Refining the Legal framework and intersectoral coordination mechanisms to promote Vietnam - ASEAN Cultural Tourism Cooperation

1. Introduction

The process of economic and cultural integration in ASEAN has entered a new phase, in which heritage values are no longer regarded solely as objects of preservation but have become key drivers of economic growth. Positioning ASEAN as a single tourism destination characterized by rich identity and sustainable development requires its member states, particularly Vietnam, to establish a modern governance system. Such a system must rely upon a coherent legal foundation and effective coordination among the relevant stakeholders. Cultural tourism, as a bridge connecting civilizations, is generating pressing demands for institutional reform in order to realize the ASEAN Community Vision 2025.

In the post-2025 development era, the tourism sector in ASEAN is undergoing a structural paradigm shift from volume-led expansion to high-value, quality-driven, resilient, and sustainable growth [1]. This transition is strategically aligned with the ASEAN Community Vision 2045 and the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) Strategic Plan 2026 - 2030. Within this context, the ASEAN Tourism Sectoral Plan (ATSP) 2026 - 2030 serves as a comprehensive regional blueprint aimed at positioning Southeast Asia as a single, high-quality destination that celebrates indigenous cultural heritage while preserving ecological assets [2]. Economically, tourism remains a cornerstone of the regional economy, generating close to 400 billion USD in 2024, contributing approximately 10% to the region’s GDP, and supporting over 42.5 million jobs [3]. The post-pandemic recovery is evidenced by the 144 million international visitor arrivals recorded in 2025, with intra-regional travel accounting for nearly 48 million arrivals.

Vietnam has emerged as a frontrunner in regional tourism recovery, registering a 21% growth rate in the first half of 2025, which ranks among the highest globally. In 2025, the country welcomed a record 22.8 million foreign arrivals, representing an 18% year-on-year increase from 2024. This growth has been catalyzed by aggressive visa liberalization policies, including the expansion of the electronic visa (e-visa) system to a 90-day multiple-entry scheme for all countries in August 2023 10, and the extension of visa-free stays up to 45 days for several key markets.  At the national level, the Vietnam Tourism Development Strategy by 2030 (approved under Decision No. 147/QD-TTg) establishes a mandate to attract at least 50 million international tourists by 2030.aaaa This strategy explicitly prioritizes cultural tourism as a key economic spearhead, emphasizing the integration of tourism development with the preservation of cultural heritage and national identity [4]. Furthermore, bilateral initiatives, such as the Vietnam - Laos Culture and Tourism Cooperation Scheme for 2026 - 2030 signed on May 12, 2026, exemplify the ongoing efforts to promote regional integration through cultural exchanges, culinary showcases, and joint human resource development [5].

Despite these positive developments, the rapid surge in international and intra-regional tourist flows has exposed systemic governance deficiencies and regulatory bottlenecks within Vietnam’s administrative system. The current legislative framework, anchored in the Tourism Law 2017, displays structural rigidities that hinder adaptive crisis response and community-based co-management. Simultaneously, persistent horizontal and vertical data fragmentation between the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Transportation creates friction in cross-border travel facilitation and local residency management. Addressing these legal and intersectoral coordination gaps is imperative if Vietnam is to achieve its strategic goal of ranking among the top three tourism destinations in Southeast Asia by 2030 [4].

2. Literature Review

Contemporary tourism scholarship increasingly conceptualizes the evolution of tourism regional integration through the lens of governance rather than government, reflecting a paradigm shift from state-centric administrative models to decentralized, collaborative networks. The success of tourism development is no longer determined solely by capital investments and physical infrastructure, but by the institutional capacity of a state to integrate policies vertically across administrative tiers and horizontally across sectoral agencies. Grounded in Multi-Level Governance (MLG) theory, regional integration is analyzed as a highly complex system where authority, responsibility, and decision-making capacities are distributed among supranational, national, regional, and subnational actors. In the context of Southeast Asia, the ASEAN Tourism Agreement of 2002 established the formal legal and institutional blueprint for regional cooperation, establishing a network approach to promote the region as a single, seamless destination.

To measure the depth of horizontal and vertical policy coordination, the public policy literature utilizes the "Spectrum of Engagement". This framework outlines four progressive stages of intersectoral collaboration: (i) Communication, characterized by one-way information sharing with zero policy adjustment; (ii) Cooperation, involving formal working relationships to optimize shared resources while maintaining absolute sectoral autonomy; (iii) Coordination, which adjustments policies and programs horizontally to resolve inter-agency contradictions; and (iv) Integration, representing the systematic synchronization of strategic objectives, administrative processes, and shared legal responsibilities

At the regional level, gravity model analyses indicate that "cultural distance" (differences in language, values, and traditions) serves as a positive catalyst that stimulates international tourist inflows, as modern travelers actively seek cultural novelty and authentic heritage experiences. However, these studies also demonstrate that the positive effects of cultural attraction are easily neutralized by high geographic distance and poor transit connectivity, highlighting the critical role of coordinated cross-border transport facilitation and intra-regional open skies policies.

To harness this cultural capital sustainably, international research highlights models of Community-Based Tourism (CBT) as viable mechanisms for balancing economic growth, natural resource conservation, and heritage preservation. Case studies on Thailand's tourism governance illustrate how the Designated Areas for Sustainable Tourism Administration (DASTA) utilizes a participatory "co-creation" methodology to certify and support local communities based on standardized criteria spanning group management, service quality, heritage conservation, environmental protection, and equitable benefit distribution [6] Furthermore, initiatives such as "CBT Net" in Thailand illustrate the strategic role of digital ecosystems in linking community-based homestays directly with global distribution systems, bypassing traditional intermediary monopolies [7]. Beyond community-level models, the Sustainable Intersectoral Linking Model (SILM-AHT) provides an analytical framework for mapping the structural dependencies between agriculture, hospitality, and tourism, proving that integrated policy support and infrastructure are essential to prevent regional fragmentation and ensure long-term resilience.

Within Vietnamese academic literature, a critical body of research examines the structural contradictions in the state's management of tourism development. Seminal studies by V. Dao Truong critically analyze the evolution of Vietnam's tourism policies from a pro-poor perspective [8]. Truong argues that although poverty alleviation and community-based empowerment are rhetorically integrated into national tourism strategies, they are systematically subordinated to macroeconomic, volume-led growth indicators. This reflects a neoliberal policy bias which assumes that gross tourism growth will naturally trickle down to marginalized populations, a premise frequently invalidated in practice due to the lack of legally binding benefit-sharing mechanisms and community co-management rights.

Furthermore, domestic legal scholars point out significant regulatory gaps within the Tourism Law 2017. Analyses of agricultural and cultural tourism in the northern mountainous provinces reveal that Vietnam’s current legal system has not yet established an integrated framework encompassing tourism, environment, land use, and cultural heritage. The administrative regulations for recognizing tourism sites remain excessively rigid and inflexible, which hinders local communities from securing formal site status and accessing state investment incentives. Additionally, domestic research on Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) preservation highlights a widening gap between national policy design and local-level implementation. The rapid commodification of living traditions for tourism promotion often results in the commercialization and distortion of indigenous cultural values, primarily because local communities are treated as passive cultural performers rather than active custodians of their heritage.

On the technological and operational front, empirical research on Vietnam’s mountainous regions (such as Moc Chau) indicates that the transport-tourism value chain is severely fragmented [9]. The data infrastructure of the domestic aviation network remains completely disconnected from ground transportation systems and rural accommodation providers. The absence of standardized APIs and interregional open-data sharing protocols inflates transaction costs for lữ hành (inbound) operators and creates physical travel bottlenecks that restrict international tourist flows to secondary destinations.

To quantify these policy outcomes, Canh Quang Tran (2025) employs Generalized Structured Component Analysis (GSCA) to evaluate the impact of government policies on tourist satisfaction in Vietnam. Tran’s findings confirm that infrastructure development, safety, environmental conservation, and cultural preservation are the primary determinants of tourist satisfaction and repeat-visit intentions. Orrespondingly, structural equation modeling (SEM) applied to local policy institutions in the Mekong Delta emphasizes that administrative staff capacity, intersectoral coordination, and genuine community consultation are the ultimate determinants of policy implementation effectiveness at the grassroots level. Finally, modern legal research suggests that rather than waiting for lengthy legislative reforms, public administrations should apply "doctrinal legal analysis" to identify and leverage existing, untapped administrative and regulatory capacities within the current legal regime to foster cross-sectoral coordination and address pressing institutional bottlenecks.

3. Theoretical  Framework

To systematically evaluate the structural inefficiencies in Vietnam's tourism governance and formulate robust policy solutions, this study establishes an integrated analytical framework combining Multi-Level Governance (MLG) and Policy Integration Theory.

Multi-Level Governance (MLG) provides a dual-axis analytical lens to evaluate how authority, administrative capacity, and responsibilities are distributed.

Multi-Level Coordination tracks the transmission, execution, and feedback loops of tourism policies from supranational entities (e.g., the ASEAN Tourism Working Group) to the national level (Vietnam National Authority of Tourism under the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism), down to subnational levels (Provincial Departments of Tourism), and finally to grassroots agents (commune-level authorities and community-based tourism groups).

Intersectoral Coordination examines the coordination, data sharing, and policy alignment among equivalent ministries. Key entities include the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism (managing resources and services), the Ministry of Public Security (overseeing border control, residency, and national security), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (managing visa issuance at diplomatic missions), and the Ministry of Transportation (overseeing regional connectivity and transit hubs).

4. Methodology

This study utilizes a qualitative research design combined with doctrinal legal analysis, comparative institutional analysis, and policy alignment mapping:

Doctrinal Legal Analysis: We perform a critical review of Vietnam's primary and secondary legislation regulating tourism and adjacent administrative sectors. The analyzed portfolio includes the Tourism Law 2017 (Law No. 09/2017/QH14), Decree No. 168/2017/ND-CP (detailing the implementation of the Tourism Law), Decree No. 45/2019/ND-CP (governing administrative sanctions in tourism) as amended by Decree No. 348/2025/ND-CP 15, and macro-policy directives such as Politburo Resolution No. 08-NQ/TW 15 and Prime Minister Decision No. 147/QD-TTg. [10]. This method identifies internal contradictions, rigid conditions, and regulatory gaps.

-  Comparative Institutional Analysis: We analyze the institutional structure of Thailand, which is widely recognized as a benchmark for multi-level tourism governance and community-based tourism in Southeast Asia. The analysis focuses on the National Tourism Policy Committee, the division of labor between the Ministry of Tourism and Sports (MoTS) and the Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT), and the operational model of the Designated Areas for Sustainable Tourism Administration (DASTA).

Policy Alignment Mapping: A policy matrix is developed to map Vietnam’s current regulatory and strategic framework against the five core pillars (READS) of the ASEAN Tourism Sectoral Plan (ATSP) 2026–2030.2 This comparative mapping identifies areas of institutional friction and provides a structured pathway toward regional harmonization.

5. Results and Discussions

5.1. The strategic shift in ASEAN tourism governance

Since the establishment of the ASEAN in 1967, the process of its formation and development has witnessed a profound change in perceptions regarding the role of tourism. From being a discrete form of cultural exchange, tourism has been elevated into one of the priority sectors in the roadmap toward the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC).

The ASEAN Tourism Strategic Plan (ATSP) 2016 - 2025 was formulated on the premise that tourism would make a substantial contribution to the economic and social prosperity of the peoples of the region. This vision positions ASEAN as a quality destination offering diverse experiences while committing to responsible and sustainable development.

The quantitative targets set for 2025 demonstrate the bloc’s strategic ambition to enhance the tourism sector's macroeconomic footprint. To realize these objectives, a multi-faceted approach is required, specifically focusing on:

• Elevating the sector's contribution to regional GDP to a target threshold of 15%.
• Expanding tourism-related employment to constitute 7% of the total labor force.
• Dismantling regulatory barriers to investment and labor mobility to facilitate these developmental imperatives.

Table 1: Projected ASEAN tourism indicators by 2025

Source: Compiled from ATSP 2016 - 2025.

Beyond its economic dimension, cultural tourism functions as the “glue” of the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC). Key instruments such as the ASEAN Declaration on Cultural Heritage (2000) and the Vientiane Declaration on Reinforcing Cultural Heritage Cooperation in ASEAN (2016) have affirmed that heritage protection is a shared responsibility of the region.

Within the ASEAN context, institutional cooperation in the cultural sphere converges on three interconnected imperatives. First is the preservation of cultural heritage across its tangible and intangible spectrums - ranging from monumental architecture to living traditions and crafts. Second is the institutionalization of a dynamic, self-sustaining cycle in which tourism dynamics capitalize on cultural capital while simultaneously funding its conservation. Third is the strategic management of contemporary socio-environmental stressors, such as climate change, rapid urbanization, and excessive commercialization, which threaten to erode these traditional fabrics.

5.2. The international legal framework for tourism cooperation and cultural heritage

Tourism cooperation between Vietnam and other ASEAN countries is governed by a network of multilateral agreements, political declarations, and common standards. The implementation of these instruments requires determined domestication by each member state. As a pivotal legal instrument, the 2009 ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA) governs cross-border capital flows, explicitly including sectors such as tourism and cultural services. The architecture of this agreement is sustained by four interconnected pillars, namely the liberalization, facilitation, protection, and promotion of investments within the bloc.

In the tourism sector, ACIA promotes market opening and the creation of an equitable environment for intra-ASEAN investors. Although it has established a common framework, significant disparities remain in the compatibility of investment laws among member states. Countries such as Thailand and Singapore continue to maintain foreign investment restriction lists in sensitive sectors, including land, the press, and religious services, in order to safeguard public order and national identity.

The international legal framework governing heritage in ASEAN has evolved from broad commitments to concrete action plans. The 2000 Bangkok Declaration emphasized that the cultural heritage of each nation constitutes an inseparable part of the common heritage of Southeast Asia. Subsequently, the 2016 Vientiane Declaration introduced measures to combat the illicit trafficking of antiquities and to mitigate the impacts of natural disasters. ASEAN member states committed to close cooperation with law enforcement and customs authorities to prevent the cross-border outflow of cultural property.

Table 2: Major declarations on culture and heritage in ASEAN

Source: Compiled from documents of the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community.

The Mutual Recognition Arrangement on Tourism Professionals (MRA-TP) constitutes a specialized legal instrument frameworked to facilitate skilled labor mobility within the tourism sector. Its structural advantages center on:

• Institutionalizing unified occupational standards for tour guides, hospitality personnel, and travel professionals, thereby elevating the regional workforce's global competitiveness.
• Professionalizing cultural tourism services by cultivating a standardized and certified cadre of guiding professionals.
• Safeguarding the qualitative fidelity and accuracy in communicating indigenous historical and cultural narratives to international visitors.

5.3. Improving Vietnam’s tourism legal framework in the context of integration

Vietnam has taken substantial steps to improve its legal system in order to align with ASEAN commitments and global trends. This reform reflects a fundamental shift in the state’s approach to tourism governance. The implementation of the Law on Tourism 2017 in early 2018 signaled a strategic reorientation of the regulatory framework, substituting conventional administrative oversight with proactive economic facilitation. The legislative advancement is characterized by two core tenets: first, a tourist-centered approach that consolidates legal safeguards for visitor safety and rights, thereby elevating the nation’s reputational profile; and second, the codification of community-based tourism under Article 19, which provides a landmark legal mechanism for local population engagement and benefit-sharing, effectively anchoring both rural poverty reduction and indigenous heritage conservation.

Furthermore, Resolution No. 08-NQ/TW, issued by the Politburo in 2017, conceptualizes tourism as an integrated service sector defined by profound intersectoral and interregional linkages, extensive socialization, and rich cultural dimensions. By channeling planning resources into strategic growth poles, this policy framework served as a foundational driver for the macroeconomic recovery and impressive resurgence of Vietnam’s tourism sector in the post-pandemic period of 2023 - 2025.

Table 3. Tourism development outcomes and targets in Vietnam

Source: Compiled from tourism sector reports and economic data.

5. 4. Intersectoral coordination mechanisms: A lever for synchronized development

Given its inherently intersectoral nature, the success of a destination depends on the synergy of the entire political system, from diplomacy and security to transport and infrastructure.

The National Steering Committee for Tourism, restructured in 2025 under Decision No. 1532/QD-TTg, serves as the highest-level coordinating body assisting the Prime Minister in resolving intersectoral issues. With the participation of leaders from multiple ministries, including Public Security, Foreign Affairs, Finance, Transport, and Industry and Trade, the Committee coordinates issues ranging from visa procedures to tourism transport corridors.

The architectural framework of the current coordination mechanism reflects a consolidated network of intersectoral covenants signed between the Ministries of Justice, Public Security, and Science and Technology, integrated with the systemic implementation of Project 06 on national population data. This collaborative governance model has yielded measurable structural advancements: first, it has minimized administrative friction for corporate entities and travelers; second, it has institutionalized the National Public Service Portal as a centralized single-window infrastructure, exploiting shared datasets to compress more than 700 distinct administrative tracks; and third, it has driven substantial improvements in the Online Service Index (OSI), accelerating Vietnam’s integration into the region's leading tier for digital governance."

At the provincial and municipal levels, departments responsible for culture, sports and tourism, home affairs, construction, and public security coordinate in heritage site management to ensure restoration in accordance with planning, transparent management of offerings and donations, and the security of festivals. Nevertheless, inconsistency in decentralization continues to create the risk of “diffused responsibility” for heritage sites located in border areas or in zones with overlapping land-use purposes.

5.5. Lessons learned from ASEAN countries

Thailand employs culture as a form of “soft power” through the campaign “Thailand - Kitchen of the World.” The country has invested heavily in tour-guide training, requiring proficiency in three foreign languages and deep cultural knowledge, while maintaining 21 overseas tourism offices and allocating USD 150 million annually to promotional activities in order to preserve its leading regional position.

The structural matrix of Singapore’s development model is explicitly predicated on quality control, technological advancement, and rigorous standardization. At the micro-level, this model is operationalized through a stringent regulatory mechanism for tour-guide licensing, which ensures systemic accuracy in cultural and historical narratives. At the macro-level, the nation's iconic "City in a Garden" branding encapsulates a hybrid urban landscape where avant-garde architecture coexists with the conservation of heritage districts, such as Chinatown and Little India-effectively optimizing product diversification within its tourism sector.

The enactment of Indonesia’s Tourism Law No. 18/2025 introduces a fundamental restructuring of the sector's administrative approach, replacing fragmented single-project management with an integrated ecosystem governance model. A cornerstone innovation of this statute is the formal codification of corporate social responsibility, which systematically redefines the nature of community engagement by transforming discretionary corporate commitments into legally enforceable obligations.

Table 4. Components of the Tourism Ecosystem under Indonesia’s New Law

Source: Based on an analysis of Indonesia’s Law No. 18/2025

.

6. Recommendation and Conclusion

This study demonstrates that while Vietnam’s tourism sector has achieved significant post-pandemic growth, its full integration into the ASEAN cultural tourism space is constrained by legal rigidities and horizontal coordination gaps. To transition from a volume-led recovery to a value-driven, integrated, and resilient tourism ecosystem, the following policy interventions are recommended for implementation during the 2026 - 2030 period:

Amend the Tourism Law 2017 to Introduce Adaptive Business Support and Clear CBT Legal Status

The National Assembly should consider amending Article 31 of the Tourism Law 2017 and revising its implementing Decree No. 168/2017/ND-CP to establish a flexible escrow deposit mechanism. This amendment should introduce an "open plan" clause authorizing the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism to temporarily reduce travel deposit requirements (by 50% to 70%) or allow partial liquidity release in the event of government-declared force majeure crises, pandemics, or natural disasters.

Furthermore, a dedicated chapter should be introduced to codify the legal status, rights, and benefit-sharing mechanisms of community-based tourism cooperatives. This would establish a formal legal basis to protect the intellectual property of indigenous cultural heritage, ensure equitable revenue distribution, and allow local communities to directly manage their cultural and natural assets.

Elevate the State Steering Committee on Tourism and Establish a National Sustainable Tourism Agency

To overcome horizontal administrative silos, the Prime Minister should elevate the authority of the State Steering Committee on Tourism (currently chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Mai Van Chinh) [11]. Modeling Thailand’s National Tourism Policy Committee, this elevated body should have the statutory authority to issue binding inter-ministerial directives.21 This will ensure that national transportation networks, national park conservancy, and border security policies are aligned with tourism strategies.

Additionally, the government should establish a dedicated public administrative agency, similar to Thailand’s DASTA, tasked with co-creating sustainable tourism zones, administering local capacity-building programs, and implementing a multi-sectoral CBT certification scheme based on sustainable, low-carbon criteria.

Establish a National Integrated Tourism-Transportation Open Data System

The Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, in conjunction with the Ministry of Transportation, should mandate the development of a National Integrated Tourism-Transportation Open Data System.16 This initiative must establish binding data-sharing standards and standardized APIs to integrate real-time databases across airlines, regional railways, ground shuttle operators, and rural CBT homestays.

Establishing this unified digital infrastructure will reduce transaction costs for inbound operators by 15% to 18%, optimize regional transit coordination, and disperse tourist traffic to secondary cultural heritage sites, thereby mitigating overtourism and promoting inclusive regional development [12, p.23]

 Implement Real-Time Visa and Residency Data Synchronization

To eliminate the five-day latency in immigration monitoring, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Public Security must complete the technical integration of their databases through real-time API synchronization. Information regarding visa approvals and renewals must automatically sync with the National Database on Population and Immigration immediately upon issuance.

Concurrently, local authorities should scale up mobile-based, user-friendly registration applications for grassroots homestay operators. This digitized approach will allow local police to monitor foreign residency in real time, shifting from resource-intensive manual checks to targeted, data-driven security management without disrupting the visitor experience.

 Pioneer Subregional Cultural Tourism Corridors and Multilateral Facilitation

Vietnam should play an active role in initiating and coordinating cross-border, multi-destination cultural circuits - such as "One Way, Multiple Destinations" - within subregional frameworks including ACMECS, CLMV, CLV, and the broader ASEAN community. These initiatives should be formalized through multilateral agreements that streamline cross-border overland transit, establish mutual recognition for tour guide credentials, and co-finance promotional campaigns using the ASEAN Tourism Fund. By standardizing and harmonizing its regulatory frameworks with regional criteria, Vietnam can strengthen its position as a highly competitive and sustainable hub in the ASEAN cultural tourism space.

Cultural tourism cooperation between Vietnam and ASEAN, in the context of regional and global integration, not only drives economic growth but also plays a crucial role in preserving and promoting the distinct cultural values of each nation. In practice, alongside opportunities to expand cultural exchange, promote national imagery, and elevate the country's global standing, this collaborative process also faces multiple challenges. These include the risk of cultural commercialization, issues concerning community intellectual property, and the illicit trafficking of cultural properties.

To ensure sustainable development, perfecting the institutional framework for cooperation is an urgent imperative. This necessitates a synchronized approach to building legal frameworks, enhancing data digitalization, innovating interdisciplinary coordination mechanisms, and promoting multilateral cooperation in heritage protection. Simultaneously, emphasis must be placed on capacity building for local communities and maximizing the role of the private sector to strike a harmonious balance between exploitation and conservation.

Looking ahead, with the advantage of abundant cultural resources and a proactive integration strategy, Vietnam holds significant potential to become a leading nation in the region for sustainable cultural tourism development. Therefore, Vietnam – ASEAN cooperation is not merely an engine for economic growth but also a vital foundation for building a cohesive, culturally rich, and enduringly prosperous regional community.

References

1. ASEAN outlines tourism priorities for 2026-2030 - TTG Asia, accessed in May 18, 2026, https://www.ttgasia.com/2026/02/02/asean-outlines-tourism-priorities-for-2026-2030/]
2. ASEAN Tourism Sectoral Plan 2026–2030, accessed in May 18, 2026, https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/ASEAN-Tourism-Sectoral-Plan-2026-2030-Short-Version-1.pdf]
3. ASEAN outlines tourism priorities for 2026-2030 - TTG Asia, accessed in May 18, 2026, https://www.ttgasia.com/2026/02/02/asean-outlines-tourism-priorities-for-2026-2030/]
4. Decision No. 147/QD-TTg 2020 approving the strategy of tourism development for Vietnam, accessed in May 18, 2026, https://english.luatvietnam.vn/decision-no-147-qd-ttg-on-approving-the-strategy-of-tourism-development-for-vietnam-by-2030-180149-doc1.html]
5. Vietnam, Laos Ink 2026–2030 Culture-Tourism Cooperation Plan - CEOInsightsAsia, accessed in May 18, 2026, 
6. https://www.ceoinsightsasia.com/news/vietnam-laos-ink-20262030-culturetourism-cooperation-plan-nwid-14572.html]
7. Policy on Community Tourism Development in Thailand, accessed in May  18, 2026, https://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/re/k-rsc/hss/book/pdf/vol04_02.pdf]
8. Local to global: unveiling the strategic potential of Community-Based Tourism in Thailand - UNITesi, accessed in May 18, 2026, https://unitesi.unive.it/retrieve/50bce86a-a1fc-44d4-9e28 ecf4026630f8/880291-1298788.pdf]

9. Tourism policy development in Vietnam: A pro-poor perspective - ResearchGate, accessed in May 18, 2026, 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271936845_Tourism_policy_development_in_Vietnam_A_pro-poor_perspective]

10. Building a digital ecosystem to support the community-based tourism value chain: a case study of Moc Chau, Vietnam - IJWOS, accessed in May  18, 2026, https://ijwos.com/ijwos-main/uploads/181291598846.pdf]
11. Decision No. 147/QD-TTg 2020 approving the strategy of tourism development for Vietnam, accessed in May  18, 2026, https://english.luatvietnam.vn/decision-no-147-qd-ttg-on-approving-the-strategy-of-tourism-development-for-vietnam-by-2030-180149-doc1.html].
12. Vietnam's tourism advances sustainability in 2026, accessed in May  18, 2026, https://vir.com.vn/vietnams-tourism-advances-sustainability-in-2026-146677-146677.html].
13. ASEAN Tourism Sectoral Plan 2026–2030, accessed in May 18, 2026, 

https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/ASEAN-Tourism-Sectoral-Plan-2026-2030-Short-Version-1.pdf].