Status of Extension and Advisory Services in the Crop Sector of Mongolia
Erdenebolor Baast *
Association for Sustainable Rural Development, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Nyamgerel Bartseren
Mongolian University of Life Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Aims: To assess the current status of extension and advisory services (EAS) in Mongolia’s crop sector by mapping the institutional and policy landscape, characterising the services and capacities of providers, analysing farmers’ access to and satisfaction with services, and identifying systemic challenges, opportunities, and policy options.
Study Design: A mixed-methods study combining documentary research, key informant consultations, and two anonymous structured surveys, interpreted through the “best-fit” framework for agricultural advisory services.
Place and Duration of Study: Mongolia, covering all 21 aimags (provinces) and Ulaanbaatar, in early 2024, under the AFACI-funded Improvement of Rural Agricultural Technology Extension System in Asia (RATES) project.
Methodology: Online surveys of 72 EAS providers and 290 farmers were combined with documentary analysis and consultations with national and local institutions.
Results: Mongolia’s EAS has evolved into a pluralistic landscape comprising public agencies, research institutions, farmer associations, private enterprises, and development partners, though systematic coordination remains limited. The public system extends from the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Light Industry through departments in 21 provinces to divisions in 330 districts, with approximately 370 extension staff positions, many of which remain vacant. Among farmers, 58% receive professional advice once a year or less, 90% desire more frequent engagement, and 53% rate system performance as poor. Providers identify financial constraints, lack of equipment, and insufficient training facilities as primary limitations, rather than lack of expertise or motivation. Five interconnected challenges emerge: insufficient human resources, inadequate financing, weak coordination, limited research–extension integration, and gaps in service coverage and content.
Conclusion: Strengthening EAS requires institutionalising extension in the forthcoming Law on Agriculture, reinforcing the coordinating mandate of the Research and Development Centre, filling vacant positions, securing stable financing, rebuilding research–extension linkages, and expanding digital advisory platforms and farmer-association delivery channels.
Keywords: Agricultural extension, advisory services, crop sector, Mongolia, pluralistic extension system, farmer survey, institutional analysis, AFACI, RATES.