The goal of double-digit growth is entirely feasible, but only if Vietnam prepares a sufficient foundation, from institutions and people to the internal strength of the economy, to maintain a flight path lasting 10–15 years.

The issue does not lie in ambition, but in the method: there must be substantive institutional reform to reduce the operating costs of the economy, while simultaneously concentrating resources on a few localities and sectors with the best absorption capacity.

When the "main engines" generate enough thrust, a spillover effect will take shape, creating confidence and putting the economy onto a sustainable growth trajectory.

Double-digit growth, starting from this year, is a correct strategic choice if Vietnam wants to escape the middle-income trap and enter a higher development trajectory. But for this goal to become a reality, two things must be observed.

First, a sufficient foundation must be prepared, from institutions and people to the internal strength of the economy, so as to take off and not to lose breath when taking a long flight. Double-digit growth is not a one- or two-year sprint; it must be maintained for at least 10–15 years to sufficiently accumulate domestic capital, creating a foundation for reinvestment and sustainable development.

Second, Vietnam must know how to focus resources. Resources cannot be spread thin over a wide area; instead, force must be concentrated on a few key localities and industries, the places with good investment absorption, creating fast efficiency, and thereby spreading to neighboring regions, helping the economy gain momentum to enter a high-growth trajectory.

Development history shows that the right goal does not automatically create the right result. The decisive factor lies in the method, especially the quality of institutions and implementation capacity. If growth is pushed while the institutional foundation is still overlapping, infrastructure is congested, and the implementation apparatus lacks consistency, the 10 percent goal is not only difficult to maintain but could also create the opposite effect: inefficient investment, distorted resource allocation, and eroded market confidence.

Double-digit growth is like an airplane preparing for takeoff. When the runway is still short, the weather is unfavorable, and the engines have not reached optimal performance, the survival principle is to reduce the load to the minimum necessary. If expectations are piled on, resources spread out, and speed forced mechanically, the aircraft may fail to take off, or face risks right at the start.

The Vietnamese economy is currently at that exact "takeoff moment." And "reducing the load" here does not mean reducing ambition, but increasing discipline in selection. Instead of doing more, one must do it more correctly, meaning prioritizing reforms and investment points with the greatest spillover impact.

The core of all cores is institutional reform. No country has achieved sustained high growth without going through a period of extensive institutional reform. Institutions are not just rules, but how laws are implemented, the level of transparency, the predictability of the business environment, and the confidence of businesses in the fairness of the "rules of the game."

In Vietnam today, the biggest bottleneck no longer lies in a lack of capital or ideas, but in institutional costs: prolonged procedures, legal overlaps, a fear of responsibility within the apparatus, and inconsistency between central and local levels. When institutional costs are high, all efforts to accelerate are internally "braked".

Therefore, if one wants to achieve substantive double-digit growth, institutional reform cannot be an "add-on" but must be the main engine of the development strategy. This requires specific and measurable steps: Substantially cutting administrative procedures, establishing a mechanism to protect officials who dare to act, standardizing and synchronizing the legal system, and, most importantly, creating an environment where businesses can make quick investment decisions with low institutional risk.

Also, the growth strategy must be highly focused. Vietnam cannot push all localities and all sectors at once.

Resources are finite, and in a “takeoff” phase, misallocation of resources can be extremely costly. Clear “locomotives” must be identified, i.e the localities with strong capital absorption, relatively complete infrastructure, and robust business ecosystems capable of delivering quick gains.

Growth centers such as HCMC–Binh Duong–Dong Nai; Hanoi–Hai Phong–Bac Ninh; along with growth poles like Da Nang, Ba Ria–Vung Tau, and Can Tho should be granted greater flexibility, higher autonomy, and clearer accountability. These must be the places that “run ahead,” pulling the entire economy forward. This focus is not favoritism; it is efficiency.

Tran Sy Chuong