Introduction

Recent trends in agricultural and rural development have shifted from centralized approaches toward participatory and multi-actor governance models. In this context, pluralistic governance, emphasizing the involvement of public institutions, private organizations, research centers, and local communities, has emerged as an important framework for improving agricultural extension systems. Accordingly, extension services are increasingly viewed not only as mechanisms for knowledge transfer but also as institutional arrangements that facilitate coordination, innovation, and stakeholder participation.
In Iran, the New Agricultural Extension System (NAES), introduced in 2016, sought to enhance extension effectiveness through decentralization, zoning mechanisms, and stronger local interactions. However, empirical evidence on how decentralization, pluralism, institutional linkages, and operational capacity jointly influence strategic outcomes remains limited. Therefore, this study aimed to explain the transition to pluralistic governance in theNAES by examining the mediating roles of pluralism, institutional linkages, and operational capacity in Mazandaran Province, Iran.

Materials and Methods
This applied, quantitative, and cross-sectional study employed a survey research design. The conceptual framework was developed based on the literature on extension governance and pluralistic advisory systems and comprised five latent constructs: decentralization, pluralism, institutional linkages, operational capacity, and strategic outcomes. The study population included agricultural extension experts, extension agents, and managers operating within the New Agricultural Extension System (NAES) in Mazandaran Province. A total of 305 respondents were selected using stratified random sampling with proportional allocation across the eastern, central, and western regions of the province.
Data were collected through a researcher-developed questionnaire measured on a five-point Likert scale. Content validity was confirmed by a panel of experts, while construct validity and reliability were assessed using confirmatory factor analysis, Cronbach’s alpha, and composite reliability measures. Data analysis was performed using SPSS26 for descriptive statistics and AMOS24 for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Model adequacy was evaluated using standard goodness-of-fit indices, and direct, indirect, and mediating effects were examined through bootstrapping procedures and confidence intervals.
Results and Discussion
The findings indicated that respondents perceived pluralism and institutional linkages at moderate to relatively high levels, whereas decentralization effectiveness and operational capacity—particularly regarding technical equipment, digital tools, and professional competencies—received lower ratings. The measurement model demonstrated satisfactory validity and reliability across all constructs.
Structural equation modeling revealed that decentralization had significant positive effects on pluralism (β = 0.698, p < 0.001) and operational capacity (β = 0.653, p < 0.001), thereby facilitating stakeholder participation and enhancing implementation capacity. Pluralism also exerted a significant positive effect on institutional linkages and fully mediated the relationship between decentralization and institutional linkages (indirect β = 0.352; 95% confidence interval excluding zero), indicating that stronger institutional collaboration depends on genuine multi-stakeholder engagement.
Operational capacity showed a significant direct effect on strategic outcomes and partially mediated the relationship between decentralization and strategic outcomes (indirect β = 0.261). In contrast, institutional linkages did not exhibit a significant direct effect on strategic outcomes, suggesting that formal organizational connections alone are insufficient without adequate operational and technical support at the local extension level. Overall, the proposed model explained 71% of the variance in strategic outcomes (R² = 0.71), demonstrating substantial explanatory power.
These findings suggest that the transition toward pluralistic governance in the New Agricultural Extension System requires not only structural reforms but also stronger operational capacities and effective stakeholder participation to achieve the intended strategic outcomes.
Conclusion

The findings indicate that the transition toward pluralistic governance in the New Agricultural Extension System extends beyond institutional restructuring and requires the simultaneous strengthening of decentralization, stakeholder participation, and operational capacity. Decentralization emerged as a key structural driver that enhances pluralistic interactions and improves implementation capacity, while its effectiveness depends on genuine delegation of authority and active involvement of local actors in extension processes.
The results further demonstrate that operational capacity plays a critical role in translating governance reforms into strategic outcomes. In particular, improving extension agents’ technical competencies, access to digital tools, and operational resources can enhance the effectiveness of the new extension system. By contrast, institutional linkages alone were insufficient to generate significant strategic outcomes, highlighting the need to complement formal collaboration mechanisms with adequate technical and organizational capacities.
Overall, the proposed structural model explained a substantial proportion of the variance in strategic outcomes (R² = 0.71) and provides empirical evidence on the mechanisms underlying the transition to pluralistic governance in agricultural extension. The findings suggest that policies aimed at improving extension performance should simultaneously promote decentralization, multi-stakeholder engagement, and capacity building to achieve more effective and adaptive extension systems in similar contexts.
Keywords
Decentralization; Pluralism; Operational Capacity; Institutional Linkages; Rural Development; Agricultural Extension