Fewer, Better Animals · Center for Policy ResearchCOP17 project details
Foreword1 · PUA2 · Lamb Fattening3 · Disease-Free Zones4 · Single-Point5 · Green Loans
COMPONENT 5

Green Loans (Both Sides)

A financial incentive to reduce livestock numbers and improve quality — on both the herder and processor side of the transaction

This component has two halves. The herder-side loan has been piloted and tested, with results reported below. The processor-side loan has not yet been tested — it is a proposed extension of the same financing logic, described using proposal language throughout.

16.2%
Herd reduction achieved by pilot herders — vs. 6% contracted target
98.8%
Loan repayment rate — confirming low credit risk
₮1.43B
Disbursed to 166 herder households across the 5-soum scale-up

The core problem

Herders keep expanding herd size because they fear that selling animals will cut their income — even though larger herds mean lower productivity per animal and greater exposure to dzud and drought. The missing piece is a real economic incentive to actually sell animals and reduce numbers. Ordinary commercial credit doesn't supply this: interest rates are too high, and no conventional loan product ties financing to a herd-reduction commitment.

This is the financing gap that sits underneath all four other components: PUA sets the pasture-carrying-capacity ceiling, but a herder still needs a reason and the capital to actually sell down to it. Green Loans supply both.

What it is

A below-market loan that herders receive in exchange for a contractual commitment to reduce their herd by a set share each year — 6% in the original Bayan-Ovoo pilot, 5% in the protected area buffer-zone scale-up. At least 60% of each loan must be invested in income-raising activities: improving animal quality and breeding stock, preparing fodder and hay, or repairing shelters.

Outreach and training — soum-wide sessions explain project goals, loan terms, and benefits
Application preparation — interested households prepare loan applications
Commitment contract — household signs a Pastureland Use Agreement setting the herd-reduction target
Loan disbursement — the local bank (State Bank or Khan Bank) disburses the concessional loan
Contract execution — household spends the loan and reduces herd to the contracted level via meat-market sales
Joint monitoring — soum government verifies herd-reduction progress on the ground
Year-end verification — the annual livestock census officially confirms the reduction
IndicatorTargetAchievedPerformance
Households under PUA45114218%
Herd reduction (SU)6%16.2%270%
Loan repayment rate98.8%Very high

Project herders vs. comparison group

IndicatorProjectComparison
Share of herd sold28.7%16.1%
Herd reduction (SU)−16.2%−3.6%
Avg. HH meat-sales income₮29.3M₮20.4M
Income per SU₮44.2K₮30.8K (+43.5%)

Under a project financed by Germany's KfW Development Bank, the model's buffer-zone revolving credit fund extended to five soums across three aimags. Borrowers reduced herds by 12.4% (sheep-units) while total herd numbers across those same soums rose 2.1–7.2% — direct evidence that borrowers cut numbers against the prevailing trend, not with it.

140 of 166 households (84.3%) fully met their contracted reduction target, and veterinary-certification rates among borrowers reached 21.5% — double the soum average.

Birth-to-death registration + herder app

This is a proposed addition to the verification approach used in the pilots — it has not yet been implemented or tested.

What the pilots verified: herd size reduced by 5% from the previous year's census, and the reduction occurred through livestock sales — not transfer to another herder. Together, these close the additionality and leakage gap for pilot results, but the underlying NSO census is a single annual snapshot based largely on oral reporting.

The proposed upgrade: a birth-to-death animal registry, combined with herder smartphone app reporting to a soum-level database, providing continuous, year-round verification.

This is the missing layer between a credible pilot result and a bankable carbon-credit claim: herd reduction evidenced continuously, with a real-time paper trail, rather than reconstructed once a year from herders' own year-end recollection.

This half of the model has not yet been piloted; it is designed as the demand-side counterpart to the herder-side loan, described here as a proposal.

The win-win mechanism

A soft working-capital loan for meat and cashmere processors, subsidized down from a market rate of roughly 17% to around 12% — required to be used specifically to purchase raw materials at Single-Point sites from herders meeting their reduction targets. In exchange, processors would offer an 8% quality premium on top of local market prices.

The 8% premium — three layers

  1. Interest subsidy pass-through (3%) — processors pass savings to PUA-compliant herders
  2. Quality and efficiency gain (3%) — professional examination captures value lost to mixed-lot trading
  3. Avoided informal-trader value loss (2%) — bypasses the 15–20% value loss typical of informal traders
Herders — access capital at below-market rates, convert herd size into productivity and cash
Lenders — a 98.8% repayment rate demonstrates genuinely low-risk lending, not a subsidized write-off
Pasture and land system — herd reduction that actually happens directly relieves overgrazing pressure
National policy — a domestic financing base (Livestock Head Tax) doesn't depend indefinitely on donor capital
Green Loans are the capital that makes the other four components move together, on both sides of the transaction — pays for the productivity investment PUA and Lamb Fattening depend on, and gives buyers a financial reason to source from participating herders at a premium.