Page 206 - ISC PROCEEDINGS 21.4

and innovation ecosystem that ultimately determine whether AI can be effectively
implemented in public governance. When these three layers are examined together, it
becomes clear that Vietnam’s current strategic gap does not lie in digital infrastructure,
but rather in its ability to convert this digital foundation into AI capabilities for public
governance. This insight provides the basis for the policy implications discussed in the
following section.
5. Conclusion
This study contributes to the literature on digital government and artificial
intelligence in the public sector by providing an integrated assessment of the transition
from e-government to AI-enabled governance. Previous studies have primarily examined
these dimensions separately, focusing either on digital government transformation
(Mergel et al., 2019; Janssen et al., 2020) or on the institutional conditions for AI adoption
in public administration (Wirtz et al., 2019; Zuiderwijk et al., 2021). Recent research also
emphasizes that AI readiness is shaped by broader institutional and innovation
ecosystems (Iuga & Socol, 2024; Anomah, 2025). Building on these perspectives, this
study develops a three-layer analytical framework linking e-government foundations,
GovTech maturity, and AI readiness. By integrating three global measurement systems—
EGDI, GTMI, and the Government AI Readiness Index—the study provides a comparative
empirical assessment of Vietnam’s position in the evolving architecture of digital
governance. The results reveal a structural gap between the country’s relatively strong
digital government infrastructure and its lower level of AI readiness. This finding extends
existing research by demonstrating that high levels of e-government development alone
are insufficient for AI-enabled governance without deeper capabilities in data governance,
institutional coordination, and technological ecosystems.
6. Policy implications
The findings indicate that Vietnam’s transition from e-government to AI-enabled
public governance is characterized by a structural imbalance across the three capability
layers. While the country has achieved relatively strong performance in digital
infrastructure (EGDI) and GovTech systems (GTMI), its AI readiness remains comparatively
low within ASEAN (Table 5), particularly in the pillars of Policy Capacity, Development and
Diffusion, and Resilience. Addressing this gap requires not only general policy
improvements but also targeted interventions that directly respond to these specific
weaknesses.
First, priority should be given to strengthening policy capacity and institutional
coordination, which represent one of the weakest components of Vietnam’s AI readiness.
Despite the existence of national digital transformation and AI strategies, implementation
remains fragmented across ministries and local governments. This fragmentation is partly
rooted in the decentralized structure of data ownership and the absence of a unified
coordination mechanism. To address this issue, Vietnam should establish a central AI
governance authority with a clear mandate to coordinate cross-ministerial data sharing,
standardize implementation guidelines, and monitor policy execution. In parallel, AI-
related performance indicators should be integrated into public sector evaluation systems
to ensure accountability and alignment between national strategies and local
implementation. Strengthening policy capacity in this way is a prerequisite for improving
overall AI readiness.
Second, targeted investment should focus on enhancing the national AI innovation
ecosystem, particularly in response to low scores in Development and Diffusion. Current

205