Agriculture and environment sectors struggle to attract students

The 2026 university admissions season shows that while programs related to technology, data, artificial intelligence and the digital economy are becoming increasingly attractive, many essential fields in agriculture, natural resources and the environment continue to struggle to attract students, particularly high-achieving ones.

The disparity is clearly reflected in admission scores. At the Viet Nam National University of Agriculture, the 2026 admission score for the Agriculture and Landscape, Animal Husbandry, Veterinary Medicine and Fisheries, and Environmental Science groups was 16 points based on high school graduation exam results. Meanwhile, Technology Education required 24.41 points, Electrical Engineering, Electronics and Automation 22 points, Tourism 21.3 points, and Logistics 21 points.

At Hanoi University of Natural Resources and Environment, many programs in climate science, hydrology, environmental science, geology, surveying, water resources and marine resources had admission scores of 15 points. By contrast, Logistics required 23.75 points, Marketing 23 points, and Business Administration 22.85 points.

The paradox is not about workforce demand

According to Prof. Tran Van Chu, former Rector of the Viet Nam National University of Forestry, the fact that many programs have low admission scores while agriculture is rapidly shifting toward high-tech production, digital transformation and a green economy is “a paradox of signals, not a paradox of demand.”

The demand for strategic human resources is real, but it has yet to become a sufficiently specific, attractive and reliable “career contract” for prospective students. According to him, the situation stems from four “lags”: awareness, the labor market, training programs and policy.

The first is a lag in awareness. Modern agriculture is increasingly associated with big data, sensors, automation, biotechnology, GIS, remote sensing, traceability, supply chain management and carbon markets. However, many people still perceive agriculture as physically demanding manual work in fields, forests or areas far from urban centers.

Although demand for workers is real, it remains fragmented, and recruitment signals are not yet strong enough. Emerging positions such as farm data engineers, ESG specialists, cold-chain managers, GIS and remote-sensing experts, emissions inventory specialists, and carbon credit managers may lead students to choose information technology, logistics, or business programs instead of agriculture, forestry, or natural resources.

Another factor lies in training programs. According to Prof. Tran Van Chu, many universities refer to smart agriculture, digital transformation and the green economy, but have yet to demonstrate these concepts through laboratories, real-world data, industry-based semesters, field projects and clearly defined career opportunities.

Simply renaming programs or adding a few technology-related courses without changing the learning experience is unlikely to improve students’ confidence.

Enrollment figures show that the issue goes beyond admission scores. Prof. Tran Van Chu cited 2025 data showing that the Viet Nam National University of Forestry offered 65 places for its Silviculture program, but only 21 students enrolled, equivalent to around 32%. The Animal Husbandry program had 30 places but attracted no students.

By contrast, 185/190 places in Logistics were filled, equivalent to more than 97%, while the Accounting program enrolled 204 students for 200 available places. Even within the same university, enrollment rates can vary significantly when students have a clearer understanding of career prospects.

According to Prof. Tran Van Chu, in 2023, agriculture, forestry and fisheries accounted for only around 0.86% of nearly 547,000 university entrants, equivalent to approximately 4,700 students.

This represents a structural imbalance rather than a challenge confined to a particular university or admissions season.

Policy lag also contributes to this gap. Society needs human resources for food security, land, forests, water resources, disaster prevention and climate change adaptation, but scholarships, commissioned training programs, internship support, starting salaries and professional allowances have yet to fully reflect the essential nature of these jobs.

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Cong Tiep, Deputy Director of the Viet Nam National University of Agriculture, also said the issue needs to be viewed objectively and comprehensively. Admission scores are an important indicator, but they are not the sole measure of the quality of a training program or the workforce it produces in the future.

According to Tiep, Viet Nam’s agriculture is rapidly shifting from traditional production toward high-tech, digital, green and circular agriculture, as well as value chain-based production. Therefore, graduates in these fields will not be limited to working on farms or directly engaging in production.

Career opportunities have expanded into technology companies, agribusinesses, food corporations, logistics, agricultural trade, quality management, veterinary services, fisheries, landscape design and management, as well as research and technology transfer. These sectors offer substantial room for employment growth.

Low admission scores are not a “verdict” on uality

When essential fields struggle to attract high-achieving students, concerns about the quality of the future workforce are inevitable. However, according to Prof. Tran Van Chu, the relationship between admission scores and graduate quality needs to be viewed with caution.

“Admission scores are an initial condition, not destiny, but neither are they meaningless,” Chu said. There are legitimate grounds for concern, he noted, but it would be wrong to mechanically conclude that admission scores of 15-16 points will inevitably produce a low-quality workforce.

The admission cutoff is the score of the last candidate admitted, not the average score of all enrolled students. It is also influenced by enrollment quotas, applicants’ preferences, admission methods, priority policies, as well as the university’s location and reputation. Therefore, a program with few applicants may have a cutoff of 15 points despite offering a strong curriculum, while a program with a high cutoff does not necessarily produce graduates of corresponding quality.

Nevertheless, the fact that many programs have cutoffs of just 15-16 points remains a warning about the depth of their applicant pool. More concerning is the actual number of students who enroll. In 2025, the Crop Science program at the Vietnam National University of Forestry enrolled only nine students out of 30 available places.

If such small class sizes persist, the consequences could affect teaching staff, laboratories, practical training facilities and the overall academic environment.

According to Prof. Tran Van Chu, persistently low admission scores may first lead to disparities in students’ foundations in mathematics, natural sciences, foreign languages and data skills, all of which are core competencies for precision agriculture, GIS, remote sensing, climate modeling and biotechnology and natural resource management.

More concerningly, pressure to maintain enrollment and revenue could lead to less rigorous assessment, reduced practical training or weaker selection standards. According to Chu, quality does not decline simply because students are admitted with scores of 15-16 points; rather, it declines when training institutions lower their standards to accommodate the academic profile of incoming students.

A prolonged shortage of high-achieving students could also weaken the competitive academic environment, research capacity, and pipeline of postgraduate talent in fields such as forestry, meteorology, hydrology, and soil science.

Thus, the human resource gap is reflected not only in the number of applicants or admission scores, but also in the attractiveness of these careers to young people. Solutions ranging from admissions and training to policies for attracting talent will require further attention.