Duong et al.
, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923
Received: 30 May 2023
Accepted: 12 November 2023
*Corresponding author: Mai T.T.
Duong, Department of Geography,
Planning and Environment, Institute
for Management Research, Radboud
University, Nijmegen, The
Netherlands
E-mail: mai.duong-phi@ru.nl
Reviewing editor:
Pier Luigi Sacco, Humanities, IULM
University, ITALY
Additional information is available at
the end of the article
TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY | RESEARCH ARTICLE
Socio-economic and environmental impacts of
land acquisition for tourism development in
Vietnam
Mai T.T. Duong1,2*, D. Ary A. Samsura1,3 and Erwin van der Krabben1
Abstract: Like in many countries around the world, Vietnam’s tourism development
has been a driver for land acquisitions. In the process of land acquisition, according
to the introduction of the 2013 Land Law, affected people in Vietnam have gained
more negotiation power and better compensation deals. Nevertheless, the impacts
of land acquisition on local socio-economic and environmental conditions remain
controversial. Hence, this paper aims to investigate the following research ques­
tions: (1) Has there been a difference in the practice of land acquisition before and
after the introduction of the new law? (2) Has there been a difference in local socio-
economic conditions following land acquisitions before and after the introduction of
the new law? and (3) How does the land acquisition process impact local people
from the perspective of sustainable development? Two cases of tourism develop­
ment were used in this study to illustrate the differences. The findings showed that,
although there were differences in land acquisition between the two case studies
due to the reform of the 2013 Land Law, the changes in the living conditions of
affected communities in the two cases were not significant. Secondly, the study
found that participation and compensation are the two factors that lead to socio-
economic and environmental effects concerning issues of land price, local safety,
and pollution in the land acquisition process. Although this study is centred on the
Vietnamese context, the results could well be useful for a broader context, espe­
cially because the negative impact of land acquisition processes for tourism devel­
opment on local people has become a serious issue in many countries.
Subjects: Asian Studies; Sustainable Development; Political Studies; Sustainability;
Tourism Planning and Policy
Keywords: Vietnam; land acquisition; tourism; land law; sustainable development
1. Introduction
Like in many other countries, tourism has been considered a key sector of Vietnam’s economy due
to its significant contribution to GDP, job creation, economic restructuring, and investment attrac­
tions (Ha, 2012). The tourism sector’s contribution to GDP in Vietnam has increased from 6.3% in
2015 to 9.2% in 2019. The sector has created jobs for approximately 2.6 million workers in 2019 –
accounting for roughly 5% of Vietnam’s workforce (Intelligence, 2022)—in comparison to only
450,000 in 2013 (Dinh et al., 2019). According to the 2019 Vietnam Tourism Annual Report,
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribu­
tion, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on
which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in
a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
Page 1 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Vietnam welcomed nearly 18 million international visitors and generated 85 million domestic
visitors. In line with that, the number of accommodation establishments, such as hotels, resorts,
and golf courses has also continued to increase. By 2019, Vietnam had 30,000 accommodation
establishments with 650,000 rooms in total. The average annual growth of the number of tourist
accommodations and rooms in Vietnam during the period 2015–2019 reached 12.0 % and 15.1%,
respectively. This partly reflects the reality that there have been more large-scale and high-end
tourist accommodation investments in Vietnam. A new wave of all-in-one resorts and leisure and
entertainment complexes has been recorded in Vietnam in recent years. Although Vietnam’s
tourism industry in general and the tourist accommodation sector in particular experienced severe
losses during the beginning of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, tourism development con­
tinues. Consequently, the demand for land for tourism facilities has been increasing annually. This
situation has placed pressure on other sectors in competition for land. Besides, as also shown in
many other countries, the process of land acquisition and conversion could influence the liveli­
hoods of affected people (see, e.g., (Ojeda, 2011; Prasad & Tisdell, 1998; Vanclay, 2017; Xu et al.,
2017)

In light of the above, the Vietnamese government has conducted several reforms related to land
conversion and compensation policies to help the affected people in the land acquisition process
and to prevent possible social conflicts over land, including for tourism development which could
be considered a method for supporting sustainable tourism (Nguyen, 2015; Nguyen et al., 2016).
One such reform is to give more rights to the original land users to negotiate for land compensa­
tion in a land acquisition process. Through this right, the original land users would have a greater
likelihood to receive higher benefits from the process compared to the situation before the
introduction of the new law. This marked an important milestone in the history of Vietnamese
land law. However, it is still unclear whether this change has led to real improvements for locally
affected people. This study seeks to determine whether this has been the case by focusing on two
research questions: 1) Have there been any differences in the land acquisition process before and
after the introduction of Vietnam’s latest Land Law? and 2) Have there been any differences in the
way that the land acquisition process in both situations has affected local people from the
perspective of sustainable development?

While this study is centred on the Vietnamese context, its results could well be useful for
a broader context, especially because the negative impact of land acquisition processes for
tourism development on local people has become a serious issue in many countries (see, e.g.
(Aabø & Kring, 2012; Mabe et al., 2019; Narain, 2009; Zhang et al., 2019), and more in Section 3).
Moreover, the fact that Vietnam is still experiencing the transitional process from a socialist and
centralized system to a more open and market-oriented system has also influenced the country’s
land policies (Duong et al., 2020; Nguyen et al., 2017) This factor could provide interesting insights
and perspectives for the general debates on land management and sustainable tourism.

The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. First, an overview of international literature
on sustainable development in tourism with a special focus on land issues is provided in the next
section followed by a discussion on the issue of land acquisition and its impacts on local people in
Sections 2 and 3 subsequently. Section 4 explains the methodology used for data collection and
analysis in this study. Afterwards, Vietnam’s land acquisition mechanism is introduced in Section 5
and the study sites are described in Section 6 to provide greater context for the study. The results
of the analyses are presented in Section 7 which are then discussed in Section 8. Finally, the main
conclusions are given in Section 9.

2. Sustainable development in tourism related to land issues

There exists an extensive literature on the topic of sustainable development, wherein the definition
of sustainable development has been interpreted in various ways. Among them, the definition
from the 1987 Brundtland Commission’s report, titled “Our Common Future”, seems to be more
exhaustive than others (Ciegis et al., 2009). The report defines sustainable development as “ . . .

Page 2 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

a process of change in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the
orientation of technological development, and institutional change are made consistent with future
as well as present needs” (Brundtland et al., 1987)

Accordingly, sustainable tourism development can be defined as the development that should
take full account of its current and future economic, social, and environmental impacts, address
the needs of visitors, the industry, the environment, and host communities, and provide socio-
economic benefits to all stakeholders, including the local community (World Tourism Organization,
2013). Related to this definition, many researchers have discussed how tourism can be developed
sustainably. For instance, Liu (2003) focused on the issue of simultaneously combining the needs
of the host community, business, and tourists, the demands for environmental protection, and the
sustainable use of resources. More specifically, Phan and Vo (2017) indicated that tourism devel­
opment must ensure the continuity of jobs for local people and preserve natural resources for
future generations. Vuong and Rajagopal (2019) argued that sustainable tourism development
means paying attention to economic benefits, the environment, and society, while also preserving
tourism resources and improving local living standards.

Based on the above studies, it can be concluded that generally speaking, sustainable tourism
development should focus on the attempt to balance the socio-economic and environmental
aspects for both future and present needs. Although tourism development can evidently support
economic growth, its implications on the socio-economic aspects of local communities directly
affected by the tourism industry are still questionable in some countries (Akama & Kieti, 2007;
Anderson, 2011; Turco et al., 2003). Indeed, some studies have shown that it is important for the
locally affected people in a tourism development process to have the opportunity to confidently
express their concerns on the consequent socio-economic impacts (Li et al., 2018). Scholars have
also argued providing people with more opportunities to actively participate in the tourism devel­
opment process results in less social tension and community dissatisfaction, which in turn, con­
tributes to the sustainability of the development (Hughes, 1995; Saufi et al., 2014). One of the
important activities in a tourism development process that directly impacts local people is land
acquisition. In the next section, the socio-economic and environmental effects of the land acquisi­
tion process for tourism development are discussed in greater detail.

3. Socio-economic and environmental aspects of land acquisition for tourism

Land remains a crucial source of livelihood for many people and is also a fundamental factor in the
development of many economic sectors, such as agriculture, mining, housing, industry, and tourism
(Vanclay, 2017). Therefore, any changes in the use of a land resource through land acquisition
processes might result in considerable impacts on many people’s livelihoods. Various studies have
reported that land acquisition processes have general socio-economic and environmental impacts on
local people, particularly in developing countries where local people’s livelihoods are highly depen­
dent on land resources. For instance, in China, thousands of hectares of agricultural land have been
acquired for non-agricultural activities, which has impacted the lives of many people in rural areas (Li
et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2019). In India, the large-scale acquisition of agricultural
land for urban development led to many negative local social, cultural, and economic changes, such
as idleness and alcoholism (Narain, 2009). Similarly, severe consequences of land acquisitions in the
agricultural sector have been reported in Ghana and Mozambique, wherein local people suffered from
displacement, lack of compensation for lost land, loss of jobs and alternative livelihoods, and
discontinued access to natural resources (Aabø & Kring, 2012). A remarkable change in ownership
and use of agricultural land in some Southeast Asian countries has also posed major threats to both
local livelihoods and the environment (Polack, 2012). For example, in Cambodia, large-scale agricul­
tural land acquisition and changes to land-use processes led to food insecurity, loss of livelihoods,
water pollution, and limited access to natural resources for local people (Khiev, 2009).

In the case of Vietnam, the continuing rise of land acquisitions for urbanization and industria­
lization, as well as its impacts on local people, have attracted the attention of both domestic and

Page 3 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

foreign scholars. For instance, Ravallion and Van de Walle (2008) suggested that unrestricted land
acquisition processes on land markets in Vietnam would increase landlessness among the poor.
Using a qualitative approach, Nguyen (2015) found that the practice of agricultural land acquisition
for an urban development project in the city of Hue has produced different impacts on certain
groups. Likewise, Nguyen (2015) employed regression analysis to quantify the effect of different
factors on household income after land loss and the role of financial compensation packages in
households’ livelihood reconstruction and found that the issue of equitable and sustainable
development remains controversial due to a lack of attention on establishing long-term
livelihoods.

Based on the aforementioned studies, we here provide a detailed list of some of the important
aspects in assessing the socio-economic and environmental impacts of land acquisition for tourism
development.

3.1. Socio-economic aspects

3.1.1. Land price levels

Through the land acquisition process, a parcel of land is transformed from agricultural land (which
often has a relatively low value) into commercial and tourism land, which tends to have
a comparably higher value. The land-use change would then lead to an altered land price, which
in turn could also distort the housing market (Lim, 2006). Moreover, the acquisition and conversion
of agricultural land could also influence the price of products and services in the agricultural
sector. Accordingly, the price of agricultural products could increase when the local supply
decreases as a consequence of the loss of agricultural land to such development projects as
tourism (Kodir, 2018).

3.1.2. Source of income

For those whose work is heavily dependent on land and natural resource extraction, such as
farmers, fishermen, or miners, a loss of land (or access to it) due to a land acquisition process
would mean losing their main source of income, which consequently influences their socio-
economic conditions (Cernea, 1997). Some scholars have shown that the privatization of com­
mons, such as land, water, beaches, and forests in many tourist sites (which occurs in many
countries, Vietnam included) has prevented local people from accessing and exploiting natural
resources for their economic benefit (Cohen, 2011; Le, 2016).

3.1.3. Job opportunities

A lack of job opportunities can negatively impact affected people’s socioeconomic conditions. In
many cases, those whose land is acquired to further the development of tourism accommodations
must find new sources of employment (Kumara, 2013; Telfer & Sharpley, 2015). Indeed, while
tourism development can create new jobs for locally affected people, these tend to be either
temporary or lowly paid due to their requiring a low level of skills and qualifications, while the more
sophisticated and highly paid jobs are often filled by outsiders. As a way to promote sustainable
tourism, it is therefore important to ensure that the people whose land was acquired for tourism
development would have the opportunity to obtain more favourable jobs as part of their essential
socio-economic conditions (Aabø & Kring, 2012)

3.1.4. Infrastructure
Changes to such infrastructure as roads, water systems, and electricity at the local destination can
significantly enhance the growth of tourism (Seetanah et al., 2011; Snyman & Saayman, 2009). The
improvement of local infrastructure due to tourism development is likely to increase the socio­
economic conditions of the local people (Abdollahzadeh & Sharifzadeh, 2014; Ogwang & Vanclay,
2019). Although infrastructure development to support tourism activities is often financed by local
governments, it can also be developed by tourism investors (Letoluo & Wangombe, 2018; Ogwang
& Vanclay, 2019)

Page 4 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

3.1.5. Social safety

Issues related to social safety, such as crime and drug abuse, are also negative externalities of
tourism development that can harm the socio-economic conditions of the local people.
Haralambopoulos and Pizam (1996) indicated that individual crimes and drug abuse have
increased due to tourism development in Samos, Greece. Moreover, the residents of Cape Cod,
a rural tourist destination resort community in Massachusetts, argued that drug abuse was one of
the most devastating impacts of tourism development in the area (Pizam, 1978). Consistent with
the findings of previous research, more recent studies have also shown that local communities
tend to perceive alcoholism and crimes as the negative impacts of tourism development
(Abdollahzadeh & Sharifzadeh, 2014; Cañizares et al., 2014; Monterrubio et al., 2020)

3.1.6. Recreation facilities

Some scholars have recognized the importance of local people having access to, and the ability to
enjoy, the recreational tourism facilities developed in their area (Lankford et al., 1997; Richardson
& Long, 1991). These facilities can be differentiated from tourism infrastructure in that the former
can be seen as a way to improve everyday life while the latter focuses more on providing
preconditions for development (Mandić et al., 2018). Tourists (who can be considered temporary
residents) will only use the facilities for a short period, whereas residents will stay and constantly
use them. Therefore, the benefits of the facilities should also be distributed to local communities
by allowing them to use the facilities and ensuring that their appearance and design are accep­
table to them (Hadzik & Grabara, 2014).

3.2. Environmental aspects

3.2.1. Natural resource depletion and pollution

Both the depletion of natural resources and pollution have been identified as having major
influences on local people. Particularly, these effects tend to occur in developing countries which
often lack sufficient means for protecting their natural resources and local ecosystems. Concerning
the depletion of natural resources, Kuvan (2010) and Mao et al. (2014) reported on how the
construction of hotels and resorts has led to deforestation in Turkey and China. The illegal mining
of beach sand along Ngapali Beach in Myanmar is evidence of the negative impacts of tourism
development on natural resources (Hampton & Jeyacheya, 2014). Other studies have also shown
how air, water, noise, and waste pollution are largely recognized as the cost of tourism develop­
ment in different countries (see, e.g., Baoying & Yuanqing, 2007; Bandara & Ratnayake, 2015;
Khiev, 2009). Similarly, in many cities in Vietnam, the land acquisition process and the construction
of tourism accommodations—especially large-scale hotel and resort projects—have further
damaged ecosystems and biodiversity in mountainous areas and coastal zones (Streicher, 2012).

3.2.2. Changing in spatial morphology

There is a worldwide concern related to the changing spatial morphology due to tourism activities
that could erode the spatial identity of local communities in particular destinations, ranging from
historic areas to coastal regions (Hough, 1990; HRH the Prince of Wales, 1996; O’Hare, 1997).
Indeed, Xie et al. (2013) showed how the tourism activities in Denarau Island in Fiji have not only
influenced the physical and environmental quality of the area but also the social conditions and
perspectives of the local community towards the area. More recently, Feng et al. (2020) reported
on how tourism development in Zhangjiajie, China has induced negative changes in landscape
morphology and traditional lifestyles.

We used these aforementioned aspects as a framework with which to analyze the influence of
land acquisition activities for tourism development on socio-economic and environmental aspects,
which we deemed important to determining the sustainability of tourism development in a certain
area. Before providing the results of the analysis using the framework of the Vietnam case, we
believe it pertinent to offer a general explanation of the land acquisition mechanism in Vietnam to
give a better understanding of the context of the study.

Page 5 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

4. Methodology
This study employed a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to investigate the
different impacts of the land acquisition process for tourism development on the socio-economic
and environmental conditions of local people in Vietnam given the changes in the country’s Land
Law. First, a desk study research was conducted to closely investigate the Vietnamese Land Law
also its other related and derivative regulations especially to explain the land acquisition process in
the country (Bassot, 2022).

For the primary data, a survey using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews was con­
ducted with directly affected households in the areas that experienced the land acquisition
process for the tourism development projects. Two tourism accommodation development projects,
one with land acquisition before and the other after the implementation of the 2013 Land Law,
were selected as case studies. The data were collected from 80 directly affected people to
investigate their perspectives on the land acquisition process, as well as its socio-economic and
environmental effects through the use of a 5-point Likert scale. Additionally, in-depth interviews
were also conducted with some local authorities to acquire data and information related to the
case studies and to gain further explanations for the results of the analysis. Due to the difficulties
in acquiring the exact number of the population and the sample frame for the study given that
there is no adequate data on the exact numbers of the affected people, we used the snowballing
method to recruit our respondents. The lack of information on the population of the data also led
us to employ the non-parametric method for the analysis in this study (Mircioiu & Atkinson, 2017).

In the next sections, the data gathered from the desk study research related to land acquisition
in Vietnam are presented and discussed followed by the descriptions of the study case areas
before the results and analysis of the primary data are presented.

5. Land acquisition mechanism in Vietnam

In this section, we first provide a brief explanation of the policies on land acquisition in
Vietnam. Once done, we more specifically explain the existing policies in Vietnam that are
designed to support the affected local people in the land acquisition process.

5.1. Policies on land acquisition

Vietnam’s transition towards a more market-oriented economy, known as Doi moi, began in 1986. The
reform has strongly affected the property rights regimes for land in Vietnam (Nguyen et al., 2017).
However, the state still plays the most powerful role in land development and the idea of private land
ownership has not yet been accepted. Due to the state’s monopoly on land development, it has the
power to expropriate land for national and public interests. For non-public-purpose projects, the state
might ask private investors to negotiate directly with the local people (i.e., voluntary conversion) if they
wish to acquire their land for development (Marci, 2015). However, in practice, the expropriation of
land for commercial purposes by public authorities (including in cases of tourism development) still
occurs due to the ambiguous definition of public interests (Hirsch et al., 2015).

5.2. Policies for the support of affected people in the land acquisition process
Theoretically, land with relatively low productivity will be converted to that with higher productivity
(McPherson, 2012). Accordingly, the process of land redevelopment is also expected to bring more
benefits to affected land users (Nguyen et al., 2016). Nevertheless, the reality of the land acquisi­
tion process has frequently led to many negative impacts on affected people, such as residential
displacement, the loss of traditional livelihoods, a decrease in income, social conflicts, and many
environmental problems (Pham et al., 2015).

In response to this situation, the Vietnamese government has issued several policies in an
attempt to support the livelihoods of those whose land is acquired for development (see
Table 1). Regarding compensation packages, affected people are entitled to receive more com­
pensation for their losses, as mentioned in Decree No.47/2014, in addition to compensation in the

Page 6 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Table 1. Compensation, support, and resettlement for land users in the land acquisition
process
Decree No.197/2004/ Decree No.69/2009/ Decree No.47/2014/
ND-CP1 ND-CP2 ND-CP3
Scope of Compen-sation (1) Compensation or (1) Compensation in the (1) Compensation for
support for the form of a land land.
whole land area exchange with the (2) Compensation for
recovered by the same use purpose. remaining invest­
state. (2) If no land is avail­ ment
(2) Compensation or able for compensa­ expenses.
support for the tion, they are (3) Compensation for
existing property entitled to compen­ losses caused by
attached to the land sation in cash calcu­ land-linked
and for expenses lated based on the houses and construc­
invested in the land price of land with tion work upon
recovered by the the same use expropriation by the
state. purpose. state.
(3) Compensation for (4) Compensation for
remaining invest­ losses due to the
ment expenses. restricted use
of land and losses
caused to land-linked
properties concerning
land in safety corri­
dors upon the con­
struction of public
works with safety
corridors.
(5) Compensation and
support for land upon
expropriation for land
allocated ultra vires
before 1 July 2004.
(6) Compensation and
support for land
when the
real-life area is dif­
ferent from what is
stated in land use
rights papers upon
expropriation.
(7) Compensation, sup­
port, and resettle­
ment to users
of land in the area
suffering environ­
mental pollution and
likely threat to
human life; users of
land susceptible to
landslide, sinking,
and other natural
catastrophes impos­
ing threat to human
life.
(Continued)

Page 7 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Table 1. (Continued)

Decree No.197/2004/ Decree No.69/2009/ Decree No.47/2014/

ND-CP1 ND-CP2 ND-CP3
Means of supports (1) Support for reloca­ (1) Support for reloca­ (1) Support for stabiliza­
tion, support for life tion and resettle­ tion of life and
stabilization, support ment in case of production.
for job-change train­ recovery of residen­ (2) Support for training,
ing, and other sup­ tial land. job change, and job
ports for persons (2) Support for life and seeking:
who have land production stabiliza­ - for households
recovered. tion, and support for directly involved in
(2) Support for stabiliza­ job-change training agricultural
tion of production and job creation in production;
and life in the reset­ case of recovery of - households and
tlement areas. agricultural land. individuals whose
inhabited land is
(3) Resettlement: dwell­ (3) Support upon recov­ linked with business
ing houses/new resi­ ery of agricultural and services.
dential land/money land in residential (3) Support for
for acquiring new areas, or garden or resettlement.
residences. pond land not (4) Other means of sup­
recognized as resi­ port.
dential land.
(4) Other means of sup­
port.

Source: Collected by the authors from various sources.

form of a land exchange. As stated in Decree No. 69/2009, compensation is paid in cash or other
forms if no land is available for compensation. Even so, compensation in land for affected people
directly involved in agricultural production should be the priority. However, in practice, because of
limited land banks, compensation is often made in cash. Further to compensation packages,
several non-financial means of support, such as that related to training, job seeking or change,
relocation, and resettlement areas should also be provided. Theoretically, both financial and non-
financial compensation and support should not only fully recover all losses, but also improve the
lives of those affected. However, the gap between the implementation and the practices of the law
or other regulations related to the land acquisition process could well be immense.

6. Description of case study

We selected two instances of Vietnamese land acquisition for tourism development as case
studies to illustrate how different land acquisition processes have influenced the socio-economic
and environmental aspects of the local community. The first was the Phuong Hoang Golf Course
development project in Lam Son commune, Luong Son district, Hoa Binh province, whose devel­
opment began before the introduction of the 2013 Land Law. The second was the FLC Sam Son
Beach and Golf Links, located in Quang Cu ward, Sam Son City, Thanh Hoa province, which was
developed after the introduction of the law. Both projects were selected to illustrate the different
processes and possible impacts of the development that may have been influenced by the law’s
implementation since it is still relatively easy to trace the people affected. Short descriptions of the
two cases are provided below.

6.1. Study area 1: Phuong Hoang Golf Course development project

The Phuong Hoang Golf Course, also known as the Phoenix Golf Resort, is located between Hoa
Binh City, the capital of the province with the same name, and Hanoi City, Vietnam’s capital (see
Figure 1 and Figure 2). The location is part of the Lam Son commune in the Luong Son district of
the Hoa Binh province. The development of the golf course began in 2003 with the acquisition of
311.7 hectares of agricultural land in Lam Son commune by the Hoa Binh provincial government,
which was then assigned to a Korean investor to implement the project. The golf course is
equipped with various facilities, including a hotel, swimming pool, restaurant, massage centre,

Page 8 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Figure 1. The location of the

Phuong Hoang golf course
project.

Source: Google Maps

Figure 2. Images of the Phuong

Hoang Golf Course.

Source: https://maichautourist.
vn/ and https://www.golfasian.
com/golf-courses/vietnam-golf
-courses/hanoi/phoenix-golf-
resort/#shadowbox-1/7/IMG_
1797.JPG., accessed on 14th
April, 2021

and sauna. Although the development of the hotel was not included in the project’s detailed plan,
the entire project was mentioned as part of the national sports development strategy in 2020,
which was approved by the Vietnamese prime minister.

The majority of the households affected by the development process belonged to the Muong
people, one of the 53 minority groups in Vietnam. Before the land development process began, the
livelihoods of the inhabitants were highly dependent on rice cultivation and crop production in the
surrounding mountainous area. After the project’s approval, over 300 households (or approxi­
mately 1,000 local people) were displaced from their land and relocated to the nearby Rong Vong,
Rong Tam, and Rong Can hamlets.4

6.2. Study area 2: FLC Sam Son Beach and Golf Resort development project
The second project is located in Quang Cu ward, Sam Son City, Thanh Hoa province (see Figure 3
and Figure 4), roughly 170 km to the south of Hanoi City. In 2014, over 200 hectares were acquired
by the FLC Group, one of Vietnam’s leading real estate companies, to invest in a large tourism
complex project. The project included an 18-hole golf course, villas, hotels, and a luxury resort.

According to the investor’s report, 596 households were relocated due to the project. These were
mostly located in Hong Thang hamlet (210 households), Quang Vinh hamlet (174 households), and
Cuong Thinh hamlet (135 households). Moreover, several households from Thanh Thang, Thanh

Page 9 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Figure 3. The location of the

FLC Sam Son Beach and golf
resort development project.

Source: Google Map

Figure 4. Images of the FLC

Sam Son Beach and golf Resort.

Source: http://flcsamson.com.
vn/en/contact-us.html and
https://batdongsanexpress.vn/
flc-sam-son.html, accessed on
10th December, 2020

Thai, and Cong Vinh hamlets were also relocated. A total of almost 3,000 people, most of whom
were farmers and fishermen, were affected by the project.

7. Analysis and results

7.1. Descriptive analysis

Table 2 shows the perspectives of the affected households on the changes in their lives related to
the land acquisition process based on a small survey. The descriptive analysis revealed that the
majority of the local people had witnessed a decrease in their income and access to the beach or
forest after the development of the project. Meanwhile, the jobs offered by the projects, and the
quantity and quality of public infrastructure in their area after the projects’ completion mostly
increased. For the remaining variables, most of the people in the case study areas reported no
substantial change after the project development.

7.2. Differences between the two case studies

7.2.1. Differences in the land acquisition process

The results displayed in Table 3 indicate that, concerning participation, compensation and support,
and areas of land and housing after the land acquisition, the differences were statistically sig­
nificant depending on whether the project began before or after the introduction of the 2013 Land

Page 10 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Table 2. Results of the descriptive analysis

Variables Median Mode Variance Min Max
Socio-Economic impacts:
1 Prices of 3 3 0.529 3 5
products and
services in the
area
2 Prices of land 4 3 0.744 1 5
and housing
in the area
3 Income 2 1 1.918 1 5
sources
4 Jobs offered 4 4 0.480 2 5
by the project
5 Quality of 4 4 1.209 1 5
local public
infrastructure
contributed by
the project
6 Quantity of 4 4 1.010 1 5
local public
infrastructure
contributed by
the project
7 Criminals and 3 3 0.904 1 4
drugs in the
local area
8 Local safety 3 3 0.429 3 5
due to
outsider
labourers
working for
the project
9 Contribution 3 3 0.175 1 5
to local
recreational
facilities
through the
project
10 Opportunities 3 3 0.073 2 4
for locals to
benefit from
the project’s
facilities
Environmental impacts:
11 Depletion of 3 3 0.794 1 5
natural
resources
(forest,
fishing, water,
soil)
12 Noise, 4 3 1.152 1 5
pollution, and
waste
13 Changing 4 3 1.215 1 5
spatial
morphology
Land acquisition process:

(Continued)

Page 11 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Table 2. (Continued)

Variables Median Mode Variance Min Max

14 Participation 4 3 0.987 1 5
in the land
acquisition
process
15 Compensation 3 3 0.180 3 5
and support
package after
making
a complaint
16 Areas of land 2 2 0.486 1 3
and housing
17 Access to the 1 1 0.551 1 3
beach or
forest
Source: Own analysis

Table 3. Results of the Mann-Whitney U test for the land acquisition process in both case study
areas
Participation in Compensation Areas _land Access _beach_
_the land _support _after &housing_- after forest
acquisition _complaining _land acquisition
process
Mann-Whitney U 527,500 658,500 370,000 778,500
Wilcoxon W 1473,500 1604,500 1316,000 1481,500
Z -2,747 -2,304 -4,488 -,185
Asymp. Sig. ,006 ,021 ,000 ,853
(2-tailed)
Grouping Variable:Location

Law. Such results might support the argument that the 2013 Land Law could improve the position
and situation of locally-affected people.

However, the results also reveal that there were no significant differences regarding access to
natural resources in both cases. This accessibility appeared quite limited for the locally affected in
both case studies. From the interview in Quang Cu, we found that the development of the project
has closed their access to the sea for fishing, which is the main source of their livelihood. One
respondent said:

The project has blocked access to the sea. It created many difficulties for local people to fish.
(R15-QC)

Similarly, the locally-affected people in Lam Son also experienced difficulties in accessing the
mountains where they worked as farmers. One respondent expressed:

‘At first, the project did not allow locals to go to the mountain. After the protest and claims, the
project allowed locals to go to the mountain, but only for a limited time (R37-LS).

Page 12 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Another respondent in Lam Son commune mentioned that:

Access to the mountain is tricky and highly depends on the project manager. We are taken
at 4–5 a.m. and picked up at around 2 p.m. (R23-LS)

Based on these findings, we can see that, despite the introduction of the 2013 Land Law, locally-
affected people could have better opportunities to be involved or participate in the decision-
making process, as well as improved compensation and support, and better conditions for their
land and houses. Moreover, the interviews showed that these residents were likely to suffer from
losing access to their working spaces. Therefore, this situation is likely to have influenced their
socioeconomic and environmental conditions in their surroundings, in turn impacting their
livelihoods.

7.2.2. Differences in social, economic, and environmental conditions after land acquisition
Table 4 presents the result of the analysis of whether there were differences in the socio-economic
and environmental conditions after the land acquisitions in the two case studies. It can be seen
that, statistically, a significant difference between the two case studies was only present in the
price of land and housing, local safety, and the attractive appearance of the local area post-land
acquisition. Concerning housing and land prices, respondents in Quang Cu believed that local real
estate prices significantly increased following the project’s approval. One said:

. . . a sharp increase in land price as the project approved. In Ho Xuan Huong Street, the
market price reached 100 million VND/m2, while the compensation price was only 6 million
VND/m2.(R30-QC)

In contrast to Quang Cu, the price of land and housing in Lam Son showed no significant change
after the project development. One respondent mentioned:

“Land price is quite cheap and hasn’t changed considerably” (R27-LS).

Concerning local safety, our respondents also give contrasting opinions. For instance, one
respondent in Quang Cu expressed:

. . . due to the arrival of many workers, some social issues happened. For example, conflicts
and fighting. Theft also increased. (R10-QC)

The interviews with the locally affected people in both Lam Son and Quang Cu yielded contrasting
opinions on the appearance of the area after the tourism development. For instance, one respon­
dent in Quang Cu commented:

. . . local landscapes are more beautiful than before, which has attracted more tourists. (R04-
QC)

In stark contrast to this, the disappearance of natural landscapes and typical traditional houses of
the local minor ethnic group in Lam Son brought disappointment. As one respondent said:

The natural beauty of this area was lost for the development. There is no chance to see
yellow rice fields anymore. All of the traditional wooden houses of the Muong ethnics have
been completely destroyed. (R52- Lam Son)

Regarding the other variables, the respondents in both case studies tended to hold similar
opinions. For instance, the majority observed that public infrastructures in both areas had

Page 13 of 23
 Table 4. Results of the Mann-Whitney U test for the social, economic, and environmental conditions after land acquisition in both case study areas
Price Price Income Job local Quality public Quantity of Criminal Local Local Benefit Depletion Pollution Attractive
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

land product _source _people _infrastructure public _drugs safety recreational project natural _appearance
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923

housing _service _infrastructure _outsider facilities facilities resources

Mann- 386,500 756,500 748,000 732,500 714,000 665,500 790,000 550,000 792,500 788,500 665,000 647,500 540,500
Whitney U
Wilcoxon 1332,500 1702,500 1451,000 1435,500 1417,000 1368,500 1736,000 1496,000 1738,500 1734,500 1368,000 1593,500 1486,500
W
Z -4,186 -,461 -,476 -,684 -,839 -1,370 -,057 -3,185 -,056 -,148 -1,366 -1,493 -2,605
Asymp. ,000 ,645 ,634 ,494 ,401 ,171 ,954 ,001 ,956 ,882 ,172 ,135 ,009
Sig.
(2-tailed)
Grouping Variable:Location

Page 14 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

improved in terms of quantity and quality following the tourism developments. In Lam Son, one
respondent commented:

The project invested in the development of electricity networks and roads within the reset­
tlement area. (R45-LS)

Similarly, a respondent from Quang Cu mentioned that:

Now we can use clean water at a cheaper price than before. In the past, we often obtained
water from a well. (R20-QC)

Interestingly, we found that, while most of the respondents in both areas experienced an increase
in job opportunities, their incomes mostly decreased after the tourism development. Instead of
depending on farming and fishing activities, local people were given opportunities to participate in
non-farming activities. As one respondent in Quang Cu said:

. . . many people lost their jobs because it now takes longer to get to the sea. (R17-QC)

. . . local people can find a stable job in the project in the short term. In the long term, it is
unsustainable. Local people can find jobs as glass cleaners or housekeepers in the hotel.
(R05-QC)

Nevertheless, they were also concerned about their income sources:

. . . before the land acquisition, the monthly income from farming and aquaculture activity of
our family was about 10 million. (R23-QC)

. . . decrease of income or even no income. Before the project, local people could earn
100,000 VND per day based on catching and selling clams. Now, they’ve lost their jobs
because of losing land and sand to breed clams and losing access to the sea. (R25-QC)

Affected people in Lam Son held similar opinions regarding job opportunities and income sources.
In terms of the former, local authorities mentioned that:

At the beginning of the project in 2004, they employed about 600–700 local workers for
constructing and gardening. After a few years, only 120–150 locals worked for the project as
hotel receptionists, caddies, gardening, and workers . . .. (R52-LS)

Another officer added:

The development of the project led to the displacement of farming. [Elder] farmers became
freelancers. Their children, however, found jobs in the nearby industrial zone. (R51-LS)

Although there were some non-farming job opportunities for local people, their income sources
were causes for concern. As one respondent expressed:

Without land, we now have to buy everything, such as rice and vegetables, which were
produced [by ourselves] before. (R09-LS)

7.3. Impact of the land acquisition process on the socio-economic and environmental
condition of the local people
To investigate the effect of the land acquisition process, as well as the differences due to location
—which represents the different implementation of the 2013 Land Law in Vietnam—on the socio-
economic and environmental conditions of the local people following the development-related
land loss, we tested 13 models5 using the Ordinal Logistic Regression analysis. Out of those 13

Page 15 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

models, only 3 could be considered significant. These were the price of land and housing, local
safety, and pollution as the dependent variables. The results of these three models are presented in
Table 5.

By analyzing the results of parameter estimation for each of these three models (provided in
Tables 6, 7 , and 8), we could identify which factor related to land acquisition had the largest
influence on each of the three dependent variables. As can be observed in Table 6, only the
difference in the location had a significant chance to change people’s perspective on the land
and housing prices after land acquisition. Moreover, in terms of local safety, the locational
difference had a significant probability of exerting an influence (see Table 7). Furthermore, the
change in the areas of land and houses due to land acquisition also could change people’s
perspectives on local safety. Interestingly, only the issue of pollution appeared uninfluenced by
the location variable, but was impacted by the areas of land and houses, as well as the compensa­
tion and support, in which the latter had the highest probability of exerting an influence (see
Table 8).

8. Discussion
Our findings indeed found that the land acquisition processes for tourism have resulted in con­
siderable impacts although the implementation of Vietnam’s 2013 Land Law has changed the land
acquisition process, especially in the case of tourism development. Many similar risks for locally
displaced people which were indicated in the previous study has also been found in this study, for
example, joblessness, lose access to common property resources (Cernea, 1997), tension between
new comers and existing residents, increase in land prices (Nghi & Singer, 2022), many environ­
mental impacts (Vanclay, 2017).

More specifically, based on our findings, land acquisition for tourism development projects could
only influence the price of land, local safety, and pollution in the area. This section discusses some
of the interpretations and reflections of these results.

8.1. State ownership, and the gap between the law’s implementation and practices
The changes in Vietnam’s Land Law have allowed land users to play a more prominent role in the
process of land acquisition. Indeed, Vietnamese land users are currently entitled to negotiate with
investors to transfer their land-use rights. This right allows land users to be involved or participate
in the process of land conversion more actively. However, the fact that the state has the sole
ownership right over land and retains the power to make the final decisions on development
projects for public purposes or public interests means that land users can still be expropriated from
their land through the process of land conversion. Although by law the compensation and support
for the affected people in a land acquisition process should be made with concern for the
restoration and stabilization of life, as well as the production of the affected people, this concern
routinely encounters many challenges in practice. This is also related to the general issue of
livelihood, which remains controversial in the land acquisition process (Li et al., 2018; Nguyen
et al., 2016)

Table 5. Model fitting information, goodness-of-fit, and test of parallel lines

Model Fitting Goodness-of-Fit Test of Parallel
Information lines
Pearson Deviance
Price of land & .006 .306 .961 .325
housing
Local safety .030 .991 .990 .541
Pollution .033 .140 .985 .003

Page 16 of 23
 Table 6. Parameter estimation for the price of land and housing
Estimate Std. Error Wald df Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Lower Upper
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923

Bound Bound
Threshold [price_land_housing = 1] -6.819 2.007 11.542 1 .001 -10.752 -2.885
[price_land_housing = 3] -2.476 1.718 2.076 1 .150 -5.843 .892
[price_land_housing = 4] -.551 1.690 .106 1 .744 -3.864 2.761
Location [Location=1] -2.302 .629 13.406 1 .000 -3.534 -1.070
[Location=2] 0a . . 0 . . .
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=1] -.972 1.210 .645 1 .422 -3.344 1.400
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=2] 2.125 1.428 2.216 1 .137 -.673 4.924
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=3] -.177 .702 .063 1 .801 -1.552 1.198
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=4] -.310 .710 .191 1 .662 -1.701 1.081
a
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=5] 0 . . 0 . . .
[compensation_support_after_complaining=3] -.137 1.505 .008 1 .927 -3.087 2.813
[compensation_support_after_complaining=4] .447 1.630 .075 1 .784 -2.747 3.641
a
[compensation_support_after_complaining=5] 0 . . 0 . . .
[areas_landandhousing_after_landacquisition=1] .272 .801 .115 1 .735 -1.298 1.841
[areas_landandhousing_after_landacquisition=2] -.670 .724 .858 1 .354 -2.089 .748
[areas_landandhousing_after_landacquisition=3] 0a . . 0 . . .
[access_beach_forest=1] -.141 .655 .047 1 .829 -1.425 1.142
[access_beach_forest=2] -.322 .732 .193 1 .660 -1.757 1.113
[access_beach_forest=3] 0a . . 0 . . .

Link function: Logit.

a. This parameter was set to zero due to its being redundant.
Note: Statistically significant (p<0.05)

Page 17 of 23
 Table 7. Parameter estimation for local safety
Estimate Std. Error Wald df Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Lower Upper
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923

Bound Bound
Threshold [localsafety_outsider = 3] .506 2.068 .060 1 .806 -3.546 4.559
[localsafety_outsider = 4] 1.787 2.078 .740 1 .390 -2.286 5.861
Location [Location=1] -2.802 .894 9.823 1 .002 -4.554 -1.050
[Location=2] 0a . . 0 . . .
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=1] 1.303 1.488 .767 1 .381 -1.613 4.219
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=2] -19.476 .000 . 1 . -19.476 -19.476
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=3] .045 .974 .002 1 .963 -1.864 1.955
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=4] -.109 .933 .014 1 .907 -1.938 1.720
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=5] 0a . . 0 . . .
[compensation_support_after_complaining=3] -1.549 1.755 .779 1 .377 -4.988 1.890
[compensation_support_after_complaining=4] -2.134 1.899 1.264 1 .261 -5.856 1.587
[compensation_support_after_complaining=5] 0a . . 0 . . .
[areas_landandhousing_after_landacquisition=1] 2.826 1.356 4.343 1 .037 .168 5.484
[areas_landandhousing_after_landacquisition=2] 2.448 1.288 3.614 1 .057 -.076 4.972
[areas_landandhousing_after_landacquisition=3] 0a . . 0 . . .
[access_beach_forest=1] -.157 .965 .026 1 .871 -2.049 1.736
[access_beach_forest=2] -.648 1.094 .351 1 .554 -2.792 1.496
[access_beach_forest=3] 0a . . 0 . . .

Link function: Logit.

a. This parameter was set to zero due to its being redundant.
Note: Statistically significant (p<0.05)

Page 18 of 23
 Table 8. Parameter estimation for pollution
Estimate Std. Error Wald df Sig. 95% Confidence
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

Interval
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923

Lower Upper
Bound Bound
Threshold [pollution = 1] -21.622 1.175 338.848 1 .000 -23.924 -19.319
[pollution = 2] -21.035 1.131 346.007 1 .000 -23.251 -18.818
[pollution = 3] -18.876 1.095 297.342 1 .000 -21.021 -16.730
[pollution = 4] -17.217 1.105 242.881 1 .000 -19.382 -15.051
Location [Location=1] -.488 .546 .799 1 .371 -1.558 .582
[Location=2] 0a . . 0 . . .
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=1] 2.050 1.098 3.488 1 .062 -.101 4.202
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=2] -.024 1.274 .000 1 .985 -2.522 2.473
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=3] .292 .677 .186 1 .666 -1.035 1.618
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=4] 1.077 .690 2.439 1 .118 -.275 2.429
[participation_landacquisitionprocess=5] 0a . . 0 . . .
[compensation_support_after_complaining=3] -18.343 .725 640.510 1 .000 -19.764 -16.923
[compensation_support_after_complaining=4] -18.703 .000 . 1 . -18.703 -18.703
[compensation_support_after_complaining=5] 0a . . 0 . . .
[areas_landandhousing_after_landacquisition=1] -.820 .799 1.054 1 .305 -2.385 .745
[areas_landandhousing_after_landacquisition=2] -1.513 .734 4.252 1 .039 -2.952 -.075
[areas_landandhousing_after_landacquisition=3] 0a . . 0 . . .
[access_beach_forest=1] .912 .639 2.042 1 .153 -.339 2.164
[access_beach_forest=2] .639 .698 .839 1 .360 -.729 2.006
a
[access_beach_forest=3] 0 . . 0 . . .
a. This parameter was set to zero due to its being redundant.
Note: Statistically significant (p<0.05)

Page 19 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923

8.2. Price of land after land acquisition: An increase in land value due to land-use change
and the development of infrastructure
Many studies have observed a rise in land prices after land acquisition in Vietnam (Nguyen, 2015,
2015; Nguyen et al., 2016). The process of land conversion is characterized by the shift from low-
value agricultural land to high-value residential and commercial land. In addition, the develop­
ment of related infrastructure and facilities in the area as part of the land-use changes also serves
to increase value (Nguyen, 2015). However, our findings suggest that the increase in land values is
mostly enjoyed by private investors and developers. Local people—mostly farmers and fishermen
—do not enjoy these increases due to not having had land to sell at the time of such infrastructure
development.

8.3. Local safety and the issue of outside workforces: The shift in labour structure after land
acquisition
Another consequence of land acquisition reported in the literature is its impact on local safety
(Khiev, 2013; Nguyen, 2015). In line with the previous findings found in the literature, our regres­
sion analysis indicates that the land acquisition process did indeed lead to a reduction in local
safety as a result of labour immigration. Indeed, land acquisition not only led to local unemploy­
ment but also created more chances for labour immigration. For instance, in the Quang Cu case
study, the project managers preferred to employ workers from their own hometowns rather than
local people. Similarly, in Lam Son, the manager of the golf course also mainly employed those
from other provinces instead of local workers, primarily due to the limited skills and educational
backgrounds of the latter.

8.4. Pollution: An environmental externality of land acquisition for tourism development

The findings from the two case studies showed that the land acquisition process and the building
of tourism facilities generated much pollution. Such negative impacts can be identified as envir­
onmental externalities of land development (for tourism purposes) which are suffered by local
people (Javier et al., 2003). A failure to define property rights over natural, environmental, and
landscape assets results in a situation whereby polluters do not pay the full cost of the clean-up
themselves (Mäler et al., 1996). Since the developers only cover a few (or even none) of the costs
associated with the environmental damage they cause, land acquisition has the damaging effect
of polluting residential areas.

9. Conclusion
It can be concluded from this study that, in general, the way land is acquired for Vietnam’s tourism
development creates sustainability problems for local communities. In particular, there is an unequal
benefit sharing among the stakeholders concerning the increase in land values, social insecurity due
to immigration, and negative environmental externalities during the land acquisition process. The
effects of these acquisitions pose a great challenge to Vietnam’s sustainable tourism development.
However, our results indicate that particular factors, namely, participation and compensation, may
have the greatest impact on the negative aspects of land acquisition for tourism. Obviously, the study
provides additional empirical evidences on how land acquisition for the implementation of develop­
ment projects of any kind, especially in Vietnam context, have an impact on local communities even
though the developers already provide them with compensation (Nghi & Singer, 2022).

This reality demonstrates a fact that (financial) compensation alone is never sufficient for
displaced people to reestablish a sustainable socioeconomic life (Cernea, 1997). Furthermore, it
is extremely important that the discourse in the land acquisition process should change from the
focus on compliance with minimum requirements and obtaining agreement from local people to
give up their land to a more effective way to manage the social risks experienced by communities.

Based on the findings, we suggest that in order to achieve sustainable development in tourism
(concerning the land acquisition issue), both local authorities and affected people should exert
greater pressure on the developers to take full responsibility for problems of externality. For

Page 20 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923
instance, full compensation for the negative externalities due to the operation of the projects
should be paid. As the heart of sustainable development is its stakeholders and their interests,
collaboration among stakeholders appears to be a vital component of developing tourism in
a sustainable manner. Nevertheless, currently, land users in Vietnam have a somewhat passive
involvement in land use planning, and their voices related to compensation prices are often
disregarded by local authorities. Thus, affected people must actively participate in the decision-
making processes related to the planning, acquisition, and compensation of land development.
Funding
This work was supported by the Vietnamese Government
through the Ministry of Education and Training in the form
of VIED scholarship 911.
Author details
Mai T.T. Duong1,2
E-mail: mai.duong-phi@ru.nl
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9531-8817
D. Ary A. Samsura1,3
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9512-9592
Erwin van der Krabben1
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2566-890X
1
Department of Geography, Planning, and Environment,
Institute for Management Research, Radboud University,
Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
2
Department of Enterprises Management, Vietnam
National University of Forestry, Hanoi, Vietnam.
3
Department of Regional and Urban Planning, Institut
Teknologi Nasional, Bandung, Indonesia.
Author contributions
Mai T.T. Duong, D. Ary A. Samsura, and Erwin van der
Krabben: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal
Analysis. Mai T.T. Duong: Data Curation, Investigation,
Resources, Writing Original draft preparation. D. Ary
A. Samsura and Erwin van der Krabben: Supervision,
Writing—review and editing.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author(s).
Citation information
Cite this article as: Socio-economic and environmental
impacts of land acquisition for tourism development in
Vietnam, Mai T.T. Duong, D. Ary A. Samsura & Erwin van
der Krabben, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923.
Notes
1. Retrieved from: https://leap.unep.org/countries/vn/
national-legislation/decree-no-1972004nd-cp-
compensation-support-and-resettlement-when
2. Retrieved from: https://leap.unep.org/countries/vn/
national-legislation/decree-no-692009nd-cp-
additionally-providing-land-use-planning.;
3. Retrieved from: https://leap.unep.org/countries/vn/
national-legislation/decree-no-472014nd-cp-
compensation-support-and-resettlement-upon
4. https://vietnamnews.vn/economy/182635/golf-course
-displaces-farmers-taints-water.html, accessed on
10th November, 2020.
5. Each model was tested for one dependent variable
related to the local socio-economic and environmen­
tal conditions against all the four variables related to
land acquisition process and the location as the inde­
pendent variables.
References
Aabø, E., & Kring, T. (2012). The political economy of
large-scale agricultural land acquisitions:
Implications for food security and livelihoods/
employment creation in rural Mozambique. United
Nations Development Programme Working Paper, 4,
1–61. https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/
files/migration/africa/Agriculture-Rural-Mozambique.
pdf
Abdollahzadeh, G., & Sharifzadeh, A. (2014). Rural resi­
dents’ perceptions toward tourism development:
A study from Iran. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 16(2), 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.
1906
Akama, J. S., & Kieti, D. (2007). Tourism and
socio-economic development in developing coun­
tries: A case study of Mombasa resort in Kenya.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(6), 735–748.
https://doi.org/10.2167/jost543.0
Anderson, W. (2011). Enclave tourism and its
socio-economic impact in emerging destinations.
Anatolia, 22(3), 361–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13032917.2011.633041
Bandara, H. & Ratnayake, I. J. S. U. J. (2015). Coastal land
uses for tourism in Sri Lanka. Conflicts and Planning
Efforts, 14(1).
Baoying, N. & Yuanqing, H. J. C. P. (2007). Resources and
environment. 17(5), 123–127.
Bassot, B.(2022). Doing qualitative desk-based research: A
practical guide to writing an excellent dissertation.
Policy Press.
Brundtland, G. H., Khalid, M., Agnelli, S., Al-Athel, S. A.,
Chidzero, B., Fadika, L. M., Hauff, V., Lang, I., Ma, S.,
Botero, M. M. D., Singh, N., Noquiera-Neto, P., Okita, S.,
Ramphal, S. S., Ruckelshaus, W. D., Sahnoun, M.,
Salim, E., Shaib, B., and Strong, M. (1987). Our com­
mon future. Report of the World Commission on
Environment and Development. https://sustainablede
velopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-com
mon-future.pdf
Cañizares, S. M. S., Tabales, J. M. N., & García, F. J. F.
(2014). Local residents’ attitudes towards the impact
of tourism development in Cape Verde. Tourism &
Management Studies, 10(1), 87–96.
Cernea, M. (1997). The risks and reconstruction model for
resettling displaced populations. World Development,
25(10), 1569–1587. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-
750X(97)00054-5
Ciegis, R., Ramanauskiene, J., & Martinkus, B. (2009). The
concept of sustainable development and its use for
sustainability scenarios. Engineering Economics, 62
(2), 28–37.
Cohen, E. (2011). Tourism and land grab in the aftermath
of the Indian Ocean tsunami. Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, 11(3), 224–236. https://doi.
org/10.1080/15022250.2011.593359
Dinh, V. T., De Kleine Feige, A. I., Pham, D. M., Eckardt, S.,
Vashakmadze, E. T., Kojucharov, N. D., & Mtonya, B. G.
(2019). Taking Stock: Recent economic Developments
of Vietnam–Special focus: Vietnam’s tourism
Developments-Stepping Back from the Tipping Point-
Vietnam’s tourism Trends, Challenges and Policy
Priorities (English) (138475). T. W. Bank. http://docu
ments.worldbank.org/curated/en/
Page 21 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923
821801561652657954/Taking-Stock-Recent-
Economic-Developments-of-Vietnam-Special-Focus-
Vietnams-Tourism-Developments-Stepping-Back-
from-the-Tipping-Point-Vietnams-Tourism-Trends-
Challenges-and-Policy-Priorities
Duong, T. T. M., Samsura, D. A. A., & van der Krabben, E.
(2020). Land conversion for tourism development
under Vietnam’s ambiguous property rights over
land. Land, 9(6), 204. https://doi.org/10.3390/
land9060204
Feng, J., Xie, S., Knight, D. W., Teng, S. & Liu, C. (2020).
Tourism-induced landscape change along China’s
rural-urban fringe: A case study of Zhangjiazha. Asia
Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25(8), 914–930.
Ha, V. S. (2012). Country presentation: Vietnam tourism
master plan to 2020. Proceedings of the 6th UNWTO
Asia-Pacific Executive Training on Tourism Policy and
Strategy, Bhutan, 25-28 June. https://webunwto.s3-
eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/imported_images/
36218/vietnam_1.pdf
Hadzik, A., & Grabara, M. (2014). Investments in recrea­
tional and sports infrastructure as a basis for the
development of sports tourism on the example of
spa municipalities. Polish Journal of Sport and
Tourism, 21(2), 97–101. https://doi.org/10.2478/pjst-
2014-0010
Hampton, M. P., & Jeyacheya, J. (2014). Coastal tourism
and local impact at Ngapali. Initial Findings.
Haralambopoulos, N., & Pizam, A. (1996). Perceived
impacts of tourism: The case of Samos. Annals of
Tourism Research, 23(3), 503–526. https://doi.org/10.
1016/0160-7383(95)00075-5
Hirsch, P., Mellac, M., & Scurrah, N. (2015). The political
economy of land governance in Viet Nam Mekong
region land governance]. http://www.mekongland
forum.org/sites/default/files/Political_Economy_of_
Land_Governance_in_Viet_Nam_1.pdf
Hough, M. (1990). Out of place: Restoring identity to the
regional landscape. Yale University Press.
HRH the Prince of Wales. (1996). Work to stop tourism
from spoiling the world’s finest sites. International
Herald Tribune.
Hughes, G. (1995). The cultural construction of sustain­
able tourism. Tourism Management, 16(1), 49–59.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-5177(94)00007-W
Intelligence, T. E. (2022). Strong Growth in Visitor to
Vietnam, but from a Low Base. Retrieved 2nd March
from https://country.eiu.com/article.aspx?articleid=
802155863&Country=Vietnam&topic=
Economy&subtopic=Forecast&subsubtopic=External
+sector&oid=952147078
Javier, R.-M. P., Javier, L. I., & Carlos, M. G. G. (2003). Land,
environmental externalities and tourism develop­
ment. Tourism and Sustainable Economic
Development – Macro and Micro Economic Issues.
Khiev, C. (2009). National updates on agribusiness large
scale land acquisitions in Southeast Asia (Brief# 6 of
8). Kingdom of Cambodia.
Khiev, C. (2013). National updates on agribusiness large
scale land acquisitions in Southeast Asia. Brief# 6 of 8:
Kingdom of Cambodia. agribusiness large-scale land
acquisitions and human rights in Southeast Asia:
Updates from Indonesia. Timor-Leste and Burma.
Kodir, A. (2018). Tourism and development: Land acqui­
sition, achievement of investment and cultural
change - case study tourism industry development in
Batu city, Indonesia. Geojournal of Tourism and
Geosites, 21(1), 253–265. https://doi.org/10.30892/
gtg.21120-285
Kumara, H. (2013). The investigate report on the looting of
sustenance lands belonging to Kalpitiya Island
inhabitants (study of the issues on land grabbing and
its socio-cultural, Economic and Political Implications
on Kalpitiya Island Communities, Issue.
Kuvan, Y. (2010). Mass tourism development and defor­
estation in Turkey. Anatolia, 21(1), 155–168. https://
doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2010.9687096
Lankford, S. V., Williams, A., & Knowles-Lankford, J.
(1997). Perceptions of outdoor recreation opportu­
nities and support for tourism development. Journal
of Travel Research, 35(3), 65–69. https://doi.org/10.
1177/004728759703500311
Le, T. (2016). Interpreting the Constitutional Debate over
land ownership in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
(2012–2013). Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 11
(2), 287. https://doi.org/10.1017/asjcl.2016.21
Letoluo, M. L., & Wangombe, L. (2018). Exploring the
socio-economic effects of the community tourism
fund to the local community, Maasai Mara national
reserve. Universal Journal of Management, 6(2),
51–58. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujm.2018.060202
Lim, C. (2006). A survey of tourism demand modelling
practice: Issues and implications. In L. Dwyer & P.
Forsyth (Eds.), International handbook on the eco­
nomics of tourism (pp. 45–72). Edward Elgar
Publishing.
Liu, Z. (2003). Sustainable tourism development: A
critique. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(6),
459–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09669580308667216
Li, C., Wang, M., & Song, Y. (2018). Vulnerability and live­
lihood restoration of landless households after land
acquisition: Evidence from peri-urban China. Habitat
International, 79, 109–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
habitatint.2018.08.003
Mabe, F. N., Nashiru, S., Mummuni, E., & Boateng, V. F.
(2019). The nexus between land acquisition and
household livelihoods in the northern region of
Ghana. Land Use Policy, 85, 357–367. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.043
Mäler, S. H. C. F. K. G., Hanna, S. S., Hanna, S., Folke, C., &
Maler, K. G. (1996). Beijer International Institute of
Ecological. In E. Arrow, K. Institute, & B. Kungl.
V. Svenska, & N. Jodha, eds., Rights to nature:
Ecological, economic, cultural, and political principles
of institutions for the environment. Island Press.
https://books.google.nl/books?id=7Ay8BwAAQBAJ
Mandić, A., Mrnjavac, Ž., & Kordić, L. (2018). Tourism
infrastructure, recreational facilities and tourism
development. Tourism and Hospitality Management,
24(1), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.20867/thm.24.1.12
Mao, X.-Y., Meng, J.-J., & Wang, Q. (2014). Tourism and land
transformation: A case study of the Li River Basin, Guilin,
China. Journal of Mountain Science, 11(6), 1606–1619.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-013-2871-6
Marci, S. E. A. (2015). Land Grabbing: The Vietnamese
Case. Master Thesis, Univerities of Ca Forscari Venezia.
McPherson, M. F. (2012). Land policy in Vietnam:
Challenges and prospects for constructive change.
Journal of Macromarketing, 32(1), 137–146. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0276146711427447
Mircioiu, C. & Atkinson, J. (2017). A comparison of para­
metric and non-parametric methods applied to a
likert scale. Pharmacy, 5(2), 26. https://doi.org/10.
3390/pharmacy5020026
Monterrubio, C., Andriotis, K., & Rodríguez-Muñoz, G.
(2020). Residents’ perceptions of airport construction
impacts: A negativity bias approach. Tourism
Management, 77, 103983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tourman.2019.103983
Narain, V. (2009). Growing city, shrinking hinterland: Land
acquisition, transition and conflict in peri-urban
Page 22 of 23
Duong et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2283923
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2283923
Gurgaon, India. Environment and Urbanization, 21(2),
501–512. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0956247809339660
Nghi, N. Q., & Singer, J. (2022). Development-induced dis­
placement and resettlement in Vietnam: Exploring the
state–people nexus. Taylor & Francis.
Nguyen, Q. P. (2015). Urban land grab or fair urbanization?:
Compulsory land acquisition and sustainable liveli­
hoods in hue, Vietnam. Utrecht University.
Nguyen, T. B. T. (2015). Acquisition of agricultural land for
urban development in peri-urban areas of Vietnam:
Perspectives of institutional ambiguity. In
G. S. O. E. A. L. Science (Ed.), Livelihood unsustainability
and local land grabbing (p. 107). Okayama University.
Nguyen, T. H. T., Bui, Q. T., Man, Q. H., & de Vries Walter, T.
(2016). Socio-economic effects of agricultural land
conversion for urban development: Case study of
Hanoi, Vietnam. Land Use Policy, 54, 583–592.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.02.032
Nguyen, T. B., Van der Krabben, E., & Samsura, D. A. A.
(2017). A curious case of property privatization: Two
examples of the tragedy of the anticommons in ho
chi minh city-Vietnam. International Journal of Urban
Sciences, 21(1), 72–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/
12265934.2016.1209122
Ogwang, T., & Vanclay, F. (2019). Social impacts of land
acquisition for oil and gas development in Uganda.
Land, 8(7), 109. https://doi.org/10.3390/land8070109
O'Hare, D. (1997). Interpreting the cultural landscape for
tourism development. Urban Design International, 2
(1), 33–54.
Ojeda, D. (2011, 6–8 April). Whose paradise?
Conservation, tourism and land grabbing in Tayrona
Natural Park, Colombia [Conference presentation].
International Conference on Global Land Grabbing I,
University of Sussex, England. https://www.future-
agricultures.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf-archive/
Diana%20Ojeda.pdf
Pham, H. T. (2015). Dilemmas of hydropower develop­
ment in Vietnam: Between dam-induced displace­
ment and sustainable development [Doctoral
dissertation, Utrecht University]. https://dspace.
library.uu.nl/handle/1874/304340
Phan, H., & Vo, V. (2017). Some issues for sustainable
tourism development in Vietnam. Scientific Journal of
Van Lang University, 5, 21–32. https://sti.vista.gov.vn/
file_DuLieu/dataTLKHCN//CVv447/2017/
CVv447S52017021.pdf
Pizam, A. (1978). Tourism’s impacts: The social costs to
the destination community as perceived by its resi­
dents. Journal of Travel Research, 16(4), 8–12. https://
doi.org/10.1177/004728757801600402
Polack, E. (2012). Agricultural land acquisition: A lens on
Southeast Asia. IIED Briefing Papers 17123: The
Global Land Rush. https://www.iied.org/17123iied
Prasad, B. & Tisdell, C. (1998). Tourism in Fiji: Its economic
development and property rights. In C. A. Tisdell & K.
C. Roy (Eds.), Tourism and development: Economic,
social, political and environmental issues (pp. 165–
191). Nova Science Publishers.
Ravallion, M., & Van de Walle, D. (2008). Does rising
landlessness signal success or failure for Vietnam’s
agrarian transition? Journal of Development
Economics, 87(2), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jdeveco.2007.03.003
Richardson, S., & Long, P. (1991). Recreation, tourism and
quality of life in small winter cities: Five keys to
success. Winter Cities, 9(1), 22–25.
Saufi, A., O’Brien, D., & Wilkins, H. (2014). Inhibitors to
host community participation in sustainable tourism
development in developing countries. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 22(5), 801–820. https://doi.org/
10.1080/09669582.2013.861468
Seetanah, B., Juwaheer, T. D., Lamport, M. J., Rojid, S.,
Sannassee, R. V., & Subadar, A. U. (2011). Does
infrastructure matter in tourism development?
University of Mauritius Research Journal, 17(1),
89–108. https://doi.org/10.4314/umrj.v17i1.70731
Snyman, J. A., & Saayman, M. (2009). Key factors
influencing foreign direct investment in the tourism
industry in South Africa. Tourism Review, 64(3),
49–58. https://doi.org/10.1108/
16605370910988827
Streicher, L. U. A. U. (2012). The ”son tra douc langur
research and conservation project” of Frankurt
Zoological Society. Vietnamese Journal of
Primatology, 2(1), 37–46.
Telfer, D. J., & Sharpley, R. (2015). Tourism and develop­
ment in the developing world. Routledge.
Turco, D. M., Swart, K., Bob, U., & Moodley, V. (2003).
Socio-economic impacts of sport tourism in the
Durban Unicity, South Africa. Journal of Sport &
Tourism, 8(4), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1477508032000161537
Vanclay, F. (2017). Project-induced displacement and
resettlement: From impoverishment risks to an
opportunity for development? Impact Assessment
and Project Appraisal, 35(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.
1080/14615517.2017.1278671
Vuong, T. K., & Rajagopal, P. (2019). Analyzing factors
affecting tourism sustainable development towards
Vietnam in the new era. European Journal of Business
and Innovation Research, 7(1), 30–42.
Wang, D., Qian, W., & Guo, X. (2019). Gains and losses:
Does farmland acquisition harm farmers’ welfare?
Land Use Policy, 86, 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landusepol.2019.04.037
World Tourism Organization. (2013). Sustainable tourism
for development guidebook - enhancing capacities for
sustainable tourism for development in developing
countries. UNWTO. https://doi.org/10.18111/
9789284415496
Xie, P. F., Chandra, V. & Gu, K. (2013). Morphological
changes of coastal tourism: A case study of Denarau
Island, Fiji. Tourism Management Perspectives, 5, 75–
83.
Xu, H., Xiang, Z., & Huang, X. (2017). Land policies,
tourism projects, and tourism development in
Guangdong. Journal of China Tourism Research, 13
(2), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388160.
2017.1350612
Zhang, J., Mishra, A. K., & Zhu, P. (2019). Identifying live­
lihood strategies and transitions in rural China: Is
land holding an obstacle? Land Use Policy, 80,
107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.
09.042
Page 23 of 23