On the opening day of the 14th National Party Congress, January 20, Dr. Tran Dinh Thien shared with VietNamNet that the goal of achieving double-digit economic growth is not merely a technical target, but a profound test of Vietnam’s developmental thinking.

A high-growth goal meant to lead, not just measure

The 14th Congress will deliberate and approve the draft Political Report, which sets the foundation for national development over the next five years. How do you assess the double-digit growth target outlined in the report?

Dr. Tran Dinh Thien – Member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council: What’s notable this time is that the double-digit growth target is not just set for a single five-year term, but is tied to a long-term vision extending to 2045.

In my view, this high target serves a guiding and directional role - it is not .just a technical figure.

The fundamental difference in the economy compared to forty years ago lies in its structure and quality. Today, we no longer "bet" on the old model of industrialisation - we’ve moved away from mechanical industrialisation heavily reliant on subcontracting, assembly, natural resources like coal and oil, or cheap labour.

The current goal - and also the foundation for development - is to build a high-standard economy rooted in technology, knowledge, and innovation.

This time, the double-digit growth target is not simply about scale; more importantly, it’s about quality. These two goals are inseparably linked.

Forty years ago, concepts like digital economy, green economy, or knowledge economy were unfamiliar to us. Now that these new orientations and drivers have become pillars, the way the economy operates must change entirely.

If we continue holding on to the old mindset - merely "tweaking," "upgrading," or "expanding" the old model - we will not be able to achieve the new goals.

Therefore, the central issue in reaching double-digit growth is whether we dare to change our way of doing things. In essence, this is a major test of mindset and the vision of national development governance - not just a question of GDP. That is the most important logic.

Where, in your view, does the momentum for this new development model come from?

First, we need to clearly recognize the shift in how we understand the forces and drivers of growth.

In the past, we viewed economic sectors mainly as "resources" - things that could be mobilized and allocated. But drivers are what propel the economy forward, generate momentum and renewal.

Without true drivers, even with resources, the economy will move very slowly - if at all.

So where is the most vital force in the economy?

Previously, the private sector was seen as a supporting actor - sometimes even stigmatized. Now, the private sector is positioned at the very center of growth momentum. That marks a fundamental transformation.

Growth can no longer rely on the administrative or state sector in the way we used to understand them - sectors that rarely demonstrated full efficiency or competitiveness.

It is the private sector, grounded in market competition, that consistently proves its strength.

If we look back at 1986, the shift is clear. With just one signal of "opening," the private sector - despite being weak at the time - immediately sprang to life, bringing goods to market and transforming economic life rapidly.

Today, we not only recognize the private sector - we affirm it as the principal, leading force.

This is a pivot in development thinking, carrying the potential to fundamentally shift our economic trajectory.

Beyond the private sector, the industrialisation model is also being discussed as a major shift - would you agree?

Absolutely. In the past, industrialisation largely relied on low technology, traditional mechanics, and assembly-based manufacturing.

Even when foreign investment was attracted, the main advantage remained cheap labor - which translated to low productivity.

Now, that model has fundamentally changed. We’ve made it very clear - especially in Resolution 57 - that our direction is high technology, the digital economy, and knowledge-based development.

The most frequently mentioned concepts today are innovation and artificial intelligence.

Growth drivers are no longer gasoline, machinery, or basic assembly lines - they are high-tech capabilities, knowledge, and creative capacity.

From now on, businesses are expected to be technology enterprises, innovation-driven enterprises - rooted in knowledge and modern finance.

Addressing infrastructure bottlenecks through rapid, previously unimaginable shifts is also seen as a major development driver. Would you agree?

In the past, we often said “infrastructure should go one step ahead,” but in reality, it usually lagged behind. It was fragmented - patching where stuck, unclogging where blocked. Interregional connectivity, in particular, was very weak.

In recent years, however, we’ve witnessed a completely different approach. Infrastructure is now seen as an integrated, high-standard system that connects the entire economy. Expressways are no longer developed in dribs and drabs - they're being rolled out simultaneously along major corridors linking key economic zones.

It’s not just roads - urban railways, airports, seaports, and energy infrastructure have all been elevated to a new strategic level. The direction is toward clean energy, renewable energy. Industrial infrastructure is no longer understood in the traditional sense, but is now associated with high-tech zones, free trade areas, and modern urban developments.

More importantly, doing things right builds trust. When the market has confidence, when businesses have confidence, then social capital will flow much more strongly.

In my view, the beginning of this shift was Van Don Airport. That project broke the “mental straitjacket” of old thinking and old methods, proving that a world-class national infrastructure system is entirely feasible through the strategic combination of public and non-state resources.

And what about international integration - a powerful driver of development - how do you assess its current role?

Previously, our open economy leaned heavily on trade and foreign investment - but under the old growth model. Rapid and aggressive liberalisation, when our internal capabilities were still weak, often led to dependency and made it difficult to elevate the economy’s quality - especially if we wanted to rely more on internal strength.

Now, integration is positioned at a much higher level. Vietnam is proactively choosing investors, prioritising high technology, and inviting global tech giants to invest, build, and develop innovation ecosystems. Integration is no longer just about opening doors - it’s about stepping into higher positions within global value chains.

Overall, the Vietnamese economy today operates on two parallel pillars: one is the strong push to develop the domestic sector with full market mechanisms; the other is high-level international integration, aligned with technology, value chains, and global standards.

Combating waste – A driver of growth

Looking ahead to the first year of this new development cycle, in your opinion, how should localities set their growth targets to maintain the 10% goal while avoiding a mentality of chasing quotas?

The first year of a new term - and at the same time, the opening year of a new development cycle - is always a difficult one, especially given the current international context.

In 2025, Vietnam’s average national growth exceeded 8%. However, some localities grew by just over 6%, while others surpassed 10%. This shows that provinces and cities are not starting from the same baseline.

Therefore, it's unrealistic to expect every locality to reach equally high growth in the first year of the new cycle. More importantly, each locality must accurately assess its own starting conditions, clearly define its development thinking, and implement solutions that maximize the role of the State - especially local governments. That includes how they use public investment to guide and activate local private sectors, which vary greatly in capability.

If the foundation is solid, this new growth cycle will have a real launching pad to ensure sustained high growth throughout the term.

We need a flexible approach to growth targets. Every locality is currently aiming for double-digit growth in 2026. That reflects strong commitment and responsibility at the national level. But based on actual implementation conditions, I believe not every locality will realistically reach 10% or more this year on its own.

That doesn’t mean they aren’t committed. It simply highlights two essential conditions that must be addressed.

First, the central government must promptly “empower” local levels - give them the space to decide, to act, and to take full responsibility. Such empowerment must be based on trust in the creative capacity of those taking action.

Second, localities that face greater difficulties in growth conditions need concrete, active support from the central level - in terms of resources, and especially in terms of mechanisms and policy frameworks.

In the medium term, some provinces may need to spend the first one to two years focusing on building foundations in infrastructure, institutional reform, and financial readiness. From that base, they can break through in the later years. This approach is not about lowering commitment or softening targets. It is, in fact, a dialectical method rooted in long-term development logic - tailored to different starting points.

In reality, provinces with smaller economies tend to grow faster. Conversely, major economic hubs that are restructuring may initially grow more slowly. According to that logic, if cities like Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City can quickly resolve bottlenecks in infrastructure and urban traffic, their momentum in the following years could be immense. But clearly, these “locomotives” will require more time and resources.

In short, when designing growth targets, localities should not chase numbers under administrative orders. Resources are like food for the human body - you must eat enough, at the right time, to properly digest. Injecting more capital does not automatically lead to higher or more sustainable growth.

You’ve repeatedly emphasized that “fighting waste” is a critical growth driver. Why do you consider this a decisive factor, especially in the context of setting a double-digit growth goal?

In recent years, the economy has demonstrated a strong capacity to mobilize resources. That’s a powerful engine we can count on. But the risk is that we are overly reliant on “static” resources.

In the coming period, achieving high growth will still require significant capital mobilization. But if we focus only on raising capital without improving how efficiently it’s used, it won’t be enough.

The priority must now shift decisively toward combating waste. Our economy is currently wasting at an alarming scale. General Secretary To Lam was among the first to highlight this. His message is clear: we must not only seek new resources, but also drastically improve the effectiveness of how we use what we already have - and that effort needs to start now.

If we succeed, we will see stronger discipline and much higher growth efficiency.

Take a concrete example: nearly 2,900 investment projects are currently stalled due to legal bottlenecks. The capital tied up is close to $250 billion. In 2026, if we manage to unblock, say, 1,000 of these projects, we could immediately unlock $70–80 billion in capital.

Simply unfreezing that blocked capital would be enough to “wake up” the economy and spark strong growth.

If that capital remains frozen, interest payments continue, funds erode, assets deteriorate, labor is wasted on a large scale, and Vietnamese businesses remain unable to rise. The cost to society is enormous.

Fighting waste here isn’t about assigning blame for the past. It’s about designing mechanisms to clear current backlogs - and, more importantly, ensuring no new waste is created going forward.

We must address both types of waste simultaneously: first, resolve legacy inefficiencies to liberate the economy; second, create mechanisms that prevent inefficiency from the outset in future initiatives.

If done well, this alone could significantly lift growth beyond the 8% rate seen in 2025.

And we must remember: fighting waste doesn’t just help raise GDP. More importantly, it makes the economy healthier, more disciplined, and more transparent.

Tu Giang - Lan Anh