Page 17 - ISC PROCEEDINGS 21.4

Ministry of Science and Technology and the Ministry of Finance; (3) domestic and
international academic studies on PPP, innovation governance, commercialization, and
high-tech development; and (4) selected references from international organizations such
as the OECD, the World Bank, and ADB.
The analysis proceeds in three steps. First, content analysis is used to examine the
main features of Vietnam’s PPP policy for high-tech innovation, including legal
foundations, policy objectives, incentive mechanisms, and institutional gaps. Second,
selected international experiences are reviewed to identify relevant models of
innovation-oriented PPP. Third, comparative analysis is applied to assess the alignment
between Vietnam’s policy direction and international lessons.
Methodologically, international experience is used only as a comparative reference,
while the core focus remains Vietnam’s current PPP framework in high-tech innovation.
The study also incorporates expert views from domestic policy forums in 2025 as
supplementary inputs to contextualize recent reforms. Overall, the methodology
combines perspectives from public economics, public management, and innovation
governance, consistent with the multidimensional nature of PPP in high-tech sectors.
4. The current state of public-private partnerships in high-tech innovation in
Vietnam, international comparison, and policy lessons
4.1. The current state of public-private partnerships in high-tech innovation in
Vietnam
In Vietnam, PPP in high-tech innovation is still at an early and formative stage.
Compared with conventional PPP sectors such as transport, energy, and water
infrastructure, its application in science, technology, innovation, and digital
transformation remains limited in both legal practice and actual project implementation.
For many years, Vietnam’s PPP regime was designed primarily for physical infrastructure,
while innovation-related cooperation between the State and enterprises took place
through fragmented arrangements rather than through a dedicated policy framework.
This situation has recently changed in an important way. The 2025 Law on Science,
Technology and Innovation and Decree No. 180/2025/ND-CP have created a more explicit
legal basis for PPP in science, technology, innovation, and digital transformation. This is a
major policy development because it formally extends PPP into areas such as digital
infrastructure, digital platforms, innovation centers, technology training, and other high-
tech activities. It also indicates a shift in development thinking: the State is no longer
expected to rely only on direct public funding, but increasingly to mobilize private
resources and expertise in pursuit of strategic technology goals.
At the policy level, this reflects growing recognition that high-tech innovation
requires different governance arrangements from conventional infrastructure PPPs. The
new framework includes more flexible forms of cooperation, broader incentive
mechanisms, and greater openness to risk-sharing than the earlier infrastructure-oriented
model. It also aligns with Resolution No. 57-NQ/TW (2024), which positions enterprises as
central actors in the innovation ecosystem, while the State acts as an enabler, regulator,
and strategic coordinator.
In practice, however, implementation remains limited. Vietnam currently has only a
small number of PPP-like or PPP-related experiences in innovation-oriented fields, and
these are concentrated mainly in digital transformation and innovation infrastructure. Da
Nang’s smart city model is one of the most cited domestic examples. In this case,
enterprises build and operate digital systems such as data centers, networks, and

16