اقتصاد سیاسی ویتنام، از پارادایم سوسیالیستی تا تجدید حیات دوی موی

Given that the characteristics of each country are different, just as the experiences of China, the Soviet Union, and Japan are different, and the Islamic Republic of Iran also has its own divine values ​​and specific conditions, for which the Vietnamese model is neither desirable nor possible, understanding Vietnam also requires a specific study of this country. The main question of this article is what is the relationship between the gradual and combined change of the socialist paradigm in the political economy and the remarkable economic growth of Vietnam from 1986 to 2023? In response to this hypothesis, it has been proposed that the gradual and combined change of the socialist paradigm in the political economy has caused the remarkable economic growth of Vietnam from 1986 to 2023. The quality of this paradigm and its evolution have been examined in detail in the text of the article. The research method in this article is explanatory, based on which the relationship between two variables, the dominant paradigm and Vietnam's economic performance, has been examined. In this article, data and empirical evidence have been collected in a library manner. The findings of this article show that the Doi Moi, which means revival, occurred as a result of a crisis in the dominant socialist paradigm that dominated the political economy of Vietnam. This paradigm determined issues as priorities and also specific solutions to achieve those priorities and preferences. Therefore, firstly, it placed the expansion of Marxist modernization as the supreme goal and secondly, it did not allow recourse to solutions outside the dominant paradigm. The Doi Moi was a search for solutions outside the socialist paradigm and by attracting other policies to overcome economic problems, a search that was based on pragmatism and not on the dogmas of the Washington Consensus, which were offered to the countries of the former Eastern Bloc and the Third World.
Introduction
In the past three decades, economic development indicators have shown remarkable transformation in Vietnam. The country has risen from being one of the poorest nations in the world to a lower-middle-income economy. Between 2002 and 2018, the national per capita income grew by 2.7 percent annually, reaching $2,700 by 2019. As a result, according to the World Bank, over 45 million people have been lifted out of poverty from a total population of 95 million. This progress is particularly significant considering that in the early 1980s, Vietnam was one of the poorest countries globally, facing widespread economic stagnation and a severe inability to supply rice, the staple food of its population. Alongside a staggering 700 percent inflation rate, the country was on the brink of collapse. Ultimately, with the escalation of economic crises, Vietnam, since 1986, has undergone a transition from a dominant socialist paradigm while maintaining elements of political authoritarianism. The economic prosperity of Vietnam since 1986 is the result of changes introduced under the Doi Moi reforms. The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between economic performance and the prevailing paradigm shaped by the beliefs, ideas, and worldview of the political leaders who have governed Vietnam. The central question of the paper is: What is the connection between the paradigm shift and Vietnam's remarkable economic growth from 1986 to 2023? In response, the hypothesis posited is that the shift in the dominant political economy paradigm has driven the significant economic growth of Vietnam from 1986 to 2023. The quality of this paradigm and its evolution are examined in detail within the body of the paper.
Theoretical Framework
Inspired by Kuhn's work on scientific paradigms, the concept of a paradigm is also used to classify the approaches to economic development. From this perspective, a paradigm is defined as a set of principles, ideologies, and strategies accepted by a group of individuals. Accordingly, any paradigm that becomes dominant under the leadership of a government firstly determines what that government considers important. For example, does a government view military power as the primary concern, or does it prioritize the wealth and economic well-being of the country? Or does it consider both power and wealth, or security and prosperity, as equally crucial? This depends on the prevailing paradigm. Each paradigm defines the goals and priorities for governments and outlines the strategies and methods necessary to achieve those goals. The dominant paradigm is what guides policymakers, showing them the paths ahead, highlighting which issues are most critical, determining which objectives to pursue, and, of course, advising on the strategies and policies required to resolve these issues and achieve the set goals. The dominant paradigm, accepted by political leaders, brings to the forefront the problems the country is facing and provides solutions for addressing them.
Methodology
The research method employed in this paper is explanatory, through which the relationship between two variables—the dominant paradigm and Vietnam's economic performance—is examined. Additionally, in this study, data and empirical evidence have been gathered through a library-based approach.
Results and Discussion
The findings of this paper indicate that Doi Moi, meaning "Renovation," emerged as a result of a crisis within the dominant socialist paradigm that had controlled Vietnam's political economy. This paradigm prioritized certain issues and prescribed specific solutions for achieving these priorities and preferences. As a result, it neither placed the expansion of public welfare at the forefront of national objectives nor allowed recourse to solutions outside the dominant paradigm. In fact, poverty in Vietnam had solutions, but these solutions were prohibited under the paradigm that prevailed until 1986. Doi Moi represented an exploration of alternatives beyond the prevailing paradigm to overcome economic challenges, but this search was grounded in pragmatism and gradual change. Therefore, since within different societies there are various beliefs, ideologies, worldviews, and opinions, different political paradigms can emerge. Each paradigm represents a consensus among political leaders and a large portion of the society who accept it. Additionally, there may be rival political paradigms, each of which highlights a hierarchy of goals and issues within the realm of political economy and proposes solutions and strategies for the government to achieve these goals and resolve these issues. Which paradigm dominates a government depends on which group emerges victorious in the power struggles among different political and social groups. The group that wins the internal conflicts of a country is able to establish the dominance of the paradigm it carries. This paper examines the political economy of Vietnam from this theoretical perspective.
Conclusions & Suggestions
Since the second half of the 20th century, there have been rival political forces in Vietnam, each carrying different beliefs, ideologies, and worldviews. Following the departure of France and the United States, the Communist Party took control over the entire territory of the country. The political leaders of the Party, having emerged victorious in the internal struggles in Vietnam, established a specific paradigm that dominated the country’s political economy. This paradigm, first, did not prioritize the expansion of public welfare as a central goal of the political system, but rather emphasized concepts such as fighting imperialism, stressing independence, and ensuring the livelihood of the people. The economic outcomes of this paradigm for Vietnam resulted in the continuation of widespread poverty, as it not only condemned the idea of wealth accumulation among the people but also imposed specific solutions for ensuring basic livelihoods, which were often ineffective. Doi Moi, a gradual process grounded in economic pragmatism, led to the remarkable economic growth of Vietnam from 1986 onward. The economic success of Vietnam since 1986 can be attributed to the adoption of solutions that were outside the framework of the dominant socialist paradigm, solutions that were implemented with a pragmatic approach by the political leadership .  .
 
.