Page 110 - ISC PROCEEDINGS 21.4

theoretically explained by the GPT framework's J-curve and the AI productivity paradox,
and empirically traced to three structural constraints: human capital deficits affecting
approximately 38 million workers, fragmented data infrastructure that confines AI to
siloed applications, and an institutional architecture now being rapidly completed through
the 2024-2026 legislative agenda.
The period 2024-2026 has witnessed an unprecedented acceleration of policy
ambition, anchored in Politburo Resolution No. 57-NQ/TW (December 22, 2024), the first
Vietnamese AI Law (year-end 2025), a VND 95 trillion science and technology budget
allocation for 2026, and the National Assembly's targets of at least 10% GDP growth and
8.5% labor productivity growth. These represent the most coherent AI governance and
industrial strategy architecture in Vietnam's history, creating genuine enabling conditions
for AI to transition from experimentation to productivity-generating deployment at
national scale. Yet policy ambition must be matched by implementation discipline.
McKinsey's insight that technology alone is never enough for true productivity, requiring
organizational redesign, workforce transformation, and new management models
(McKinsey & Company, 2024), applies with full force in Vietnam. Equally, Acemoglu's
(2024) caution that AI deployment focused on automation rather than worker
augmentation risks reducing labor welfare without commensurate productivity gains is
particularly salient given Vietnam's large informal workforce and limited social protection
for displaced workers.
This paper makes three contributions. Theoretically, it applies GPT theory, the
productivity J-curve, and TFP decomposition to a lower-middle-income economy in rapid
digital transition, illuminating the conditions under which AI adoption translates into AI
productivity in developing country contexts. Empirically, it provides the most
comprehensive English-language synthesis of Vietnam's AI-economy landscape through
2025-2026, integrating evidence from the OECD Economic Surveys: Viet Nam 2025, e-
Conomy SEA 2025, the Vietnam AI Economy 2025 report, and multiple official statistical
sources. In terms of policy, it offers a structured, evidence-based recommendation
framework directly anchored in Vietnam's current legislative and strategic context.

References
[1]. Acemoglu, D. (2024). The simple macroeconomics of AI (MIT Economics Working
Paper). MIT Department of Economics.
https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2024-
04/The%20Simple%20Macroeconomics%20of%20AI.pdf
[2]. Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. (2023). Power and progress: Our thousand-year
struggle over technology and prosperity. PublicAffairs.
[3]. Bresnahan, T. F., & Trajtenberg, M. (1995). General purpose technologies:
Engines of growth? Journal of Econometrics, 65(1), 83–108.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01598-T
[4]. Brynjolfsson, E. (1993). The productivity paradox of information technology.
Communications of the ACM, 36(12), 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1145/163298.163309
[5]. Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. (2000). Beyond computation: Information technology,
organizational transformation and business performance. Journal of Economic
Perspectives, 14(4), 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.14.4.23
[6]. Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress,
and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. W. W. Norton & Company.

109