In the past few years, capacities in EAS to perform their traditional roles such as training and communication of technical information have eroded. Meanwhile, the extension landscape has become increasingly pluralistic with greater participation of the private sector. All these warrant new knowledge, skills, and expertise among EAS providers.

The Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services (GFRAS) has articulated a new vision for Extension and Advisory Services (EAS) within the Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS). This vision articulated in its position paper, called “New Extensionist”, argues for an expanded role for EAS (Box 1) within AIS and development of new capacities at different levels. The motive behind the development of ‘New Extensionist’ comes from the realisation that the existing EAS need new capacities to respond effectively to the emerging challenges in agricultural development (declining water availability, increasing soil degradation, and changing and uncertain climate and markets). In the past few years, capacities in EAS to perform their traditional roles such as training and communication of technical information have eroded. Meanwhile, the extension landscape has become increasingly pluralistic with greater participation of the private sector. All these warrant new knowledge, skills, and expertise among EAS providers.

Following the publication of the New Extensionist, the GFRAS Consortium on Education and Training collected existing curricula used in different countries, conducted an analysis of the competencies that the curricula focused on and organised consultations with experts to identify the core competencies needed in extension today. The experts then agreed on a listing of core competencies that the New Extensionist professional should have. This brief has these details.

This FAO learning module is part of a series designed to strengthen Capacity Development (CD) in agricultural and development programming. It provides practical guidance, processes, and tools to help practitioners incorporate effective capacity-focused strategies into projects and programmes. The content supports FAO staff, partners, and stakeholders in assessing existing capacities, identifying gaps, setting clear objectives, and designing interventions that enhance sustainable capacities at the individual, organizational, and systemic levels. The module emphasizes engagement with national and local actors, context analysis, participatory design, and monitoring of capacity outcomes — all aimed at improving long-term development results.

The Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services (GFRAS) has articulated a new vision for Extension and Advisory Services (EAS) within the Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS). This vision, articulated in its position paper, called The “New Extensionist”, argues for an expanded role for EAS (Box 1) within AIS and development of new capacities at different levels. The motive behind the development of The “New Extensionist” comes from the realisation that the existing EAS needs new capacities to respond effectively to the emerging challenges in agricultural development (declining water availability, increasing soil degradation, and changing and uncertain climate and markets). In the past few years, EAS’ capacities to perform their traditional roles, such as training and communication of technical information, have eroded. Meanwhile, the extension landscape has become increasingly pluralistic with greater participation of the private sector.

A recent study undertaken in the Maldives investigated agricultural stakeholders’ views on capacity building towards sustainable agriculture. In this study, the views of 373 stakeholders were analysed and coded. Ten codes emerged from the data analysis, two of which are the subject for discussion in this paper. The first of the two codes examined stakeholders’ understanding of the term ‘sustainable agriculture’ and, the second code examined understanding of the term ‘building capacity in agriculture’. The two codes revealed a converging view amongst farmers that agricultural sustainability was inextricably linked to profitability. This was underpinned by increased production capacity fuelled by enhanced access to inputs and markets. Farmers further noted that the best vehicle through which capacity building towards profitability could be achieved was that of individualistic farming activity, either as sole farmers or family farming units. Conversely, the study noted that institutional agricultural capacity building interventions had a softer focus on profitability. Such interventions generally concentrated on improving islanders’ livelihoods and building food security through the establishment of collective producer and marketing cooperatives. This paper examines why intervention slippages occurred and suggests their recalibration in favour of assisting individualistic farming units in building capacity towards profitability and agricultural sustainability.