Impact of the Dzud Disaster on Nomadic Livestock Farming in Mongolia

Abstract

This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the socio-economic impacts of the 2023–2024 winter dzud on Mongolia’s nomadic livestock farming. A comprehensive impact assessment approach is proposed, including a social assessment of the dzud impact on farms, an analysis of pasture carrying capacity, and an economic assessment of direct and indirect losses to nomadic livestock farming. The study’s results for the five most affected aimags indicate that 63.3% of surveyed households suffered livestock losses, and the total economic damage, including the reduced value of pasture ecosystem services, reached 1.5–1.9 billion USD. Based on the grazing pressure analysis and expert survey results, overgrazing was identified as a key vulnerability factor. Priority adaptation policy measures were identified, including sustainable pasture resource management, including the use of traditional nomadic practices, and increased direct financial and social support for nomads. The findings have practical implications for policy development in regions with similar climate risks.

1. Introduction

The increasing impact of natural and anthropogenic factors on agriculture poses significant threats to the sustainability of nomadic livestock farming. These impacts lead to vegetation degradation, changes in the nature and duration of precipitation, livestock structure, and reduced household income, thereby impacting populations and ecosystems.

The winter disaster of dzud occurs in Mongolia, Kazakhstan, China and other countries, causing economic losses and social changes in nomadic society [1], so studying the causes and consequences of dzud is an important scientific task. Dzud is a Mongolian term for a natural disaster that results in the mass death of livestock and occurs both in winter and in spring.

Theoretical approaches to determining the natural and anthropogenic factors influencing the duration and frequency of dzuds have been reflected in the works of many researchers from Mongolia, Japan, the USA, Australia and other countries [2,3,4]. Several types of dzud are currently recognized, characterized by heavy snowfall, extreme temperature fluctuations, and the formation of ice crusts that restrict livestock access to forage [5]. Dzud events of varying duration, frequency, and intensity are recorded across Mongolia’s diverse natural zones, from the Gobi Desert in the south to the taiga in the north, with the affected area steadily expanding [6,7,8].

As noted by several scholars, the livelihoods of nomadic households in Mongolia are highly dependent on climatic conditions and the ecosystem services provided by their territories [9]. According to data from the Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Light Industry, the frequency of dzud events in Mongolia has increased over time [10]. While only three dzud events were recorded between 1950 and 1970, the number dropped to two between 1970 and 1990, but then rose sharply to six between 1990 and 2010 [11,12]. Analysis of the PRECIS climate model showed that extreme events (heatwaves, cold waves, droughts) will become more frequent throughout Mongolia [13].

Between 2000 and 2014, several aimags (first-level administrative units in Mongolia) experienced substantial livestock mortality, measured in ‘sheep units’ (SU): Uvurkhangai (6.3 million), Arkhangai (5.9 million), Zavkhan (5.2 million), Bayankhongor (4.3 million), Uvs (3.6 million), Dundgovi (3.4 million), Govi-Altai (2.9 million), and Umnugovi (2.2 million). In Mongolia, SU is used to standardize livestock numbers for comparison and resource management. These losses were driven by a combination of hazard factors (such as pasture shortages due to drought and deep snow) and vulnerability factors, including excessive livestock density and inadequate fodder reserves [14]. The 2009–2010 dzud resulted in significant livelihood losses and the displacement of rural residents, affecting 28% of Mongolia’s population [15]. Meat prices doubled, triggering inflation and further weakening an economy already strained by the 2008–2009 financial crisis [16]. In the aftermath, 45 out of 138 surveyed households abandoned livestock herding, with most relocating to urban or suburban areas [17]. Economic inequality among Mongolian households increased markedly, as indicated by the Gini coefficient rising from 0.46 to 0.61, with elevated inequality persisting for four years [18]. It also took four years for Mongolia’s total livestock population to recover from the 2009–2010 dzud [2].

Major socio-economic reforms influenced the conduct of traditional nomadic farming [19]. The system of government regulation in Mongolia underwent significant changes with the dismantling of agricultural collectives, a shift in land-use structures, an increase in livestock numbers, and intensified pasture overgrazing [20,21,22,23,24]. As the authors note [25], traditional practices are increasingly recognized as vital for the sustainable use of natural resources and conservation. We agree with the authors of the papers [22,26] that knowledge erosion, the declining applicability of old proven practices, and social (e.g., institutional) and environmental changes are significant drivers of changes in grazing practices and require changes in current policies. To mitigate environmental and anthropogenic risks, various measures have been implemented, including reproductive herd management, the use of winter shelters, the construction of livestock wells, and the preparation of feed reserves.

The natural resource potential and regenerative capacity of pastures and hayfields are critical determinants of the socio-economic development of nomadic livestock farming in Mongolia [27] and these properties also determine the economic losses of livestock breeders.

There are very few scientific works devoted to the assessment of the socio-economic consequences of the 2023–2024 dzud in Mongolia. Most of the studies are technical reports of international organizations (UNDP, UNOCHA, IFRC, etc.) [28,29,30]. Previous studies on the dzud disaster reflected the physical, geographical and climatic characteristics, precipitation dynamics, snow depth causing dzud processes, probabilistic changes under different development conditions, the current socio-economic state of the territory, and the results of surveys of local nomads [31,32,33].

Research gaps, in our opinion, are due to the lack of comprehensive theoretical justifications and assessments of the actual manifestation of the effects of the dzud disaster using statistical information, spatial climate data, and comprehensive sociological research.

The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the dzud disaster on nomadic livestock farming in Mongolia, changes in the environmental and socio-economic conditions of life, and the quality of life of the local population.

This study, using a unified methodological framework for the first time, explored the socioeconomic and environmental impacts of the dzud in five model territories of Mongolia most affected by the dzud during the winter period of 2023–2024, utilizing statistical analysis and expert assessment. This study, for the first time, provided direct and indirect economic estimates of losses to Mongolia’s nomadic economy and prioritized adaptation policy measures based on the opinions of the target groups. This enabled new results to be obtained, demonstrating the impact of the dzud disaster on the socioeconomic status of the population and comparing them with data from previous studies. This comprehensive sociological study provided an opportunity to obtain objective assessments of social and economic reality, the actual state of livelihoods of nomad farmers, and to identify priority adaptation policy measures from the perspective of the nomads themselves. This is an important step in the subsequent development of support programs for nomadic livestock farming. These findings have important implications for developing strategies to manage nomadic livelihoods and understanding how environmental and economic changes affect pastoralists’ well-being and what support measures are currently needed.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Design

We employed the research framework illustrated in Figure 1 to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the impact of dzud on nomadic households in Mongolia. This framework comprised five components:

• Analysis of the causes of dzud occurrence;
• Social assessment of dzud impacts on nomadic livestock farming;
• Evaluation of natural resource potential of specific territories and anthropogenic vulnerability factors;
• Economic assessment of dzud impacts on nomadic livestock farming;
• Identification of key adaptive policy measures based on the target group perspectives.

Our analysis of the causes of dzud was grounded in a review of the literature, statistical data analysis, and empirical validation through expert assessments. The contributing factors were classified into two categories: climatic and anthropogenic. Climatic factors included temperature fluctuations, the intensity and volume of precipitation, and the depth and density of snow cover. Anthropogenic factors encompassed shifts in herd composition, overgrazing, reduced pastoral mobility, and inadequate preparation for the winter season. The sources of climate analysis data were the National Statistics Office of Mongolia [34] and the National Remote Sensing Center [35].

Based on an analysis of the contributing factors and scale of dzud events, model territories with representative characteristics were selected for in-depth assessment. The three assessment components addressed distinct dimensions of the dzud impact on nomadic households and facilitated cross-verification of results, thereby strengthening the reliability of the findings.

The comprehensive sociological study included a survey of household surveys of nomadic livestock farmers and individual expert interviews. Given the vast territory of Mongolia with a low population density and the dispersion of nomadic livestock farming households over large distances of 10–30 km from each other, conducting a complete survey is almost impossible to organize due to the large expenditure of time and resources, therefore, a multistage sampling was used. At the first stage, model territories were selected; in the second stage, the most affected soums were selected (soums are the second-level administrative units in Mongolia) based on the proportion of livestock mortality reported by households; at the third stage, respondent nomadic households were selected using the snowball sampling method. The snowball sampling method is the most suitable approach [36,37], as nomads are geographically dispersed over significant distances, and their trust in external researchers can be undermined by the stress and losses they have experienced. Despite potential limitations, this method is the most appropriate, allowing for the collection of relevant data while building on the social capital of the community, as nomad farmers with trusting relationships are more likely to share relevant information. The sample used in the study incorporates territorial stratification and ensures representativeness.

Participation in the sociological survey is voluntary, as reflected in the questionnaire on the Yandex platform. The questionnaire for surveying nomadic households included questions divided into sections: daily practices of nomadic livestock farming; assessment of the frequency of adverse natural events; assessment of the challenges and problems of the 2023–2024 winter period and experience in overcoming them; immediate plans and prospects, the demand for various areas of support measures from society and the state to preserve and develop traditional nomadic livestock farming; and a “passport” (basic socio-demographic characteristics of respondents). To enhance the reliability of the collected information and the validity of the conclusions drawn from the nomadic survey, a structured questionnaire was administered to individual experts using targeted sampling based on high competence, knowledge of the specific problems of nomadic livelihoods, current trends, and challenges, relevant education and experience in areas closely related to the issue under consideration, and a willingness to participate in the study. The expert questionnaire included questions on the challenges faced by modern nomadic pastoralists and the measures necessary to overcome dzud and preserve and develop nomadic pastoralism. Quantitative data were analyzed using the MS Microsoft Excel statistical package to obtain descriptive and inferential statistics.

The evaluation of natural potential was based on an analysis of grazing pressure and pasture carrying capacity for each aimag. Extended periods during which actual grazing pressure surpassed normative grazing pressure contribute to pasture depletion and further land degradation. The following indicators and calculation methods were used:

Normative grazing pressure is the number of livestock that a pasture can sustainably support, measured in SU (data of General Agency for Land Administration and Management, Geodesy and Cartography of Mongolia [38]).

Actual grazing pressure represents the current livestock load on pastures, was also expressed in SU. Livestock numbers are converted into SU using the species-specific conversion coefficients adopted in Mongolia: horses—7 SU, cattle—6 SU, camels—5 SU, sheep—1 SU, goats—0.9 SU. Normative carrying capacity denotes the number of livestock that can sustainably graze on one hectare of pasture during the grazing season and is expressed in SU/ha. It is calculated by dividing the normative pressure by the total pasture area. Actual carrying capacity is an indicator showing the current livestock density per hectare, also in SU/ha. It is calculated by dividing the actual pressure by the pasture area.

The economic assessment included both direct and indirect losses on market and ecosystem approaches. Direct losses assessment calculated based on livestock mortality data and geometric mean market prices for products (meat, cashmere). Costs for livestock carcass disposal estimated at approximately 1000 tugriks (official currency of Mongolia) per animal in 2010 [39], were adjusted to 2024 values using deflator indices. Indirect damages included the decline in the value of pasture ecosystem services estimated on market-based approach. Statistical data on market prices of forage resources (hay) during the harvesting period (September–December 2023) were used. Data on actual pasture productivity (kg/ha) were obtained from the website of the General Agency for Land Administration and Management, Geodesy and Cartography of Mongolia.

For validation, we used R. Costanza’s global assessment value of pasture ecosystem services (67 USD/ha/year in 1994 prices) [40], determined on the basis of “willingness to pay” estimates for ecosystem services, adjusted to current prices using deflator indices. Prices in tugriks were converted to US dollars using the official exchange rate.

The identification of key directions for adaptive policy development based on feedback from the target group: nomadic farmers and experts.

An open-ended question was included in the questionnaire for nomadic households “In your opinion, what measures should be taken by society and the state to preserve and develop traditional nomadic livestock farming?” This allowed us to compile a list of proposals and expectations directly from traditional knowledge holders who had encountered the problem.

During individual interviews, experts also expressed their recommendations and assessed the effectiveness of various support measures.

The text responses received from nomadic livestock farmers were subjected to qualitative content analysis and categorization. All proposed measures being systematized into four main groups: economic instruments (E), regulatory and environmental measures (N), social instruments (S), public investments (I). Within each group, specific measures (15 in total) were identified, such as subsidies (E1), livestock management (N1), social protection (S1), construction of feed storage facilities (I1), and others.

To determine the priority, a quantitative analysis of the frequency of mentions of each of the categorized measures was carried out. The results were compared with the findings of the expert survey and the results of the socio-economic and ecological-economic assessments, ensuring data triangulation and the scientific validity of the final recommendations. This allowed us not only to identify the population’s expectations but also to support them with expert opinion and objective data on the condition of pastures and the extent of damage.

2.2. The Study Area

Mongolia is situated in the central part of East Asia and is characterized by a sharply continental climate, with harsh winters and dry, hot summers. The country covers a total area of 1,564,100 km², with a population of 3,457,500 as of 1 January 2024.

In 2022, Mongolia’s GDP at current prices was 16,810.9 million USD, with a per capita GDP of 5000 USD. The mining industry contributed 24% to GDP, while agriculture accounted for 13%. The country’s labor force totaled 1,180,500, with 24.9% employed in agriculture [34].

Historically, nomadic livestock farming has been the dominant sector of Mongolia’s economy. Traditionally, nomadic herders raise five types of livestock: horses, cattle, camels, sheep, and goats, with most pastoral activities organized at the family level. Between 1990 and 2023, the total livestock population increased 2.5-fold, reaching 64,681.9 thousand head (Figure 2).

Sheep farming is the leading branch of nomadic livestock farming. The sheep population at the end of 2023 was 29.4 million animals, accounting for 46% of the total livestock (Figure 3). Mongolian goats are good at fattening on pasture. The goat population is 24.6 million animals (38% of the livestock structure). Cattle (cows and yaks) and horse breeding in Mongolia are proceeding at a steady pace. There are over 5.3 million cattle and 4.8 million horses, accounting for 8% and 7% of the total livestock. The number and proportion of camels in the country are small—474,000 animals and 1%.

At the same time, the traditional herd structure is shifting towards a more ecologically detrimental composition, characterized by a predominance of goats and sheep. Whereas until the 1990s the ratio of sheep to goats was approximately 3:1, it has now approached the ratio of 1:1. Sheep and goats accounted for 84% of the total livestock population in 2023.

Following the transition to a market economy in the early 1990s, demand emerged under global market influences for Mongolian cashmere goats, valued for their high-quality undercoat used in cashmere production. Consequently, herders increased their cashmere goat populations. However, numerous studies highlighted that goats are the most environmentally detrimental livestock species [41,42]. Goats graze vegetation along with the roots, leading to decreased forage availability and prolonged recovery periods for pasture vegetation, which in turn disrupts natural ecosystem dynamics.

Each year, hundreds of thousands of livestock perish in Mongolia due to natural disasters, with dzud being the primary cause of mortality, as confirmed by Mongolian government statistics. The most significant livestock loss occurred in 2010, totaling 10.3 million head (Figure 4). That year, white dzud resulted in the deaths of approximately 5 million goats and 4.4 million sheep. Over the first four months of 2024, 7.4 million livestock perished due to severe climatic conditions, including nearly 4 million sheep and 2.4 million goats.

2.3. Model Research Territories

Given Mongolia’s vast territory, the diversity of natural and socio-economic conditions across its aimags, and the impracticality of conducting comprehensive surveys, it was necessary to identify model territories that exhibit typical characteristics. These territories facilitated detailed studies of the impact of dzud on households and the population. The selection criteria for model territories included the following indicators: frequency and duration of dzud events, environmental conditions, the socio-economic development level of each aimag (first level administrative subdivision of Mongolia), economic specialization (specifically livestock farming), growth in livestock numbers, livestock mortality rates, and patterns of population migration.

During the winter of 2023–2024, dzud affected 15 of Mongolia’s 21 aimags. The aimags most severely impacted were Sukhbaatar, Khentii, Arkhangai, Tuv, and Dornogovi. These five aimags accounted for 63.8% of the country’s total livestock losses (Figure 5).

Nomadic livestock farming is the predominant form of land use in Mongolia. Nomadic livestock farmers are the individuals whose primary occupation is livestock husbandry year-round and whose livelihoods depend primarily on income derived from livestock.

In 2023, the number of livestock farming households in Mongolia totaled 247,900 [34], all of which are nomadic [21]. From 1991 to 2023, the number of nomadic households declined by 14.2%, decreasing from 288,900 households in 1991 [34]. Currently, livestock farmers represent 20.8% of the population in Arkhangai, 10.0% in Dornogovi, 16.3% in Khentii, 23.7% in Sukhbaatar, and 20.6% in Tuv.

Agricultural production constitutes the largest share of average monthly income for rural households, accounting for 36.6% [34].

A distinctive feature of Mongolian households is the prevalence of extended family households, consisting of multiple generations living together. Under economically challenging conditions, family members pool resources and cohabit for mutual support. Elderly women are more likely to reside in extended family households (over 50%) compared to elderly men (over 40%) [43].

3. Results

3.1. Analysis of the Causes of Dzud Occurrence

The primary factors contributing to the occurrence of dzud in Mongolia are climatic variables such as humidity, snow, rainfall, wind, temperature fluctuations, and the formation of snow or ice crusts.

To illustrate temporal patterns, we present climate data on precipitation and minimum temperatures over a 20-year period, alongside snow depth and density data spanning three years.

Starting in November 2023, Mongolia experienced complex winter conditions. According to the National Statistics Office of Mongolia [34], precipitation in November 2023 amounted to 17.6 mm in Sukhbaatar aimag and 14.5 mm in Khentii aimag (Figure 6).

Data from the National Remote Sensing Center [35] indicate that, as of 1 November 2023, snow cover extended across most of the country, with depths reaching 25–30 cm. The proportion of snow-covered area was 90% in Sukhbaatar, 82% in Tuv, and 79% in Arkhangai aimag. Minimum temperatures in December 2023 dropped to −40.8 °C in Khentii and −35.5 °C in Tuv. By March, snow depth measured 25 cm in Sukhbaatar and 20 cm in Arkhangai, with snow density ranging from 0.30 to 0.42 g/cm³ (Figure 7;

Table 1. Snow cover height and density in Arkhangai, Dornogovi, Khentii, Sukhbaatar, and Tuv from January to March of 2022–2024.

	2022			2023			2024
	January	February	March	January	February	March	January	February	March
Arkhangai
Depth, cm	2	3	8	5	5	1	19	24	20
Density, g/cm3	0	0	0.16	0.22	0.2	0	0.29	0.33	0.3
Dornogovi
Depth, cm	1	3	1	3	3	0	12	15	10
Density, g/cm3	0.3	0.27	0	0.29	0.29	0	0.3	0.32	0.33
Khentii
Depth, cm	4	7	5	19	17	12	19	19	15
Density, g/cm3	0	0.13	0.16	0.25	0.28	0.21	0.3	0.31	0.35
Sukhbaatar
Depth, cm	5	8	7	11	13	0	24	26	25
Density, g/cm3	0.16	0.18	0.2	0.28	0.27	0	0.33	0.39	0.42
Tuv
Depth, cm	8	6	5	26	22	4	21	22	19
Density, g/cm3	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.3	0.32	0.25	0.28	0.29	0.32

).

The severity of the 2023–2024 winter conditions was corroborated by deviations in snow cover and minimum temperature indicators from the threshold values established for white dzud in the regulation of Government of Mongolia [44]. Specifically, these thresholds were defined as follows: snow density on pastures of 0.25 g/cm³; ten-day and monthly average air temperatures exceeding long-term averages (−26 °C in the southeast, between −14 °C and −24 °C in the south and central regions, and −30 °C in the northwest); average snow depths exceeding 25 cm in mountainous areas, 22 cm in steppe regions, and 12 cm in the Gobi Desert. The precursor conditions for the onset of white dzud include snow densities between 0.20 and 0.24 g/cm³ across any region, with snow depths exceeding 16 cm in high-altitude areas, 11 cm in steppe zones, and 5 cm in the Gobi Desert.

Large amounts of precipitation, extremely low winter temperatures, and deep and dense snow cover in January–March 2024 were the causes of a severe dzud in the winter of 2023–2024.

3.2. Social Impact Assessment of Dzud on Nomadic Livestock Farming

In May 2024, a comprehensive sociological study was conducted, including a survey of livestock breeder households and an individual survey of experts. A total of 90 of nomadic livestock farming households were surveyed, representing 3.2% of all households in the most severely affected soums within the model territories. The highest livestock losses in Arkhangai aimag were recorded in Erdenemandal soum (−36.3% of the herd), in Dornogovi—Zamyn-Uud (−71.8%), in Khentii—Bayanmunkh (−64.2%), in Sukhbaatar—Khalzan (−66.0%), and in Tuv—Lun (−42.0%). The total number of nomadic livestock farming households in these soums was 2836.

Household members themselves decided who would answer the questionnaire. Respondents chose to complete the questionnaire by hand or by typing it in. In total, 58.9% of men and 41.1% of women responded. The distribution of respondents by age (18–24 years old—7.8%; 25–34 years old—23.3%; 35–44 years old—26.7%; 45–54 years old—20.0%; 55–64 years old—13.3%; 65 years and older—8.9%) reproduces the trends reflected in the statistics (18–24 years old—10.2%; 25–34 years old—23.7%; 35–44 years old—25.3%; 45–54 years old—18.8%; 55–64 years old—13.3%; 65 years and older—8.7%).

During the survey, nomadic livestock farmers reflected on their experiences during the 2023–2024 winter season (

Table 2. Classification of nomads’ responses to the open-ended question: “What problems and consequences did you encounter this winter, and how did your family cope?”, %.

Response Categories	Overall by Model Aimag	Arkhangai	Dornogovi	Khentii	Sukhbaatar	Tuv
Natural-climatic factor, force majeure	71.1	70.6	78.9	63.6	93.3	52.9
Livestock mortality	63.3	35.3	63.2	59.1	100.0	64.7
Unforeseen expenses	52.2	64.7	21.1	77.3	40.0	52.9
Financial problems	15.6	11.8	10.5	9.1	26.7	23.5
Adaptation	18.9	41.2	31.6	9.1	0.0	11.8
Labor shortage	10.0	17.6	26.3	4.5	0.0	0.0

). The most common problems faced by nomads are severe natural and climatic factors (“increased dzud frequency”, “it was very difficult, there was a lot of snow” (71.1%). Livestock loss was noted by 63.3% of respondents. A significant proportion of respondents (52.2%) noted unforeseen expenses (“emergency purchases of fodder, medicines, and materials for constructing additional livestock shelters”). Practices of successful climate adaptation (“we prepared well for the winter”, “the livestock was ready”, and “fodder was purchased early, and we got through the winter successfully”) were reported by 18.9% of respondents. Financial problems (“debts on loans”, “no money to pay for loans”) affected 15.6% of respondents. Labor shortages were noted by 10% of respondents overall. Analysis of nomads’ responses by aimag demonstrates the greatest damage and difficult natural and climatic conditions in Sukhbaatar aimag, which is also confirmed by statistical data (Figure 5) and data characterizing extreme temperatures and snow cover in the model territories (Figure 6 and Table 1).

The nomads’ plans for the next 1–3 years reflected their intention to adopt adaptation strategies: 60.0% intended to stockpile or purchase fodder for their animals, and 15.6% planned to harvest hay or fodder for sale. Additionally, 43.3% aimed to maintain traditional practices, such as increasing livestock numbers. A notable proportion of nomads in Arkhangai (70.6%), Tuv (64.7%), and Sukhbaatar (46.7%) planned to seek alternative income sources, while 28.9% considered migration.

Overall, the survey results highlight the difficult conditions under which nomads sustain their livelihoods and underscore significant challenges to the continuation of traditional nomadic livestock farming. These conclusions supported by expert assessments.

The experts (n = 15) were highly qualified specialists who, by the nature of their activities, are closely related to agriculture (20.0%), science (20.0%), state and municipal administration (13.3%), industry (13.3%), education (13.3%), entrepreneurship (6.7%), public organizations (6.7%), protected areas (6.7%), distribution of experts by gender (53.3% men and 46.7% women); by age groups (25–34 years old—6.7%; 34–44 years old—20%; 45–54 years old—40%; 55–64 years old—26.7%; 65 years and older—6.7%). Most of the experts filled out questionnaires on the Yandex platform or filled out an electronic version of the questionnaire and sent it by e-mail. It was possible to organize meetings with several experts, at which important opinions and comments were received. Experts highlighted the key challenges faced by contemporary livestock farmers, many of which were linked to extreme weather events and natural disasters.

3.3. Evaluation of Natural Potential of the Territories and Anthropogenic Vulnerability Factors

Expert survey findings and data from 2000–2020 indicated a consistent decline in both the area and productivity of pasturelands in Mongolia, primarily driven by a sharp increase in livestock numbers and consequent overgrazing. According to the National Statistics Office of Mongolia [34], total pasture area decreased from 129.3 million hectares in 2000 to 104.6 million hectares in 2023—a 19% reduction. During the same period, the national livestock population more than doubled, rising from 30.2 million to 64.7 million head. Notably, even substantial livestock losses (up to 10 million head during severe dzud events) have failed to significantly reduce grazing pressure. As noted in [45], “potential carrying capacity of Mongolian pastures is estimated at an average of 47.1 million livestock units. However, as of 2021, the livestock population had reached 67.1 million head, exceeding the sustainable carrying capacity by 26.0%.”

To assess pasture carrying capacity (

Table 3. Assessment of pasture carrying capacity in the aimags of Mongolia.

Aimag	Pasture Area, ha	Normative Grazing Pressure, Thousand SU	Actual Grazing Pressure, Thousand SU	Undergrazing (+) or Overgrazing (−), Thousand SU	Normative Carrying Capacity, SU/ha	Actual Carrying Capacity, SU/ha	Surplus (+) or Deficit (−) of Pasture Carrying Capacity, SU/ha
Arkhangai	3,737,478	3435.8	11,122.8	−7687.0	0.92	2.98	−2.06
Dornogovi	9,087,156	6256.9	3987.4	+2269.5	0.69	0.44	+0.25
Khentii	5,008,113	4907.0	8458.3	−3551.3	0.98	1.69	−0.71
Sukhbaatar	7,668,543	6105.2	7489.1	−1383.9	0.80	0.98	−0.18
Tuv	5,162,131	6040.6	9125.4	−3084.8	1.17	1.77	−0.60

), normative carrying capacity and actual carrying capacity were calculated. According to the General Agency for Land Administration and Management, Geodesy and Cartography of Mongolia [38], the normative grazing pressure in the study aimags ranges from 3435.8 to 6256.9 thousand SU. The lowest actual grazing pressure was observed in Dornogovi aimag (3987.4 thousand SU), while the highest was in Arkhangai aimag (11,122.8 thousand SU).

Maximum overgrazing of livestock is observed in the Arkhangai aimag (7687.0 thousand SU). In four of the five study aimags (Arkhangai, Khentii, Sukhbaatar, and Tuv), actual carrying capacity exceeded normative carrying capacity. In contrast, Dornogovi aimag exhibited a surplus in pasture carrying capacity, capable of supporting an additional 0.25 SU per ha.

3.4. Economic Assessment of Dzud Consequences

Surveyed nomads identified livestock losses as their primary economic burden, but the overall impact of dzud is far more extensive. The economic assessment includes both direct losses: livestock mortality, reduced pasture productivity, damage to key production and non-production assets, depletion of feed reserves, and decreased outputs of meat, milk, wool, and cashmere. Additional expenses included veterinary care, increased production costs (e.g., feed purchases and carcass disposal), and reduced household income.

Indirect damages stem from disruptions in industries reliant on nomadic products. They included payments made during production halts, transportation losses, and lost profits, such as unrealized trade revenues and taxes from affected enterprises.

Direct production losses were estimated using the geometric mean of market prices for livestock (1 head of cattle, camel, sheep, goat) and cashmere (per kg) recorded in the aimags during the first and second quarters of 2024. The price of one hay bale (20–25 kg) ranged in Arkhangai aimag was 18,000 tugriks [46]; Dornogovi—12,000–14,000 tugriks [47]; Khentii—10,000–12,000 tugriks [48]; Sukhbaatar—7000–15,000 tugriks [49]; Tuv—12,500–15,000 tugriks [50]. The results of the economic assessment of damage from the 2023–2024 dzud in the model territories of Mongolia are presented in

Table 4. Economic assessment of damage from dzud in model aimags of Mongolia.

Aimag	Direct Product Losses (Meat, Cashmere), Thousand USD	Costs for Livestock Carcass Disposal, Thousand USD	Reduction in the Value of Pasture Ecosystem Services (Market-Based Approach), Thousand USD	Total Economic Damage, Thousand USD
Arkhangai	76,386.4–90,458.95	774.6	275,801.7	352,962.7–367,035.3
Dornogovi	44,873.0–56,386.26	534.0	202,578.8–236,341.9	247,451.8–292,728.1
Khentii	93,303.99–100,791.2	905.3	214,455.1–257,346.1	307,759.0–358,137.3
Sukhbaatar	124,543.7–159,848.8	1638.1	115,304.8–247,081.7	239,849.9–406,931.9
Tuv	54,290.33–54,709.6	595.9	329,999.4–395,999.3	384,289.7–450,708.9
Total	393,397.4–462,194.8	4448.0	1,138,139.8–1,412,570.7	1,532,313.1–1,875,541.5

Source: [46,47,48,49,50].

.

The maximum economic damage, including the reduced value of pasture ecosystem services, reached 384,289.7–450,708.9 thousand USD in Tuv aimag.

3.5. Priorities of Adaptation Policy

The livestock farmer survey identified the expectations and needs of nomadic households in Mongolia regarding adaptation measures to mitigate the socio-economic impacts of dzud and to enhance state support for nomadic livestock farming (Figure 8).

Over 60% of respondents emphasized the need for regulatory and economic interventions. Among these, the highest priority (accounting for more than 30% of responses) was assigned to controlling livestock populations in accordance with pasture carrying capacity and implementing selective breeding programs (N1). This indicated a clear recognition of the necessity for sustainable pasture resource management. Respondents corroborated the study’s findings that frequent dzud events and overgrazing constitute critical challenges; they acknowledged pasture degradation as a key issue and expressed support for measures aimed at livestock regulation and pasture restoration.

The second most frequently prioritized measure was social protection for nomadic livestock farmers (S1), cited by 22.2% of participants. Economic support mechanisms, including direct subsidies (E1) and various forms of preferential credit (E2, E3), were also strongly advocated. These responses underscored the social and financial vulnerabilities of nomadic households and highlighted the need for direct financial assistance, consistent with results from the socio-economic assessment and expert consultations. Additionally, respondents identified the dissemination of best practices and educational initiatives targeting youth as vital components for the sustainable development of nomadic livestock farming.

4. Discussion

The results of this study show that in conditions of increasing climatic extremes that cause dzud (air temperature and humidity, snow, rain, wind, temperature fluctuations, formation of snow or ice crust), the impact on nomadic livestock farming is determined by a complex of organizational and economic factors (transition from traditional nomadic migration patterns to a two-season system (winter and summer), changes in land use structure marked by a reduction in pastureland, and shifts in livestock composition, notably the predominance of sheep and goats).

In the context of increasingly frequent hazardous climate events, the impact of the key vulnerability factor we identified (overgrazing) is increasing, which is consistent with the findings of other researchers on the impact of this factor on livestock health and mortality in Mongolia [9,20,28,29,30,51,52,53]. The adaptation policy priorities we identified based on the opinions of target groups are reflected in international experience. The need to utilize traditional nomadic practices in response to increasing climate impacts has been demonstrated in numerous studies. For example, the Qashqai nomads (Iran) [54] have begun to reduce their livestock numbers by selling older animals, to establish new migration routes. In Pakistan [55] adaptive strategies include the cultivation of fruit trees and afforestation, which not only increase the population’s diet in the form of fruit and improve livestock forage, but are also considered a significant source of income. In southern Ethiopia [56] nomads use various traditional coping strategies, such as the creation of reserve pastures, seasonal herd mobility, herd division, division of pastures into wet and dry seasons, diversification of herd composition, mainly drought-resistant species (camels and goats), and the movement of animals to relatives and clan members to use territories remote from their permanent places of residence.

The study’s findings confirm that Mongolian nomadic households faced serious socioeconomic consequences following the winter dzud disaster of 2023–2024, key among them are unforeseen costs associated with the mass death of livestock, a decrease in the quality of life leading to the forced migration of livestock farmers.

Results of our study on the need to formulate an adaptation policy that integrates sustainable pasture management, financial support for livestock farmers, and the preservation of traditional nomadic practices, resonate with the international experience. Unlike abrupt natural disasters, such as earthquakes or tsunamis, dzuds are slow-onset events, offering sufficient time for preparedness and the implementation of effective disaster prevention and mitigation strategies.

A critical component of adaptive measures is the sustainable management of pasturelands through regulation of livestock numbers in accordance with pasture carrying capacity. This conclusion is consistent with prior research [55], which underscores that “effective management of open-range pastoral lands necessitates the development and implementation of pasture management plans incorporating seasonal and rotational grazing to prevent overgrazing”.

The strong demand for economic support mechanisms for nomadic pastoralism identified in this study was supported by prior research [57], which emphasized the importance of reducing interest rates on loans for livestock farmers. Furthermore, preserving traditional ecological knowledge through youth education and disseminating best practices was recognized as an effective strategy for supporting nomadic livestock farming. This was corroborated by [22], which asserted that “traditional ecological knowledge of herders is critical for developing locally adapted solutions.” Best practices integrating the traditional ecological knowledge of Mongolian nomads were documented in [58], encompassing rotational grazing, selection for livestock resilience, maintenance of optimal herd size and structure, and other related strategies. Similarly, other researchers [59] note the importance of incorporating traditional nomadic knowledge and participation in the development of adaptation policies to climate change.

This study has certain limitations, including a small sample size and potential selection bias associated with snowball sampling, which is most appropriate for post-disaster studies such as dzuds. The results are primarily focused on the model territories studied, which somewhat limits the generalizability of the findings to the entire national level. Future research could address these limitations by using larger samples and longer observation periods to further validate and expand on these findings. Consideration should also be given to a stratified sample that accounts for spatial, sociodemographic, and economic differences within the study population, which would enhance the overall validity and applicability of the results. Despite the sample limitations, the study identified key trends and issues, and the conclusions and recommendations are robust for the model territories studied in the context.

5. Conclusions

This study provided a comprehensive assessment of the impact of the 2023–2024 dzud on Mongolia’s nomadic livestock farming. It was found that the dzud disaster resulted in the death of 7.4 million livestock and caused losses of 1.5–1.9 billion USD. A sociological survey revealed that 63.3% of nomadic households experienced livestock losses. A key factor exacerbating the impact of the dzud disaster was systemic overgrazing, caused by a multiple increase in herd size in favor of sheep and goats, the most environmentally detrimental livestock species.

Pasture carrying capacity assessments show that the actual grazing pressure in four of the five aimags exceeds normative grazing pressure by 2–4 times, creating the ecological basis for the catastrophic consequences of a dzud, as confirmed by expert survey results. This excess is systemic and is associated with a sharp increase in livestock numbers (2.5 times from 1990 to 2023) while pasture area decreased by 19%. Traditional adaptation mechanisms, including seasonal migrations and maintaining a balanced herd structure, have been weakened as a result of the socioeconomic transformations of recent decades.

The priority adaptation measures identified by the pastoralists themselves demonstrate an awareness of the need for systemic change and are aimed at addressing the root causes of vulnerability. The most frequently mentioned measure was regulating livestock numbers according to grazing pressure (N1), indicating the nomads’ willingness to make unpopular but necessary decisions for long-term sustainability. The main support measures from the state should be the regulation of livestock numbers in accordance with the grazing load and selection work, social protection of nomads, subsidies and preferential financing, regulation of prices for livestock products. These priorities align with the strategic goals outlined in Mongolia’s Long-term Development Policy “VISION-2050”, which stipulates that Mongolia plans to become a leading country preserving its nomadic civilization.

As nomadic livestock farming in Mongolia faces growing threats from climate change and the transformation of traditional livelihoods, future research must prioritize the development of innovative strategies for managing nomadic grazing systems under escalating dzud-related risks.