Page 18 - ISC PROCEEDINGS 21.4

intelligent operation platforms, while local authorities establish standards and use the
services. Although not yet representative of a fully mature technology PPP regime, this
case shows that PPP can be adapted to digital sectors where government demand and
private technology capacity can interact productively.
At the same time, several limitations remain evident. First, the legal framework,
although recently improved, is still largely untested and in some respects incomplete.
Guidance is still limited on such issues as project identification, contract structure for
R&D-intensive activities, valuation of intangible assets, revenue and benefit-sharing, and
the role of public data in PPP arrangements. Second, many public agencies and local
authorities may remain cautious in applying new mechanisms because innovation
projects are riskier, more uncertain, and harder to evaluate than infrastructure projects.
Third, enterprises may hesitate if commercialization rights, intellectual property
arrangements, and public support mechanisms are not sufficiently clear. Fourth, Vietnam
still lacks a strong pipeline of bankable high-tech PPP projects and lacks sufficiently
specialized intermediary institutions to structure and coordinate such projects.
A further challenge is that current progress in Vietnam is still more policy-driven
than market-driven. In other words, the legal and strategic commitment is advancing
faster than practical implementation capacity. This creates a gap between policy ambition
and institutional readiness. The effectiveness of the new framework will therefore
depend not only on the promulgation of legal texts, but also on the State’s ability to pilot
concrete projects, provide credible incentives, build project preparation capacity, and
generate trust among private investors.
Overall, the current state of PPP in high-tech innovation in Vietnam may be
described as one of cautious transition: the policy foundation is strengthening, practical
experimentation is beginning, but implementation remains constrained by institutional,
legal, and organizational limitations. This is precisely why international comparison is
useful, not as an end in itself, but as a basis for identifying what kinds of policy adaptation
are most suitable for Vietnam.
4.2. International experience in public-private partnerships for high-tech
innovation
Internationally, countries have adopted diverse PPP models to promote high-tech
innovation, depending on their institutional capacities and strategic priorities.
The United States provides a prominent example of mission-oriented public-private
innovation. Agencies such as NASA and DARPA use procurement contracts and public
funding to support high-risk R&D that private firms would rarely undertake alone. NASA’s
Commercial Crew Program, involving firms such as SpaceX and Boeing, illustrates how the
State can share technological risk, guarantee demand through procurement, and catalyze
major breakthroughs. The United States also uses publicly funded national laboratories as
platforms for joint research with firms, thereby accelerating technology transfer and
practical application.
Israel offers a different model through the Yozma venture capital program. By using
public capital to co-invest with private funds and by allowing private partners to buy out
the State’s stake on favorable terms, Israel succeeded in attracting substantial private
investment into technology startups. The key lesson is that well-designed co-investment
schemes can crowd in private capital and help create a self-sustaining innovation market.
The European Union has developed large-scale strategic innovation partnerships
through programmes such as Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe. Public institutions, firms,

17