People who help transform society and specific sectors of society are usually classified as thinkers (the theorists) and doers (the implementors).  Those of us who joined the agribusiness road show to Vietnam last June 24 to 27, 2025 were fortunate to have as one of our speakers someone who is both a thinker and very much a doer.  Christian Eyde Moeller is someone who walks his talks.  He is a professional who not only meticulously prepares a strategic plan and a play book but also shows the way to those who work for him the actual steps needed to reach his goals.

            In his presentation on Vietnam’s Agricultural Performance, he first outlines the “Four Pillars of Vietnam’s Success.”  The first pillar had to do with bold policy reforms implemented by the Socialist government in 1988 to 1997: 1988 Resolution 101 involving land-use rights; 1993 Land Transfer Law that enabled transfers of land; and 1997 Rice export quota removed.  The second pillar was the encouragement of private investments within a market economy.  This resulted in $3.31 billion foreign direct investments (FDI) in agriculture in 1990.  In 2022, there was an additional $68 million in FDI in agriculture, with Bayer and the TH group in joint ventures. The third pillar was the heavy investments in countryside infrastructure reaching some 595,000 kilometers of roads, coupled with universal electrification which brought electricity cost to $0.073 /kWh compared to $0.15/kWh in the Philippines.   The fourth pillar was the focus on worker productivity that reached $6,500 per worker, 70 % mechanization and average monthly wage of $150 compared.  Today the average monthly wage in Vietnam is $697 compared to $790 in the Philippines. These data already give the answer to why the factories leaving China are flocking to  Vietnam and hardly come to the Philippines:  better infrastructures, lower energy costs and lower wages. Hopefully, the Luzon Economic Corridor being planned by the U.S. and Japan to significant improve the infrastructures connecting Batangas to Manila to Bataan can shift some of the factory relocation from China to the Philippines away from Vietnam.

            The success of Vietnam (as compared to Philippine performance) is especially pronounced in Agriculture.  Christian lists Vietnam’s winning crops (as of 2024) as Coffee ($5.2 billion); Durian ($3.2 billion); Shrimp ($ 4 billion) and Rice ($5.7 billion).  The more worrying development is the so-called Coconut Threat posed by Vietnam.  We have to keep in mind that there are some 3.6 million hectares planted to coconuts in the Philippines.  At the moment, our coconut exports still outpace those of Vietnam: $2.4 billion vs. $1.1 billion.  The annual growth of Vietnam’s coconut exports is, however, 13.6% compared to our 9.5%.  Even more worrying is the much higher productivity of coconut farming in Vietnam which is 7.85 MT/ha compared to the Philippine 4.53 4.53 MT/ha.

            At the micro level, Christian can speak from personal experiences about how the Philippine Government suffers when compared to the Socialist State of Vietnam.  There is what he calls the “Government Support Gap” in the Philippines.  Vietnam adopted a policy in building comprehensive rural infrastructures while the Philippines’ local government lack funding for critical farm-to-market roads.  Vietnam achieved 51,000 kilometers of rural networks with universal electrification as compared with the Philippines’ patchy 36 % road quality and 70 % electrification rate.  Constitutional land ownership limits deter foreign direct investment in the Philippines while Vietnam’s more flexible land-use polices attract international partnerships.  The Philippines face an average of $1 billion typhoon damage annually while Vietnam has invested in climate-smart, resilient systems. 

            In summary, Christian lists lessons that the Philippines can learn from the Agribusiness Success story of Vietnam:

            -Centralize infrastructure building.  The Department of Agriculture must lead in the provision of farm-to-market road to the small farmers.  Mindanao should be linked to ports all over the country.  ADB partnership for rural connectivity.  Climate-resilient bridge and port design.

-As regards electricity costs, our energy officials should target the $0.073/kWh of Vietnam.

Scale geothermal from 10% to 25 %. EPIRA reforms to cut pass-through charges.  Target Vietnam’s $0.073/kWh for agriculture.

  -Adopt Vietnam’s system of foreign land leases.

            -Climate-resilient design:  one-in-fifty year flood standards; typhoon-proof connectivity; and solar grid networks.

            -Boost processing:  Attract Tetra Pak to Davao; develop local packaging supply; and cut 70 % dependency to 30%.  Build coconut milk export capacity.

            -Fix wage-productivity gap:  DA-led training program for upskilling and reskilling farm and agribusiness workers; support mechanization; and align with ASEAN peers (learn also applicable lessons from Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia.)  Mechanization from 30% to 70%.  Digitalization of agriculture and 5 G rural deployment.

            -Market diversification.    Develop mango and avocado value chain.  EU organic certification program.  China market penetration strategy.  Vietnam has clearly a geographic advantage vis-à-vis the China market. ( I would add other products for  Philippine agribusiness diversification:  bamboos, durian, cashew, pili, coffee, and cacao.)

            Christian was emphatic about the indispensable role of the Nucleus Estates model developed by the Malaysians in the palm oil and rubber industries in the last century.  The ideal size of a nucleus estate (whether in coconut, palm oil, coffee, bamboos and other plantation crops) is 20,000 hectares, planting 208 palms per hectare and surrounded by small holder farming communities.

            Up to this point we have been considering what the Philippines can learn from the Vietnamese economic development success from my point of view (a Filipino economist) and from a European point of view (Christian is from Denmark).  Those who participated in the road show from both the Vietnamese and Philippine sides were thankful that a leading Vietnamese economist made a presentation entitled “Is Vietnam the Next Asian Tiger?”  Dr. Pham Van Dai from the Fulbright Institute, answered for us the question, “Is Vietnam the Next Asian Tiger?”  He started his economic briefing by enumerating the key economic zones of his country:  (1)  North Mountainous (agriculture predominates, still poor infrastructure, rich natural minerals and low human capital; (2)  Red River Delta (Mega City,  Ha Noi, FDI and electronics);  (3)  North Central (Heavy industry such as steel, cement and chemicals, and ports);(4) South Central (Tourism, beach, manufacturing, heavy industry (steel), renewable energy; (5) Highland (Agriculture with perennial ‘plants such as coffee, pepper , cashew, and durian;  (6)  Southeast (Mega City,  Concentration of FDIs, especially light industries; university center; sea and airport;  (7) Mekong Delta (rice, seafood and food processing).

            Dr. Dai presented the latest macroeconomic data according to the World Bank:  GDP at $433.7 billion; GDP per capita at $4,324; Agriculture value added accounts for 13 %, Industry at 41.8 % and Services at 45.2%; External Trade at 185.7 % of GDP; Population at 100.4 million;  Median age at  32.4 years.  During the last four decades, Vietnam has been the second best performing economy in the Indo-Pacific region after China.  Because of the focus on countryside and agribusiness development, it has done wonders in poverty alleviation—together with Malaysia and Thailand--by bringing down poverty incidence to less than 5%.  In the Indo-Pacific region, Vietnam stands out with two key comparative advantages, i.e. unparalleled natural conditions for diverse and productive agriculture (tropical monsoon climate for year-round cultivation; fertile river deltas—Mekong, Red—and high-yield crops--and diverse topography supporting specialized agriculture) and productive workforce (abundant, cost-effective labor supply, generational farming expertise and adaptable, skilled rural population). It has to be pointed out, though, that the ultimate reason for success is that the country has had the fortune of enlightened leadership who knew how to convert these competitive advantages for the common good of the Vietnamese society.  The Philippines has been less lucky.  To be continued.