•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Vietnam has land and the potential to develop modern agriculture and a green economy. Yet many projects have been delayed for reasons other than capital shortages: land access has been difficult, environmental procedures have raised concerns for investors, and regulatory barriers have made it hard for farmers to shift to modern production models.
Against this backdrop, the Government’s Resolution No. 17/2026/NQ-CP on cutting red tape, decentralization, and simplifying administrative procedures and business conditions in agriculture and environmental sectors is presented as a step toward unlocking one of the country’s most significant resources.
Resolution 17 is notable for its scope. Among eight Government resolutions implementing the Party’s Second Central Committee conclusions on simplifying and reducing business conditions, Resolution 17 covers 15 key sectors under state management in agriculture and the environment, including land, water resources, environment, cultivation, husbandry, fisheries, and forestry.
Within these sectors, the article highlights three bottlenecks:
The resolution’s overarching objective is to “cut, decentralize, and simplify administrative procedures and business conditions, creating maximum convenience for people and businesses.” The article frames this as more than technical reform, reflecting a shift in governance mindset.
Resolution 17 outlines three major groups of solutions:
The resolution requires “cutting and simplifying unnecessarily burdensome and illogical administrative procedures and business conditions,” aiming to dramatically reduce compliance costs for people and firms. The article describes this as structural reform rather than minor adjustments.
A key element is greater devolution in handling administrative procedures. Procedures previously managed centrally are moved to local authorities to shorten processes and increase flexibility. The resolution also emphasizes “decentralization linked to monitoring and accountability” to ensure power is exercised responsibly.
The resolution calls for moving from pre-approval checks to post-approval supervision. It emphasizes enhancing inspection, monitoring, and strict sanctioning of violations after licensing, shifting from “do not allow until controlled” to “allow but with accountability.”
In the article’s framing, Resolution 17 is not only about cutting procedures; it also changes how resources flow through the economy by addressing land access, environmental compliance burdens, and constraints on agricultural modernization.
If implemented effectively, the article expects wide-ranging impacts:
With land, environment, and agriculture “unlocked together,” the article describes the economy as gaining a new growth engine.
The article cautions that reform matters only if it becomes real in day-to-day implementation. Resolution 17 requires stronger ex-post checks, inspections, supervision, and strict enforcement of violations to ensure that loosening procedures does not lead to lax governance.
It also notes that decentralization must be paired with effective controls over the exercise of power to prevent laxity or abuse. More importantly, the article argues that the mindset of the administrative machinery must change; the greatest reform is not issuing a document, but how each agency and official implements it.
Resolution 17 is presented as more than an administrative text. It is described as a call to shift from management to liberation, from control to creation. The article concludes that if fully implemented, Resolution 17 could turn land from a bottleneck into a growth engine, shift environmental regulation from a compliance obstacle into a competitive advantage, and lift agriculture from a traditional pillar into a new growth engine for the economy.
It also emphasizes that what is “freed” is not only procedural barriers, but space for development, investment opportunities, and the autonomy of people and businesses.
TS. Nguyễn Sĩ Dũng
Premium gym chains are entering a “golden era” that is ending or already in decline, as rising operating costs collide with shifting consumer preferences toward more flexible, community-based ways to exercise. Long-term memberships are shrinking, margins are pressured by higher rents and facility expenses, and competition from smaller, more personalized…
