Skip to main content

Vietnam: Leading Growth in Southeast Asia

Vietnam plans to become a modern and industrialized country by 2020 (Socio-Economic Development Plan, 2011). One hallmark of industrialized states is the extent of the manufacturing sector, and in particular, the share of medium and high technology value added within this sector (Amsden 2004, UNIDO 2010, CIEM 2010). Manufacturing generates externalities in technology development, skill creation and learning that are crucial for competitiveness. A cursory analysis of the share of medium and high technology activities in total manufacturing exports shows a positive correlation between the latter and economic development (UNIDO, 2011). Analyzing manufacturing exports allows for a better comparison across countries as the ability to participate in global markets illustrates the competitiveness of a country. Vietnam has benefited from a program of internal modernization, a transition from its agricultural base toward manufacturing and services, and a demographic dividend powered by its young population (MGI, 2012).

Vietnam’s manufacturing exports basket consists of resource-based and low tech manufactures such as oil, fisheries, textiles, footwear, etc. Competitiveness in these sectors relies on worker productivity and a large pool of cheap labor. In addition to low value added Vietnam’s export-oriented manufacturing activities rely almost exclusively on imported supplies, while the only local content provided is the work of low- or semi-skilled employees (CIEM, 2010). The share of medium to high tech activities in manufacturing value added is about 20% and in total manufacturing exports, 28% (UNIDO, 2011). By way of contrast, medium to high tech manufactures account for 80% of Japan’s total manufacturing exports, 60% of China’s and 62% of Thailand’s. This is where the new growth model needs to focus on[1]. Policy attention is needed in the supporting industries of emerging clusters of electronics and automotive sectors.

A new growth model requires a far reaching strategy that will propel Vietnam into the global value chain of medium to high technology sectors. Productivity deepening ought to define the new growth model envisioned in this paper. Productivity in the old model has been based on factor accumulation partly through heavy public investment and partly through labor migration. Given the extraordinarily rapid pace of economic development already achieved, it seems unlikely that Vietnam can continue to increase the contribution of productivity growth that has resulted from public investment and from migration from farm to factory. Moreover, the high levels of public investment are now unsustainable and are destabilizing the economy.

Instead, a surge in productivity within manufacturing and services will need to compensate. At present, however, Vietnam‘s industrial productivity growth is the slowest in the region, less than one percent per annum over the past decade. According to the McKinsey Global Institute, industrial productivity growth is slow for two reasons:
i)                    labor productivity growth is slow in labor intensive export industries like garments and shoes because sewing shirts and shoes is difficult to mechanize;
ii)                  state-dominated, inward-oriented industries are highly protected and inefficient. (MGI, 2012).

Defining Vietnam’s relative strengths in the global value chain of any product will involve a discovery process—in which private firms and the government learn about underlying costs and opportunities and engage in strategic coordination. This will help alleviate the first constraint to industrial productivity growth. A complementary rather than adversarial relationship between the state and the private sector will also be key if a productivity-led model is to take root in industry. Because addressing (ii) involves shutting down deadwood, we must be prepared to deal with the task ahead of time. In other words, reformers should be prepared to answer these questions: What is to be the strategy for engaging those threatened by reform? Can they be persuaded to support it? To what extent can/should their objections be overridden? Should they be compensated for their anticipated losses – and, if so, how and to what extent?

[1] Policy discussions on deepening medium to high technology manufacturing in the auto and electronics sector forthcoming.

Comments

Post a Comment

Constructive feedback is always welcome. Thank you

Popular posts from this blog

Unemployment by state in the USA

Below is a visualization of unemployment rates by county using a powerful Python library called Bokeh . The two maps are for the states of Texas and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. As the second largest economy in the United States (10th largest in the world), Texas shows interesting county variation in macroeconomic factors such as unemployment. According to Wikipedia , in 2015, Texas was home to six of the top 50 companies on the Fortune 500 list and 51 overall (third most after New York and California). The northern counties were least affected by the financial crisis of 2008/09. Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington area encompasses 13 counties which constitute the economic and cultural hub of the region commonly called North Texas or North Central Texas. Bokeh Plot The least affected counties in Massachusetts were the southernmost tourist areas of Nantuckett and Dukes County. The ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Modeling Core PCE inflation: A dual approach

Today's release of the August 2025 Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) inflation data drew widespread media attention, with coverage highlighting both the persistence of inflation and its implications for Federal Reserve policy. Across outlets, analysts pointed to resilient consumer spending and income growth as signs of underlying economic strength, even as inflation remains above the Fed's 2% target. The consensus among media reports is that while inflation is not worsening, its stubbornness continues to challenge policymakers navigating a softening labor market and evolving rate expectations. To provide deeper insights into inflation's trajectory, I've developed a forecasting framework that combines two econometric approaches — ARIMA time series modeling and Phillips Curve analysis—to predict Core PCE inflation. This analysis presents a unique opportunity to validate my forecasting methodology against eight months of 2025 data. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Malaysia at a Cross Roads: Diagnosing the Constraints to High Income Status

Malaysia at a Crossroads: Diagnosing Constraints to High-Income Status In 2008, Malaysia was recognized by the Growth Commission – a distinguished panel comprising 2 Nobel Prize Winning Economists and other leading development practitioners – as one of thirteen countries that sustained high growth in the post-war period. The 30-year stretch that caught the attention of the Growth Commission was between 1967 and 1997 when Malaysia grew at an average of 7.3% per year. This long stretch of growth was interrupted by periods of external shocks including the Volcker shock of 1986, the Asian Financial crisis in 1997/8, later the so-called Dot Com Bubble of 2001, and more recently the Global Financial Crisis of 2008. Despite these shocks, Malaysia remained resilient - formally earning the title "Upper Middle Income Country" in 1992. (See summary figure that breaks down the country's per capita growth story). As...
2 comments
Read more