Rethinking city classification system in Vietnam: Towards urban sustainability and people-centered development

VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
Original Article  
Rethinking City Classification System in Vietnam: Towards  
Urban Sustainability and People-Centered Development  
Le Minh Son*  
Vietnam Institute for Development Planning Strategies, Ministry of Planning and Investment,  
65 Van Mieu, Hanoi, Vietnam  
Received 12 May 2020  
Revised 09 June 2020; Accepted 15 June 2020  
Abstract: This paper presents an original attempt to bring forward extended perspectives about the  
City Classification System (CCS) in Vietnam. For many years, the CCS has played a central role  
the development of Vietnam national urban system as well as a motivating guideline for individual  
cities. However, (1) aspects of sustainable urban development are underrepresented among the CCS  
indicators and (2) the CCS remains a top-down, rigid policy which takes away much of the local  
development context and their developmental challenges. It is argued that Vietnam CCS needs  
adjusting to better reflect the multi-dimensional nature of urban development process (especially  
sustainability) and to better comprehend people-oriented, local development.  
Keywords: City classification system; development; people-centered; urban policy; urban  
sustainability.  
interchangeably) has expanded rapidly. In 2009,  
there were 731 cities nationwide, by 2019, the  
number of cities has increased to 833, in which  
class I cities (top of the hierarchy) increased  
from 05 to 20 (Table 2).  
1. Introduction  
Among the East and South East Asian  
countries, Vietnam is a relatively late comer but  
also one of the fastest transforming, in its urban  
transition. While in 1990, only 19.5% (12.8  
million) of the country's population were  
classified as urban, by 2018 urban population  
already accounted for 35.7% (33.8 million) of  
national population (GSO [1], see Appendix A).  
The system of cities (or urban system,  
The active, conducting role in facilitating  
and promoting urban growth in Vietnam has  
been attributed to the Vietnamese party-state,  
particularly since 1986 economic reform when  
industrialization and trade liberalization were  
introduced [2, 3]. One of the cornerstone policies  
________  
Corresponding author.  
Email address: [email protected]n  
81  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
82  
in Vietnam urban development picture has been  
the City Classification System (CCS) which,  
broadly speaking, aims to categorize Vietnamese  
cities into 'classes' respective to their socio-  
economic performance using a set of indicators.  
The CCS has been a central policy in Vietnam  
urban development framework, in which it acts  
both as a monitoring instrument for the central  
government and as a development guidance  
for local governments. However, long-term  
urban issues such as environmental pollution,  
congestion, social inequity, etc. as well as the  
ways in which such policy has shaped socio-  
economic development in Vietnamese cities  
intrigue questions about its effectiveness and  
practicality, an area that has cumulated rather  
scarce and limited research attention so far.  
2. City Classification System and Urban  
System in Vietnam  
A
review of the socio-economic  
development strategy (SEDS) documentations  
shows that the Vietnamese party-state has  
recognized and repeatedly emphasized the  
economic role of cities and the urban network as  
the engine of local and national growth. For  
instance, in as early as 2001, orientations  
emphasized:  
‘Planning the urban network with a few big  
cities, many medium cities and small urban  
systems with reasonable distribution in the  
regions’ (SEDS 2001 - 2010 [4]).  
Ten years later, a more specific orientations  
were given:  
This paper thus presents an original attempt  
to contribute to this literature gap by bringing  
forward extended views around the CCS. It is  
argued that firstly, aspects of urban sustainability  
have often been overlooked in the CCS and  
secondly, as top-down policy the CCS has often  
omitted local development context as well as the  
optimal development paths for cities. Because of  
the lack of reliable data and access to  
information, this paper the paper would not go  
in-depth in analyzing the CCS but instead  
presents perspectives not yet discussed in current  
literature. The analysis relies on data and  
documentations published by the Vietnamese  
‘Step by step forming a system of urban  
areas with synchronous, modern and  
environmental friendly infrastructure including  
some big cities and many small and medium-  
sized cities linked and rationally distributed  
across regions’ (SEDS 2011-2020 [5]).  
To erect and monitor a system of cities as the  
backbone of national economy requires a  
comprehensive set of instruments, and thus the  
CCS was established. Its primary aim is to  
categorize Vietnamese cities into specific  
"classes" according to their socio-economic  
performance using a set of indicators criteria. It  
was first established in 2001 [6], underwent  
revision in 2009 [7] and officially put into Law  
in that same year [8]. Major inconsistent  
provisions existed between those documents (for  
example, see Chau [9]), so eventually in 2016,  
government-state,  
secondary  
literature  
relevant to urban development in Vietnam and,  
to a lesser extent, information that are  
available in public domains.  
The rest of this paper proceeds as follows.  
Section 2 sketches an overview pictures of the  
CCS and current status of Vietnam urban  
system. Section 3 reviews some limitations of  
the CCS and shows the case to reconsider CCS  
to better account for sustainability and bottom-  
up people centric development. The conclusion  
provides further discussion on urban  
development and some future policy adjustment.  
A summary of legal documents referred in this  
paper is provided in Appendix C.  
Vietnam  
National  
Assembly  
Standing  
Committee passed Resolution No. 1210 on  
Classification of Cities [10] to overcome these  
overlaps and conflicts. Currently, this is the  
latest legal document in effect on the criteria for  
city classification, competence and relevant  
procedures. A preliminary comparison of criteria  
from early to current documentations is  
demonstrated in Table 1.  
Accordingly, Vietnamese cities are  
designated into six classes: Special, I, II, III, IV,  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
83  
V (Roman numerals) using the point-based  
system which consists of six indicator groups:  
(1) Functions of an urban center; (2) Population  
size; (3) Population density; (4) Non-agricultural  
labor; (5) Urban infrastructure facilities; (6)  
Urban architecture and landscape. To advance to  
a higher class, a city is required to score at least  
the minimum point in total as well as the  
minimum point in each criteria.  
Table 1. Comparison of criteria and points urban classification systems through the years  
2001 [6]  
Min  
point point  
2009 [7, 11]  
2016 [10]  
Min  
Indicators  
Max  
Indicators  
Min  
point point  
Max  
Indicators  
Max  
point  
20  
point  
1. Functions of  
Urban Center  
17  
10  
7
25  
15  
10  
20  
1. Functions of  
Urban Center  
2. Population  
size  
10.5  
7
15  
10  
5
1. Functions of  
Urban Center  
15  
2. Population  
size  
2. Population size  
6
8
6
6
3. Population  
density  
3. Population  
density  
3.5  
3.5  
3. Population  
density  
4.5  
4.5  
4. Non-  
agricultural  
labor  
15  
4. Non-  
5
4. Proportion of  
non-agricultural  
labor  
agricultural labor  
5. Urban  
21  
30  
5. Urban  
38.5  
55  
5. Urban  
45  
60  
infrastructure  
facilities  
infrastructure  
facilities  
Infrastructure  
facilities & Urban  
architecture and  
landscape  
6. Urban  
7
10  
architecture &  
landscape  
Total  
70  
100  
Total  
70  
100  
Total  
75  
100  
Source: Tabulated by author, based on documentations  
The CCS which plays important role in  
concretizing the strategic orientations set by  
Vietnamese party-state. Specifically, city  
classification is the central focus of Vietnam  
Urban System Development Master Plan [12], in  
which very specific targets are set for the number  
of cities in each class (see Table 2). In addition,  
funding and budget are distributed from the  
central government to cities based on their  
respective classes, according to the Urban  
Upgrading Program 2009 - 2020 [13]. CCS is  
complementary to, and should be distinguished  
City, because of their economic and political  
significance, are assigned 'Special' classes and  
currently they remain the only two Special-  
classed cities in Vietnam.  
By the end of 2019, Vietnam's urban system  
consists of 02 special cities, 20 class I cities, 29  
class II cities, 45 class III cities, 85 class IV cities  
and 652 class V cities (Table 2). Compared to  
2009, there is an increase of 15 class I cities, 10  
class II cities, 05 class III cities, 38 of class IV,  
30 class V cities. Overall, in 10 years, there were  
102 new cities. The average urbanization rate  
increased from 29.74% to 35.74% in 2009 - 2018  
[1]. The urban system in Vietnam is  
characteristically hierarchical (i.e. bottom  
heavy); the increase in the number of cities is  
mainly in the group of cities of class IV and V.  
from,  
Vietnam's  
regional  
and  
urban  
administration hierarchy (see Appendix B) in a  
sense that only cities direct under central  
government, provincial cities and towns are  
listed in the system. Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
84  
Table 2. Urban classification in Vietnam in 2009 and 2019  
Actual  
Target set by the government  
Class  
2009  
02  
05  
12  
40  
2019  
02  
20  
29  
45  
2015  
02  
9
2025  
Special  
17  
I
II  
III  
23  
65  
20  
81  
IV  
V
Total  
47  
625  
731  
85  
652  
833  
79  
687  
870  
122  
760  
1000  
Source: Data for 2009 from The World Bank [14, p. 12]; data for 2019 from Vietnam Ministry of  
Construction [15]; target figures from Vietnam Urban System Master Plan [12]  
number of cities by respective classes closely  
match the objective targets set by the  
government. However, both the media and the  
research circles have often been skeptical, even  
critical, about the true motivations by local  
authorities as well as the official figures  
reported. Whether or not the figures are inflated  
is not the focus of this paper and it should be  
cautiously noted that not all contemporary issues  
in Vietnamese urban development are solely  
rooted in the CCS. But given the significance of  
the CCS in Vietnamese urban framework with  
long-established practices and procedures, any  
adjustment in the provisions of the policy would  
have universal impacts to the system of cities.  
3. Placing Urban sustainability and People  
at the Center of Development  
From the central government perspective,  
city classification policy provides a systemized,  
streamlined framework via which the grand,  
nationwide urban network picture can be  
observed and monitored. For local governments,  
city classification policy is a useful guideline for  
cities to self-assess and navigate their positions  
in Vietnam's urban system. City class and  
ranking are often used by urban authorities in  
promoting their image and attracting investment.  
Arguably, this is a factor that stimulates cities to  
mobilize, innovate and compete fairly with each  
other. General consensus is that the policy has  
provided an incentive for cities to attain upward  
mobility within the urban hierarchy. The World  
Bank [14, p. 11] affirmed that "striving for  
higher classification standards is a major  
preoccupation of local government authorities as  
the higher classifications receive a larger share  
of state resources. The classification system  
provides incentives for cities to try to move to a  
higher class". OECD [16, p. 21] agreed that "the  
greater autonomy and increased financial  
flexibility that comes with the higher  
classifications creates an incentive for attaining  
upward mobility within the scale".  
In terms of contemporary legal framework,  
some studies have voiced concern on how the  
structure of the CCS influences the development  
choices made by local authorities. In the report  
"Vietnam 2035" jointly published by The World  
Bank and Vietnam Ministry of Planning and  
Investment, it is argued [3, p. 223] that the  
"original goal was to spur the development of  
cities using indicators set by the central  
government", however "the urban classification  
system  
encourages  
local  
infrastructure  
development, leading to massive and fragmented  
urban development". Indeed, the CCS structure  
(illustrated in Table 1) is skewed towards urban  
infrastructure facilities. Out of maximum 100-  
point, urban infrastructure facilities, architecture  
and landscape indicators account for 30, 65 and  
60 point (in 2001, 2009, 2016 respectively),  
meanwhile points awarded to other indicators  
Supposedly, if the policy is carried out  
perfectly (i.e. in a consistent and rigorous  
manner in each and across different levels of  
administration) then Vietnam urban system  
appears to be expanding healthily, i.e. the  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
85  
are far lower. Consequently, a city can score the  
minimum points required by mainly investing in  
additional infrastructure. An example from  
Coulthart et al. [17, pp. 4–5] showed that "a city  
or town may invest in road expansion when there  
is only limited traffic demand, instead of  
expanding piped water supply, where clear need  
exists".The choice of investment made by local  
authority therefore is geared to 'tick the box'  
instead of targeting true local demands.  
often not acknowledged nor recognized in  
official reports which thereupon hinders proper  
investigation in the effectiveness of the CCS.  
This is elaborated in two further observations:  
First of these, aspects of sustainable urban  
development are underrepresented among the  
CCS indicators; in other words, while the CCS  
has covered basic development aspects of a city,  
it is not specific enough in terms of urban  
sustainability. The CCS is relatively single-  
minded in its design and thus results in a rather  
one-dimensional approach by local authorities:  
the increased urbanization via physical  
expansion of the city. As illustrated in Table 1,  
the way the CCS is structured highly encourages  
short-term infrastructure-led investment at city-  
level. While urbanization is a common  
phenomenon of economic development, rapid  
urban development not necessarily lead to  
growth; rapid urban development without far-  
seeing vision and careful management  
potentially leads to very costly long-term  
readjustment. For instance, as shown in an  
investigation by the Development Bank of Latin  
America [21, pp. 24–27], despite a high level of  
urbanization on par to developed countries, per  
capita income levels in Latin America lags 50  
years behind Europe and 70 years behind the  
United States - the case coined as "urbanization  
In terms of CCS implementation, local  
newspapers have reported issues such as: local  
short-term spontaneous, mass investment to  
qualify for higher classification; informal  
lobbying to advance to a higher classification  
[18]; loopholes and poor monitoring procedures  
resulting in cities qualifying for higher class  
while not meeting the necessary criteria [19].  
Eventually, the mismatch between a city socio-  
economic performance and its class becomes a  
common phenomenon. In many cases, cities  
advancement  
in classification  
is  
not  
performance-based but driven by other motives.  
Vested interest has been pointed out as one  
motive affecting investment choices by local  
authorities. Investigating the local budget  
mechanisms, Hoang & Doan [20, p. 59]  
discovered that "managing officials in big  
[higher-class] cities also have higher salaries and  
bonus allowance than their counterparts in  
smaller [lower-class] cities" and therefore  
"urban upgrading process is usually done  
subjectively by officials". Similarly, The World  
Bank [3, p. 224] affirmed that "the higher the  
ranking, the more power cities have to issue  
land-use certificates and to allocate land for and  
to lease land to households and individuals".  
without  
development".  
Meanwhile,  
environment-related indicators in the CCS only  
include water/waste water treatment (measured  
in percentage) and provision of urban public area  
(measured in m2/person); however the most  
alarming environmental problems in Vietnamese  
cities nowadays, such as air pollution even in  
special-classed cities [22, 24] are not reflected. It  
is true that the data for air quality is now being  
developed publicly but they are only available  
for big urban centers. This raises questions on  
how urban environment issues are effectively  
monitored and by whose authority. Recent  
directives initiated by the Vietnamese  
government, such as the introduction of National  
Action Plan to streamline United Nations' 2020  
Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals [25]  
or the Scheme for Development of Smart  
Contemporary literature above have  
suggested that the CCS has created a distorted  
motivations for local authorities in striving for a  
higher classification - usually linked to budget  
allocation and increased administrative power. It  
is unclear exactly what the benefits are to local  
residents from a higher city classification and via  
which channels these benefits might reach them.  
In addition, the issues reported in the media have  
also shown issues with CCS implementation  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
86  
Sustainable Cities in Vietnam for the period  
2018 - 2025 [26], shows the effort to revitalize  
urban policies. These documents which  
particularly emphasized principles of sustainable  
urban development and people-centered  
development demonstrates that the party-state  
are willing to take more mindful steps forward.  
Given the ambition to become an industrialized  
country by 2035, Vietnam is expected to  
experience continuing rapid structural shifts in  
labor structure, modernization and urbanization,  
so the new environment-oriented mindset is  
much welcomed. But these foresights and  
visions need materializing by tangible policies.  
The CCS - as the contemporary backbone policy  
in Vietnam urban landscape - therefore needs to  
be more sophisticating to better reflect the multi-  
dimensional nature of urban development  
process (particularly aspects of sustainable urban  
development) and longer-term vision, serious  
preparation and is crucial.  
most optimal and sustainable development path  
according to local conditions.  
One the other hand, for cities of sufficient  
agglomeration size, local development problems  
can be better tackled with flexibility and  
efficiency. But in small cities (which is the  
majority in Vietnam) budget balance is a  
significant challenge. Su [27] argued that 50 out  
of 63 provinces and cities in Vietnam fail to  
manage their budget independently and  
ultimately they are reliant on central budget  
allocation. The dilemma is that cities who are  
unable to be financially independent have to rely  
on contemporary mechanisms of city-ranking to  
obtain more funding, thus adopting the one-  
dimensional,  
infrastructure-led  
approach  
inscribed by the CCS.  
4. Concluding Remarks  
Due to rather limited data and information, it  
is perhaps unrealistic to provide concrete policy  
recommendations. However, it is logical to  
indicate how the CCS can be improved  
forthwith. First of all, tightening CCS  
regulations/conditions, such as increasing the  
minimum number of points required or the  
amount of time leading to ranking submission, to  
make it harder to meet classification criteria.  
Second of these, the CCS is heavily top-  
down policy. While it was designed to systemize  
performance criteria and streamline procedures  
between the central and local governments,  
much of the local development context has been  
taken away and replaced by quantitative  
indicators. This directly questions the validity of  
the CCS itself as a policy. In many developed  
countries there exists no formal legal policy for  
city classifying, rather it is informally done.  
Ideally, this allows policies to promote growth  
and urban development to prioritize local  
characteristics, utilize endowments and  
resources that best suit the local conditions of  
each city. It is worth noting that every city has  
their own characteristics in terms of population  
demographics, culture, local endowments as  
well as their unique developmental challenges;  
even among cities of the same classification, no  
two cities are identical regarding local  
conditions. Thus, these local conditions should  
be better realized to inform their respective  
socio-economic development agendas. The CCS  
has created a common 'denominator' for cities,  
urban development in Vietnam is more of  
'ticking the box' nature instead of choosing the  
Eventually,  
cities  
aiming  
for  
higher  
classification thus must prepare socially,  
economically over longer period of time.  
Secondly, a more comprehensive and accessible  
database is needed. This is of benefits to both the  
research circles and to policy-makers at all levels  
to observe and monitor how cities thrive within  
Vietnamese urban hierarchy.  
Vietnam's  
Provincial Competitiveness Index, which was  
constructed through collecting and analyzing  
primary data questionnaire feedbacks, proves a  
solid example on how quality data can assist  
policy-making. Not only does it enable the  
competitiveness of a province to be objectively  
measured but it also provides valuable inputs  
from local business and firms. This author  
proposes the addition of a more qualitative-  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
87  
based approach: bottom-up surveys and  
questionnaires to capture how quality of urban  
life is experienced by its residents.  
References  
[1] Vietnam General Statistics Office, Population  
classified by ‘Rural’ and ‘Urban’, 2020.  
Accessed: 08 June 2020  
[2] H. B. Thinh, Basic Views of the Party and the  
Government on Urban Planning and Urbanisation,  
Sociology 3 (2011) 28-35 (in Vietnamese).  
[3] World Bank and Vietnam Ministry of Planning &  
Investment, Vietnam 2035: toward prosperity,  
creativity, equity, and democracy. Washington,  
DC: World Bank Group, 2016.  
[4] Vietnamese Communist Party, Socio-Economic  
Development Strategy 2001 - 2010, 2001. (in  
Vietnamese)  
Thirdly, integrate and incorporate urban  
sustainability indicators as compulsory  
requirement for higher classification. Recently,  
urban development concepts such as "Green  
City", "Eco-City", "Livable City", "Resilient  
City", "Compact City", etc. have continued to  
gain popularity in Vietnamese discussion circles.  
These concepts individually aim to create an  
ideal sustainable-city design but the common  
element among these concepts is the emphasis  
on harmony between human activities and  
minimizing impacts on the environment.  
Although there exists no agreement about the  
most desirable form of urban sustainability (for  
example, see a review by Jabareen [28]), they  
showcase a variety of values and approaches  
hanh-trung-uong-dang/dai-hoi-dang/lan-thu-  
ix/chien-luoc-phat-trien-kinh-te-xa-hoi-2001-  
2010-1543. Accessed: 08 June 2020  
[5] Vietnamese Communist Party, Socio-Economic  
Development Strategy 2011 - 2020, 2011. (in  
Vietnamese)  
available  
towards  
sustainable  
urban  
development.  
hanh-trung-uong-dang/dai-hoi-dang/lan-thu-  
xi/chien-luoc-phat-trien-kinh-te-xa-hoi-2011-  
2020-1527. Accessed: 08 June 2020  
There is no ultimate standards that are  
perfectly suited to the development context of  
cities - One size does not fit all. In the very long-  
term, when cities have reached an advanced  
level of development, city classifications may no  
longer be the most important aspiration pursued  
within Vietnamese urban hierarchy. But in the  
short-term, having a classification system in  
place still helps cities to maneuver their  
development paths. Having said that, the next 15  
years is pivotal to whether Vietnamese cities  
would become sustainable and livable to an  
increased urban population. This paper have  
attempted point out drawbacks of the CCS  
previously not discussed in the literature and  
calls for urgent amendment of the policy to better  
account for sustainable urban development  
aspects and local context. It is apparent that other  
regulations relevant to Vietnam urban  
framework need amending accordingly and  
definitely further researches are much needed.  
Hopefully arguments presented in this paper  
would welcome continued academic discussion  
in the coming future.  
[6] Vietnam Government, Decree on Classification of  
Urban Center and Urban Management Levels,  
2001.  
(in  
Vietnamese)  
toanvan.aspx?ItemID=23098&Keyword=.  
Accessed: 08 June 2020  
[7] Vietnamese Government, Decree on Classification  
of  
Cities,  
2009.  
(in  
Vietnamese)  
goc.aspx?ItemID=113230. Accessed: 08 June  
2020  
[8] Vietnam National Assembly, Urban Planning Law  
2009,  
2009.  
(in  
Vietnamese)  
hphu/hethongvanban?class_id=1&_page=1&mod  
e=detail&document_id=91026. Accessed: 08 June  
2020  
[9] C.H. Than, Inconsistency in contemporary  
regulation on classification of cities, Can Tho  
Univ. J. Sci. 23b (2012) 147–152. (in Vietnamese)  
[10] Vietnam National Assembly Standing Committee,  
Resolution on Urban Classification, 2016. (in  
Vietnamese)  
toanvan.aspx?ItemID=111516. Accessed: 08 June  
2020  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
88  
[11] Vietnam Ministry of Construction, Circular on  
Detailed Regulations of Decree No. 42/2009/ND-  
CP on Classification of Cities, 2009. (in  
Vietnamese)  
phan-loai-phan-cap-do-thi-o-viet-nam-thuc-trang-  
va-yeu-cau-doi-moi.html. Accessed: 08 June 2020  
[20] H. B. Thinh, D. T. T. Huyen, Urbanization in  
Vietnam nowadays, Vietnam J. Soc. Sci. 5(90)  
(2015) 55–62.  
[21] Corporación Andina de Fomento, Urban growth  
and access to opportunities: A challenge for Latin  
America. Caracas, Ve.: Corporación Andina de  
Fomento, 2017.  
[22] T. T. Hien, N. D. T. Chi, N. T. Nguyen, L. X. Vinh,  
N. Takenaka, and D. H. Huy, Current Status of Fine  
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) in Vietnam’s Most  
Populous City, Ho Chi Minh City, Aerosol Air  
Qual. Res. 19(10) (2019) 2239–2251. doi:  
10.4209/aaqr.2018.12.0471.  
hphu/hethongvanban?class_id=1&mode=detail&d  
ocument_id=91459. Accessed: 08 June 2020  
[12] Vietnam Prime Minister, Decision on Approving  
Modification of the Master Plan for Development  
of Vietnam’s Urban System by 2025, vision set to  
2050.  
(in  
Vietnamese)  
hphu/hethongvanban?class_id=1&mode=detail&d  
ocument_id=86144. Accessed: 08 June 2020  
[13] Vietnam Prime Minister, Decision on Approval of  
Urban Upgrading Program 2009 - 2020, 2009. (in  
Vietnamese)  
[23] H. A. Tuan, C. X. Nam, T. V. Trung, The  
Environmental Pollution In Vietnam: Source,  
Impact And Remedies, Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 6  
(2017) 249-253.  
[24] M. Amann, Z. Klimont, T. A. Ha, P. Rafaj, G.  
Kiesewetter, A. Gomez-Sanabria, N. Binh, N. T. T.  
Thu, K. M. Thuy, W. Schopp, J. Borken-Kleefeld,  
L. Hoglund-Isaksson, F. Wagner, R. Sander, C.  
Heyes, J. Cofala, N. Q. Trung, N. T. Dat, N. N.  
Tung, Future air quality in Ha Noi and northern  
Vietnam, RR-19-003, Laxenburg, Austria, IIASA  
Research Report, 2019.  
hongvanban?class_id=1&mode=detail&document  
_id=87822&category_id=0. Accessed: 08 June  
2020  
[14] World Bank, Vietnam Urbanization Review:  
Technical Assistance Report. Washington, DC:  
World Bank Group, 2011.  
[15] Vietnam Ministry of Construction, Vietnam  
urbanization rate to exceed 40% by 2020 (in  
do-thi-hoa-o-viet-nam-du-kien-se-vuot-moc-40-  
vao-nam-2020-266690.html. (accessed: 08 June  
2020)  
[25] Vietnam Prime Minister, National Action Plan on  
Implementing Agenda 2030 for Sustainable  
Development,  
2017.  
(in  
Vietnamese)  
[16] OECD, OECD Urban Policy Reviews: Viet Nam,  
OCED Publishing house: Paris, 2018. DOI:  
10.1787/9789264286191-en.  
[17] A. Coulthart, Q. Nguyen, H. Sharpe, Vietnam’s  
infrastructure challenge - urban development  
strategyꢀ: meeting the challenges of rapid  
urbanization and the transition to a market oriented  
economy, Washington, DC: World Bank., 2006.  
hphu/hethongvanban?class_id=2&_page=1&mod  
e=detail&document_id=189713. Accessed: 08  
June 2020  
[26] Vietnam Prime Minister, Approving Scheme for  
the Development of Smart Sustainable Cities in  
Vietnam in the period 2018 - 2025 with vision to  
2030,  
2018.  
(in  
Vietnamese)  
[18] Vietnam Inspectorate Online Newspaper, Develop  
criteria and standards to avoid racing for urban  
hphu/hethongvanban?class_id=2&_page=1&mod  
e=detail&document_id=194337. Accessed: 08  
June 2020  
upgrading  
(in  
Vietnamese)  
dung-tieu-chi-tieu-chuan-tranh-chay-dua-xin-  
nang-cap-do-thi-102885.html. (accessed: 08 June  
2020)  
[27] D. T. Su, Budget Decentralisation with Local  
Urban Government Reform (in Vietnamese), Natl.  
Assem. Off. Oxfam Unicef, vol. Conference  
"Local Government in Vietnam: Theoretical and  
practical issues", Ninh Thuan, Vietnam, 2013. (in  
Vietnamese)  
[19] Architecture/Sustainability/Housing/Urban  
Initiatives  
decentralization of urban areas in Vietnam:  
Situation innovation requirements (in  
Vietnamese),  
Vietnam,  
Classification  
and  
&
[28] Y. R. Jabareen, Sustainable Urban Forms: Their  
Typologies, Models, and Concepts, J. Plan. Educ.  
Res.  
26(1)  
(2006)  
38–52  
doi:  
10.1177/0739456X05285119.  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
89  
Appendix A.  
Urbanization in Vietnam  
Urban population in Vietnam during 1990 - 2019  
100%  
90%  
80%  
70%  
60%  
50%  
40%  
30%  
20%  
10%  
0%  
Urban Rural  
Source: data from Vietnam General Statistics Office website [1]  
Appendix B  
Vietnam Regional and Urban Administration Hierarchy  
Source: adapted from World Bank [14, p. 10]  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
90  
Appendix C  
Summary of legal documents referred in this paper  
Name used in paper  
SEDS 2001 - 2010 [4]  
Full name  
Socio-Economic Development Strategy for the period 2001 - 2010  
Chiến lược phát triển Kinh tế - Xã hội 2001 - 2010  
Socio-Economic Development Strategy 2010 - 2020  
Chiến lược phát triển Kinh tế - Xã hội 2010 - 2020  
SEDS 2010 - 2020 [5]  
Decree on Classification of Urban Center and Urban Management  
Levels (Decree No. 72/2001/ND-CP dated 05 October 2001)  
Decree on City and  
Town Classification  
2001 [6]  
Nghị định của Chính phủ về việc phân loại đô thị và cấp quản lý đô  
thị (Nghị định số 72/2001/NĐ-CP ngày 05/10/2001)  
Decree on Classification of Cities (Decree No. 42/2009/ND-CP dated  
07 May 2009)  
Decree on City  
Classification 2009 [7]  
Nghị định về việc phân loại đô thị (Nghị định số 42/2009/NĐ-CP  
ngày 07/05/2009)  
Urban Planning Law (Law No. 30/2009/QH12 dated 29 June 2009)  
Urban Planning Law [8]  
Luật Quy hoạch đô thị (Luật số 30/2009/QH12 ngày 29/06/2009)  
Resolution on Urban Classification (Resolution No.  
1210/2016/UBTVQH13 dated 25 May 2016)  
Resolution on Urban  
Classification [10]  
Nghị định về Phân loại đô thị (Nghị định số 1210/2016/UBTVQH13  
ngày 25/05/2016)  
Circular on Detailed Regulations of Decree No. 42/2009/ND-CP on  
Classification of Cities (Circular No. 34/2009/TT-BXD dated 30  
September 2009)  
Circular on Detailed  
Regulations of City  
Classification [11]  
Thông tư quy định chi tiết một số nội dung của Nghị định  
42/2009/NĐ-CP ngày 07/05/2009 của Chính phủ về việc Phân loại  
đô thị  
Decision on Approving Modification of the Master Plan for  
Development of Vietnam's Urban System by 2025, vision set to 2050  
(Decision No. 445 dated 17 April 2009)  
Master Plan for  
Development of  
Vietnam Urban System  
by 2025, with vision set  
to 2050 [12]  
Quyết định về phê duyệt điều chỉnh định hướng Quy hoạch tổng thể  
phát triển hệ thống đô thị Việt Nam đến năm 2025 và tầm nhìn đến  
năm 2050 (Quyết định số 445 ngày 17/04/2009)  
Decision on Approval of Urban Upgrading Program 2009 - 2020  
(Decision No. 758/QD-TTg dated 08 June 2009)  
Urban Upgrading  
Program 2009 - 2020  
[13]  
Quyết định phê duyệt Chương trình nâng cấp đô thị quốc gia giai  
đoạn từ năm 2009 đến năm 2020 (Quyết định số 758/QĐ-TTg ngày  
08/06/2009)  
L.M. Son / VNU Journal of Science: Policy and Management Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2020) 81-91  
91  
Decision on the Issue of National Action Plan to Implement Agenda  
2030 for Sustainable Development (Decision No. 622/QD-TTg dated  
10/05/2017)  
National Action Plan on  
Implementing Agenda  
2030 for Sustainable  
Development [25]  
Quyết định về việc ban hành Kế hoạch hành động quốc gia thực hiện  
Chương trình Nghị sự 2030 vì sự phát triển bền vững (Quyết định số  
622/QĐ-TTg ngày 10/05/2017)  
Decision on Approval of the Scheme for the Development of Smart  
Sustainable Cities in Vietnam in the period 2018 - 2025 with vision  
to 2030 (Decision No. 950/QD-TTg dated 01 August 2018)  
Scheme for the  
Development of Smart  
Sustainable Cities in  
Vietnam in the period  
2018 - 2025 with vision  
to 2030 [26]  
Quyết định về phê duyệt đề án phát triển đô thị thông minh bền vững  
Việt Nam giai đoạn 2018 - 2025 và định hướng đến năm 2030 (Quyết  
định số 950/QĐ-TTg ngày 01/08/2018)  
pdf 11 trang yennguyen 14680 Free
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Rethinking city classification system in Vietnam: Towards urban sustainability and people-centered development", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên

File đính kèm:

  • pdfrethinking_city_classification_system_in_vietnam_towards_urb.pdf