📋 Tender Overview
Resolution No. 21-NQ/TW of the Central Government on views and orientations for amending the Land Law and related laws not only sets out the requirement to continue perfecting land law. The resolution opens a fundamental shift in thinking: From managing mainly through administrative procedures to managing land as a strategic resource, competitive advantage and driving force for national development. Download Resolution No. 21-NQ/TW of the Central Government on viewpoints and directions for amending the Land Law and related laws not only poses a requirement to continue improving land law but also opens a fundamental shift in thinking. Land is a special resource of the country. But the highest immediate budget revenue from land does not necessarily bring the greatest efficiency. Recently, a paradox still exists: While businesses lack production premises, people have difficulty accessing housing, and many infrastructure projects need land funds to deploy, in many places, allocated land is still slow to be put into use, projects take long, public land is wasted and resources are trapped in layers of procedures. In that context, Resolution No. 21-NQ/TW of the Central Government on the views and orientations for amending the Land Law and related laws not only sets out the requirement to continue improving land law. The resolution opens a fundamental shift in thinking: From managing mainly through administrative procedures to managing land as a strategic resource, competitive advantage and driving force for national development. From land management to managing development resources. The constitutional foundation of the land regime remains unchanged: Land is owned by the entire people, the State is the owners representative and unified management. The breakthrough of Resolution 21 does not lie in narrowing the role of the State, but in the need to raise that role to a new level. Administrative management is necessary. The state must know how much land there is, what type of land it is, who is using it, for how long and whether the use is for the right purpose or not. Without a strict legal order, land is easy to be encroached upon, used arbitrarily, lost or become the object of group interests. But administrative management alone is not enough. A plot of land can be fully registered, assigned to the right authority and have all procedures completed, but still be abandoned. A project may have the correct process on paper but be delayed in implementation for many years. A public land fund may not be legally lost but still does not create any value for society. Download Politburo member, Permanent Deputy Prime Minister Pham Gia Tuc presented the key and core contents of Resolution No. 21-NQ/TW on the perspective and orientation of amending the Land Law and related laws at the National Conference to research, study, grasp and implement the Resolution of the Third Conference of the 14th Party Central Committee - Photo: VGP/Nhat Bac Therefore, modern land governance must answer more questions More important question: Is the land being used effectively; Is it being brought to the right capable subject; Is it being put into use on schedule? Does it create adequate value? Does the project create products, jobs and revenue; Whether financial obligations are fully fulfilled; Are environmental commitments and community benefits guaranteed? Are economic, social and environmental benefits balanced? and who is responsible if resources are left fallow or used below potential? This is a very important development in the thinking of Resolution 21. Land is no longer seen only as a physical area that needs to be inventoried and controlled, but as a multidimensional value system. Each plot of land can simultaneously contain economic, social, cultural, environmental, defense, security values and future development potential. That perspective fundamentally changes the criteria for evaluating a land decision. A piece of land is not always best used when it brings in the highest immediate revenue. Its long-term value can be greater if it is reserved for strategic infrastructure, green spaces, social housing, schools, hospitals, innovation centers or development reserves for future generations. Resource management also requires managing the entire land use life cycle. In the long run, attention often focuses strongly on the time of land allocation, land lease, land conversion or land recovery. Meanwhile, what determines the value of development lies in what happens after that decision. A modern land institution must therefore be able to track the whole cycle: From planning, establishing rights, selecting users, allocating land, putting land into exploitation, creating value to fulfilling obligations and evaluating results. The right to access land cannot be separated from the responsibility for land use. Being assigned a particularly large public resource but not putting it to use, using it for the wrong purpose, or keeping land waiting for price increases must be recognized as a form of waste of national resources. The life cycle approach also helps identify a persistent weakness: Land is often stuck at junctions between areas of development.law and regulatory agencies. A project may comply with land law but have problems with planning; meet investment conditions but have not completed construction procedures; There is an implementation policy but the public assets have not yet been resolved; land has been allocated but financial obligations have not been determined. Each agency can do its part correctly, but the entire process still does not produce results. Moving from management to governance is also a shift from procedurally divided thinking to results-based integrated thinking. The destination is not a file that has gone through all the agencies, but a resource that has actually been put to use legally, effectively and sustainably. Resolution 21 also sets out the requirement to open up but not relax. This is a v
