This means the principle of “local decisions, local implementation, local accountability” has yet to be realized.

On November 2, the Academy of Administration and Public Governance, together with the Vietnam Association of Administrative Sciences and Tay Ho Ward People’s Committee (Hanoi), held a forum on “Local governance at the ward administrative level.”

Staffing shortages 

Tran Anh Tuan, Chair of the Vietnam Association of Administrative Sciences and former Deputy Minister of Home Affairs, affirmed that the two-tier local government model, replacing the three-tier system from July 1, 2025, is a progressive step suited to the country’s development needs in the new era.

However, he noted that during implementation, the two-tier model has faced significant challenges, especially when Vietnam is switching from state administration to local governance, including urban governance at the ward level.

With the two-level local government model, local governance not only requires ward authorities to decide on issues within the management scope in the ward area, but also to be the center and pillar implementing the mission of orientation, creation, and coordination for economic-cultural-social development.

Ward authorities must promote digital transformation, including digital human resources and digital capacity in many aspects, including knowledge, skills, and thinking, in order to make data-based decisions and implement evidence-based policies.

At the same time, authorities need to connect and promote the strength of the business sector, develop private economy, innovate, bear supervision, listen to criticism and promote resources from businesses and social organizations; innovate organization and activities of residential communities toward self-management and autonomy, thus creating connection and cooperation between authorities - businesses - residential communities.

The former deputy minister pointed out many challenges facing ward administrations today: organizational and staffing pressures causing work overload; a lack of defined job descriptions; inconsistent procedures despite decentralization (in land management, construction order, environmental sanitation, and public services); limited autonomy in managing operations, finances, and staffing; slow digital transformation; insufficient progress in developing “smart wards”; and a workforce of limited capacity and low motivation.

Nguyen Thanh Tinh, Chair of Tay Ho Ward People’s Committee, said that while the two-tier model gives wards more autonomy, “the lack of synchronized authority in problem-solving” remains the biggest challenge.

“We often face difficulties in dealing with issues in urban management, construction, and environmental protection because our authority is limited. We must report to and wait for the city’s approval, which reduces efficiency and timeliness,” Tinh said.

He added that while local authorities are implementing digital transformation, the use of technology is still limited to data entry and reporting. The government has not yet been able to apply AI or big data effectively in risk management or public service forecasting.

“Workload pressure is high, professional demands are increasing, but salary and incentive policies remain insufficient to attract and retain qualified staff. Mechanisms for financial autonomy or mobilizing social resources for self-governance, innovation, and urban management are still full of obstacles,” he added.

The vicious circle of “ask-give”

Prof Nguyen Quoc Suu, Deputy Director of the Academy of Public Administration and Management, said shifting from a three-level to two-level local government helps reduce intermediate layers, thus improving government operation efficiency, increasing state governance effectiveness, ensuring decisions are implemented quickly. Ward-level authorities are given more initiative, enhancing responsibility in serving and supporting people.

Shifting from “administrative command” thinking to “service-governance” has created a clear impact on the organization and operation of ward-level authorities, demonstrating fundamental changes in state management culture.

He said although there are now many regulations on decentralization and delegation, in reality, wards still need city approval for everything. This fails to implement the spirit of “local decides, local does, local takes responsibility".

According to Suu, the solution to resolve the vicious circle of “asking-giving” and enhance ward authority responsibility is perfecting the institutional framework confirming public legal personality of local authorities (clearly stipulating ward authorities as public legal entities with separate assets and budgets), self-responsibility (independent before law and people for their decisions) and strengthening of adjudication mechanisms (ensuring people can effectively sue administrative decisions equally before law).

In addition, it is necessary to develop professional human resources by building the image of “professional, friendly, dedicated and creative urban civil servants”.

Nguyen Ba Chien, Director of the Academy of Public Administration and Management, pointed out four “bottlenecks” directly affecting ward-level authority performance and efficiency: overload in workload and psychological pressure on civil servants; inadequacies in capacity and structure of civil servant teams; “gaps” in coordination and direction mechanisms; and obstacles in institutions, processes and supporting infrastructure.

Thu Hang