make products “eye-catching” in the market, the advertising effect of products “out of the blue” will be triggered, and the trend of mutual comparison will intensify. In addition, the packaging is a good thing on the facade. In the same way as selling products, my packaging looks good to allow farmers to remember and expand their influence, so manufacturers are happy.

Excessive packaging of agricultural materials is not a good thing. It does not say that garbage has increased environmental pollution. What is more serious is that farmers spend money.

In recent years, overburdened peasants have become the focus of attention across the country. To this end, the state has adopted various measures to reduce the burden on peasants. While efforts are being made throughout the country to reduce the burden on peasants, over-packing of agricultural materials is counter-trend, and people cannot but feel angry. Reducing the burden on peasants requires joint efforts from all quarters. In particular, agricultural-funded enterprises that have a direct and indirect relationship with agriculture should give more tangible benefits to farmers, and they should not just “face up” the so-called effort.