According to Vo Tri Thanh, President of the Institute for Brand and Competition Strategy Research, Vietnam has witnessed a wave of profound reforms over the past six months, marking revolutionary steps in the country’s development policy formulation.
Vietnam has enacted a “quadruple pillar” of important resolutions. These include Resolution 57-NQ/TW on innovation, Resolution 59-NQ/TW on international integration, Resolution 66-NQ/TW on legal perfection, and Resolution 68-NQ/TW on private sector development, all issued by the Political Bureau.
POLICIES HAVE FOCUSED ON THE “SUPPLY SIDE” AND NOT GIVEN DUE IMPORTANCE TO THE “DEMAND SIDE”
In addition to providing tax, fee, and capital support to businesses, these pillar resolutions also signal a clear shift in the thinking of the Vietnamese government, from mere support to proactively creating an ecosystem for innovation, digital transformation, and knowledge-based economic growth.
Resolution 68 affirms the private sector as the vanguard of innovation and national development. Providing a more detailed analysis of Resolution 68, Mr. Thanh identified the core policy groups. Firstly, creating a transparent, competitive, and conducive business environment is essential. This foundation enables businesses to thrive based on their strengths, creativity, and efficiency, rather than relying on connections or a culture of favoritism.
Additionally, Resolution 68 introduces policies aimed at improving the interaction between the state and businesses, shifting the focus to serving rather than controlling. This implies minimizing unnecessary administrative interventions, avoiding the criminalization of business activities, and reducing transaction costs—long-standing obstacles for the private sector.
“We tend to focus on the supply side, which means supporting businesses with capital, technology, resources, and skilled labor, even attracting talent. But the demand side – the market where businesses and consumers interact – has not received adequate attention,” said Vo Tri Thanh, President of the Institute for Brand and Competition Strategy Research.
Comprehensive support policies are in place, ranging from household businesses, startups, small and medium-sized enterprises to pioneering businesses. They are all embedded within an innovative ecosystem, with clear and practical incentive mechanisms.
Notably, the utilization of the state budget has also transformed towards flexibility and risk acceptance. “This new mindset aims to encourage technological initiatives, support startups and small and medium-sized enterprises, as well as market-leading corporations,” said Vo Tri Thanh.
However, the President of the Institute for Brand and Competition Strategy Research also emphasized an issue: while the policies have made breakthroughs, they are still “not truly comprehensive, especially from the demand perspective.” He explained that the demand aspect involves creating incentives and conditions to promote technology application and digital transformation. “We tend to focus on the supply side, which means supporting businesses with capital, technology, resources, and skilled labor. But the demand side – the market where businesses and consumers interact – has not been given due importance,” he added.
PROPOSING FOUR POLICY GROUPS TO CREATE MARKET INCENTIVES
The expert shared proposals and initiatives to create pressure and incentives from the demand side to boost the supply side’s development. Accordingly, four policy groups from the demand side need attention.
The first policy group is to create a competitive, equitable, and transparent business environment. Competition, according to Mr. Thanh, is the core driver that stimulates technology demand.
In the digital world, competition occurs not only in the physical world with products, services, or finances but also in the digital space with complex platforms. Dispute handling in the digital realm is far more challenging than in traditional business due to data, privacy, personal and organizational ownership, and cross-border data flow considerations.

Moreover, in the digital environment, the “winner takes all” phenomenon makes it easier for large enterprises to dominate small and medium-sized enterprises, challenging the maintenance of a fair competitive environment. Therefore, Mr. Vo Tri Thanh emphasized that building appropriate institutions, laws, and economic governance is vital.
The second policy group is to expand the market to stimulate demand. One effective approach is through public procurement. However, the issue lies not only in the process but also in creating advantages through scale. He also mentioned the case of building a digital technology market for government agencies, with a particular focus on supporting small and medium-sized enterprises.
While many agencies have started implementing this, the policy faces challenges when put into practice due to regulations related to bidding and public spending, resulting in less-than-expected outcomes. Therefore, government procurement policies should concentrate on scale and substance to enable businesses to invest and grow.
The third policy group is to connect supply and demand, especially supporting startups and small and medium-sized enterprises. “Many startups have creative ideas but lack a market. In addition to public procurement, support from successful market players, such as mentors, venture capital funds, or angel investors, is necessary,” said the President of the Institute for Brand and Competition Strategy Research.
Establishing entrepreneurial universities not only aligns with the spirit of Resolution 57-NQ/TW on the national innovation ecosystem but also encourages businesses to participate directly, from investing to collaborating with universities to foster technology development and creativity.
These entities understand not just the value of technology but also grasp the pace of growth and market demands. Supporting startups and small and medium-sized enterprises through professional investment funds, flexible market mechanisms, and a willingness to take risks will create a strong incentive to connect supply and demand.
The fourth policy group is to build an innovative ecosystem, with universities playing a crucial role. Recently, Ho Chi Minh City has been promoting the “entrepreneurial university” model to boost innovation and connect education, research, and socio-economic realities. City Chairman Phan Van Mai proposed selecting 5-6 universities (including both public and non-public institutions) to pilot the “entrepreneurial university” model.
“This advanced university model is not just about education or research but also about research commercialization, creating an ecosystem for startups, and bringing real value to economic growth,” said Vo Tri Thanh. Globally, institutions like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have generated tens of billions of dollars from startups.
In Vietnam, establishing entrepreneurial universities aligns with the spirit of Resolution 57-NQ/TW on the national innovation ecosystem and encourages businesses to participate directly, from investing to collaborating with universities to foster technology development and creativity. This approach also paves the way for Vietnam to create its own “MIT-like” institutions and nurture future tech giants.
More importantly, the core of the current reform strategy is not just about technology, growth, or profit but about enhancing the quality of life and happiness of the people.
“Even as we focus on technology, growth, and profit, the ultimate goal is human happiness. Technology and innovation must serve to improve lives,” the expert emphasized.
“Eximbank Takes Charge: Addressing Administrative Violations in Gold Trading Operations”
“Following the State Bank of Vietnam’s conclusion regarding compliance with policies and laws in gold trading activities, Eximbank has pledged to address the issue with utmost seriousness, openness, and transparency throughout the remediation process.”
“Underutilized Potential: Rediscovering the Role of Logistics Hubs in Streamlining Transportation Networks.”
With 69 logistics centers spread across the nation, the potential for a comprehensive network is yet to be realized. The advantages of such a model are vast, but they remain untapped. To fully harness the power of these centers, a strategic approach is necessary, involving policies, resources, and technological advancements that will propel the development of a robust and interconnected logistics network.