Rice policy in a transitional economy: balancing the social and political objectives


Rice is an important component on the global food security agenda. However, prevailing economic analysis suggests that rice policy globally is often damaging and not economically efficient, rendering food security as a goal highly vulnerable to volatility in the world rice market. This paper explores the case of Vietnam’s rice policy as a key rice exporter, a country that has developed highly distinctive policy settings to manage the inherent tensions between ‘socialist’ policy legacies and ‘market-based’ objectives during an economy-wide liberalisation process. In open economy political terms, our case study facilitates the exploration of two key issues. First, how well the OECD-centric concept of agricultural policy exceptionalism works in a developing country context. Second, how the policy may succeed politically even in the face of what appear to be severe political constraints from external economic pressures. The paper develops a narrative of the political economy of rice policy in Vietnam during the Renovation (Doi Moi) Period from 1986 to the present. We find, first, that the policy trajectory in Vietnam’s rice sector runs counter to recent claims about post-exceptionalism in agriculture; that is, rice policy has resisted pressures to comply fully with market rules despite Vietnam’s accession to the World Trade Organization. Second, the interaction of economic liberalisation processes and the ruling Communist Party’s political survival strategy results in policy settings that fail standards of policy coherence and are often economically inefficient, although the survival strategy itself remains stable and reform-resistant over time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5


  1. 1.

    It was called Vietnam’s Food Imports Exports Association when first established by Decision 727/KDDN-QD dated 13/11/1989, following Decision 64-HDBT on the management of imports and exports by the Council of Ministers. Its name was changed in 1999 by Decision 33/1999/QD-BTCCBCP dated 26/08/1999. Its latest regulations were promulgated in 2006.

  2. 2.

    These provinces included Long An, An Giang, Kien Giang, Tien Giang, Dong Thap, Can Tho and Vinh Long, all in Mekong river delta.

  3. 3.

    Being established in September 1999, this fund aimed to cover the bank interest for the purchase of agricultural commodities when the world price fell, having adverse effects on domestic production; reserve agricultural products for exports; and provide finite financial support for losses in exports activities of some commodities due to exogenous risks or the lack of competitiveness (Decision 195/1999/QD-TTg dated 27/9/1999).

  4. 4.

    See Ha et al. (2015) for a comprehensive review.

  5. 5.

    Chu et al. (2017) find that economic efficiency would be enhanced if about 13% of the proposed protected cultivated rice land is released to other crops, but this release is pro-rich, implying a trade-off between economic efficiency and inequality in Vietnam


  1. ACI. (2002). Rice value chain study: Vietnam. Agrifood Consulting International (ACI): A report prepared for the World Bank.

  2. Agroinfo. (2009). Sometimes our rice sneaks to thailand [co luc gao ta chui lui sang thai]. Available at http://agro.gov.vn/vn/tID13914_Co-luc-gao-ta-chui-lui-sang-Thai.html, Accessed: 20/10/2017.

  3. Baomoi. (2017). Food association: Power manipulated for local interests [hiep hoi luong thuc: quyen luc bi thao tung vi quyen loi cuc bo]. Online Baomoi. Available at https://www.baomoi.com/hiep-hoi-luong-thuc-quyen-luc-bi-thao-tung-vi-quyen-loi-cuc-bo/c/21683952.epi. Accessed: 30/10/2017.

  4. Baulch, B, Hansen, H, Trung, L, Tam, T. (2008). The spatial integration of paddy markets in vietnam. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(2), 271–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Childs, N, & Kiawu, J. (2009). Factors behind the rise in global rice prices in 2008. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

  6. Chu, L, Nguyen, HTM, Kompas, T, Dang, K, Trinh, B. (2017). Optimal rice land protection in a command economy. Crawford School Research Paper No. 1707.

  7. Dang, KS, Nguyen, DAT, Nguyen, AP, Nguyen, TTN. (2013). Vietnam’s rice development and trade management policy. Institute of Policy and Strategy for Agriculture and Rural Development: unpublished manuscript.

  8. Daugbjerg, C, & Feindt, PH. (2017). Post-exceptionalism in public policy: Transforming food and agricultural policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 24, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Daugbjerg, C, Farsund, AA, Langhelle, O. (2017). The resilience of paradigm mixes: food security in a post-exceptionalist trade regime. Journal of European Public Policy, 24, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dawe, D. (2010). The rice crisis: Markets, policies and food security. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dixon, JA, Gibbon, DP, Gulliver, A. (2001). Farming systems and poverty: Improving farmers’ livelihoods in a changing world. Rome and Washington D.C. : Food & Agriculture Organization and the World Bank.

  12. FAO. (2019). Faostat. Available from http://faostat3.fao.org/home/E [Accessed: 23 March, 2019].

  13. Foure, J, Benassy-Quere, A, Fontagne, L. (2013). Modelling the world economy at the 2050 horizon. Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, 21(4), 617–654. http://www.cepii.fr/cepii/en/bdd_modele/versions.asp?id=11.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fulton, ME, & Reynolds, T. (2015). The political economy of food price volatility: The case of vietnam and rice. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 97(4), 1206–1226 . https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aav019, http://ajae.oxfordjournals.org/content/97/4/1206.full.pdf+html.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. General Statistic Office. (2008). Exports in march and the first quarter of 2008 (xuat khau hang hoa thang 3 va quy 1 nam 2008). Available from http://www.gso.gov.vn [Accessed: 25 August, 2012:].

  16. Ghosh, M, & Whalley, J. (2004). Are price controls necessarily bad? The case of rice in Vietnam. Journal of Development Economics, 73(1), 215–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Giesecke, JA, Tran, NH, Corong, EL, Jaffee, S. (2013). Rice land designation policy in Vietnam and the implications of policy reform for food security and economic welfare. The Journal of Development Studies, 49(9), 1202–1218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Government of Vietnam. (2008). Report and response to questions by Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung. Hanoi: 12th National Assembly, 4th meeting, 13 November 2008, Report No. 177/BC-CP.

  19. Grafton, RQ, Daugbjerg, C, Qureshi, ME. (2015). Towards food security by 2050. Food Security, 7(2), 179–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Grant, W. (1995). Is agricultural policy still exceptional? The Political Quarterly, 66(3), 156–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. GSO. (1997). Statistical yearbook of Vietnam 1996. Statistical Publishing House: Hanoi.

    Google Scholar 

  22. GSO. (2004). So lieu thong ke Vietnam the ky XX (in English: the statistics of Vietnam for the XXth century). Hanoi: Statistical Publishing House, Hanoi.

  23. GSO. (2014). Vietnam - living standards survey 1992 - 1993. World Bank Microdata Library. Available at http://microdata.worldbank.org/index.php/catalog/1910/study-description.

  24. GSO. (2016). Results of the Vietnam household living standard survey 2014. Hanoi: General Statistical Office.

    Google Scholar 

  25. GSO. (2017). Vietnam - household living standards survey 2004. World Bank Microdata Library. Available at http://microdata.worldbank.org/index.php/catalog/2370.

  26. Ha, PV, Nguyen, HTM, Kompas, T, Che, TN, Trinh, B. (2015). Rice production, trade and the poor: regional effects of rice export policy on households in Vietnam. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66(2), 280–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Headey, D, & Fan, S. (2008). Anatomy of a crisis: the causes and consequences of surging food prices. Agricultural Economics, 39, 375–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. IFPRI. (1996). Rice market monitoring and policy options study. Washington: IFPRI.

    Google Scholar 

  29. ITC. (2019). Trade map: Trade statistics for international business development. Available from http://www.trademap.org/Country_SelProductCountry_TS.aspx?nvpm=1|704||||1006|||4|1|1|2|2|1|2|1| [Accessed: 23 March, 2019].

  30. Le, HD, Tran, L, Le, BM, Ha, HT, Nguyen, QA, Tran, TD, Doets, E, Hulshof, P, Elburg, L, Melse-Boonstra, A, Brouwer, I. (2013). Food composition table for Vietnam Available from http://www.fao.org/infoods/infoods/tables-and-databases/asia/en/ [accessed: 8 April 2019.

  31. Maclean, J, Hardy, B, Hettel, G. (2013). Rice almanac: Source book for one of the most important economic activities on earth, 4th edn. Los Banos: IRRI.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Markussen, T, Tarp, F, Van den Broeck, K. (2011). The forgotten property rights: Evidence on land use rights in Vietnam. World Development, 39(5), 839–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Martin, W, & Anderson, K. (2011). Export restrictions and price insulation during commodity price booms. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 94(2), 422–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Minot, N, & Goletti, F. (1998). Export liberalization and household welfare: the case of rice in vietnam. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80(4), 738–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Minot, N, & Goletti, F. (2000). Rice market liberalization and poverty in Viet Nam. International Food Policy Research Institute.

  36. Molini, V. (2006). Food security in Vietnam during the 1990s. WIDER research paper 2006/67.

  37. Nguyen, HTM, Kompas, T, Breusch, T, Ward, MB. (2017). Language, mixed communes, and infrastructure: Sources of inequality and ethnic minorities in vietnam. World Development, 96, 145–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Nielsen, CP. (2003). Vietnam’s rice policy: Recent reforms and future opportunities. Asian economic journal, 17(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pham, HN, & Nguyen, NQ. (2009). Vietnam’s rice sector 2008 and forecast for 2009 [nganh gao vietnam 2008 va trien vong nam 2009]. Vietnam Agriculture Outlook 2009 Conference [Hoi thao trien vong thi truong nganh nong nghiep Viet Nam 2009]. Hanoi 24-25/03/2009.

  40. Ray, R. (2007). Dietary changes, calorie intake and undernourishment: a comparative study of india and vietnam. Discussion Paper 2007-01. School of Economics and Finance.

  41. RFA. (2009). VFA under the ax of public opinion [Hiep hoi luong thuc duoi bua riu du luan]. Available at http://www.rfa.org/vietnamese/news/programs/ReviewOnlineDomesticPress/Vietnam-food-association-under-critics-why-nnguyen-05232009083937.html, accessed 22/10/2009.

  42. Sheingate, AD. (2003). The rise of the agricultural welfare state: institutions and interest group power in the United States, France, and Japan. Princeton University Press.

  43. Skogstad, G. (1998). Ideas, paradigms and institutions: agricultural exceptionalism in the european union and the united states. Governance, 11(4), 463–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Slayton, T. (2009). Rice crisis forensics: How Asian governments carelessly set the world rice market on fire. Center for Global Development Working Paper No. 163.

  45. Tadasse, G, Algieri, B, Kalkuhl, M, von Braun, J. (2016). Drivers and triggers of international food price spikes and volatility. In Kalkuhl, M, von Braun, J, Torero, M (Eds.) Food price volatility and its implications for food security and policy, AG (pp. 59–82). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

  46. Thi, HT, Simioni, M, Thomas-Agnan, C. (2018). Assessing the nonlinearity of the calorie-income relationship: An estimation strategy–with new insights on nutritional transition in vietnam. World Development, 110, 192–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Timmer, CP. (2012). Rice price formation in the short run and the long run: the role of market structure in explaining volatility. In Munier, RB (Ed.) Global uncertainity and the volatility of agricultural commodities prices (p. 151). Amsterdam: IOS Press.

  48. Tran, CT, Do, LH, Le, NM. (2013). Who has benefited from high rice prices in Vietnam. Oxfam: Hanoi.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Tsukada, K. (2011). Vietnam: Food security in a rice-exporting country. In Shigetomi, S., Kubo, K., Tsukada, K. (Eds.) The world food crisis and the strategies of asian rice exporters (pp. 53–72).

  50. VASS. (2011). Poverty reduction in Vietnam: Achievements and challenges. The Gioi Publisher.

  51. World Bank. (1998). Vietnam rising to the challenge: An economic report. Washington DC: World Bank. Report No 18632-VN.

  52. World Bank. (2003). Poverty. Hanoi: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  53. World Bank. (2008). Capital matters. Joint donor report to the vietnam consultative group meeting. Hanoi: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  54. World Bank. (2011). Market Economy for a middle-income Vietnam. Joint donor report to the vietnam consultative group meeting. Hanoi: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  55. World Bank. (2012). Well begun, not yet done: Vietnam’s remarkable progress on poverty reduction and the emerging challenges. World Bank Report No. 70798-VN. Hanoi: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  56. World Bank. (2016). Taking stock: an update on Vietnam’s recent economic developments. Special focus: Transforming Vietnamese agriculture - Gaining More from Less.

  57. World Bank. (2017). World development indicator.

  58. World Bank. (2018). Climbing the ladder: Poverty reduction and shared prosperity in vietnam. World Bank Report No. 70798-VN. Hanoi: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  59. WTO. (2016). World trade statistical review. Hanoi: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hoa-Thi-Minh Nguyen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests

The authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Special thanks to Tran Cong Thang and Nhung Cam Nguyen for their help with the interviews for this research. We gratefully acknowledge funding from the College of Asia and the Pacific at the Australian National University, and we thank all interviewees for their participation. The paper has been developed substantially from a Crawford school discussion paper, with thanks to two anonymous referees, the Senior Editor, Philip Taylor and the participants of Vietnam Update 2017, East Asian Economic Association 2018, Vietnam Symposium on Leadership and Public Policy 2018, Carsten Daugbjerg, Frode Veggeland and the participants of the European Consortium of Political Research 2019.



This Appendix provides details on the interviews carried out by the authors and the household survey data collected by the General Statistical Office (GSO) of Vietnam.


Our sample of respondents for our interviews was selected from six categories based on desk research on the structure of Vietnam’s rice market. Category 1 consists of policymakers from agencies that have been in charge of regulating the market since 2008 (Fig. 1). Given the decentralisation in the country, we interviewed officials from both the central and provincial government levels. Respondents came from the Government Office, ministries of Finance (MOF), Trade and Industry (MOIT), Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD), and an ‘industry’ association, the Vietnam Food Association (VFA).

In category 2 are food export companies, the most important of which are the Vietnam Northern Food Corporation (VNF1) and Vietnam Southern Food Corporation (VNF2). They are not only the largest trading food companies, but as state-owned enterprises serve as an essential tool of the government to control Vietnam’s rice market. In addition to these two companies, we interviewed state-owned provincial food companies because they are crucial to the implementation of rice policies at the provincial level. The sample of category 2 also included some private rice companies to investigate any discrimination in treatment towards them due to their ownership status.

The sample in category 3 was selected to explore the widespread support that rice-exporting companies and farmers receive in terms of subsidised credit and interest. Hence we approached the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV), the key decision-maker, and the Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (Agribank) as a primary policy executing agency in this regard. A few commercial banks were also included in our sample to get diversity in opinions.

In category 4, we interviewed representatives from academia and non-governmental agencies (NGOs) to get their independent views. To investigate the effects of Vietnam’s institutions in the rice market, we carried out systematic interviews with wholesalers, millers, and collectors (category 5), and farmers (category 6) selected in key rice-producing provinces, namely Can Tho and An Giang in the Mekong river delta and Nam Dinh in the Red river delta. These groups had large, medium and small size entities to ensure diversity in perspectives. The interview content discussed with each category is shown in Appendix Table 1. This content has been designed based on the role and responsibility in the rice market of different stakeholders. We used two kinds of questions, namely open-ended and closed. The former was applied mostly to elite interviews with policymakers, banks and academia while the latter was used for categories 5 and 6. A combination of them was asked in interviews with rice exporting companies. The interviews took place on December 2016 and January 2017. As seen in Appendix Table 4, we succeeded in reaching almost all planned interviewees. Among those we failed to interview were VFA and VNF2, who refused to participate in our study.

Table 4 Intended versus actual interviews by category

Household Living Standard Survey Data

Vietnam’s Household Living Standard surveys (VHLSS) were carried by the General Statistical Office (GSO) of Vietnam. The first survey was in 1993, with 4800 households interviewed, all of whom were included in the second survey five years later, together with an additional 1200 families. Since 2002, GSO surveyed households on a biennial basis. The sample size was increased to almost 30,000 households in 2002 but then reduced to about 9000 since 2004. All surveys are nationally representative, with the master sample being updated every ten years, based on population censuses. The core modules of these surveys are household comprehensive income and expenditure, which are hardly changed over time. Therefore, statistics using the data on income and expenditure are comparable across years. Description of the surveys and their results can be found on the website of the World Bank and GSO (e.g. GSO (2014), GSO (2016), and GSO (2017)).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nguyen, H., Do, H., Kay, A. et al. Rice policy in a transitional economy: balancing the social and political objectives. Food Sec. 12, 549–566 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-01005-x

Download citation


  • Food policy
  • Rice
  • Political economy
  • Vietnam
  • Communist party
  • Exceptionalism