Author
Abstract
In 2013, the Mekong Delta Plan (MDP) was jointly introduced by the Dutch and Vietnamese governments as a long‐term, “no regret” policy vision to develop an “economically attractive, climate adaptive and environmentally sustainable” delta. To what extent have the Vietnamese decisionmakers' food security discourses transformed and adapted in the opportune context provided by the MDP? How can we account for the patterns of continuity and change in their policy discourses over the years? Drawing upon the literatures of authoritarian environmental state and securitization theory, and based on a thematic analysis of 112 official policy documents, my research presents the following findings: (1) Whilst embracing the idea of agricultural diversification, Vietnamese policymakers have not shifted away from a predominant emphasis on rice output and export in conceptualizing national food security; (2) their food security discourses continue to embody the political imperative deeply rooted in regime legitimacy concerns, which not only pivot around economic growth, poverty reduction, social stability, and natural disaster alleviation, but have also expanded to the climate mandate; and (3) frames of food safety, hygiene, and quality are gaining robust traction, which have been incorporated into more recent discourses and have dovetailed with the elites' aspiration for international recognition of Vietnamese agricultural produce. Overall, I argue that the ruling elites in Vietnam, driven by rising environmental challenges and political imperatives, have performed as strategic securitizing actors to remold food policy discourses, endorsing, reinforcing and expanding legitimacy claims in the macro policy context facilitated by the MDP. En 2013, los gobiernos neerlandés y vietnamita introdujeron conjuntamente el Plan Delta del Mekong (PDM) como una visión política a largo plazo y sin arrepentimientos para desarrollar un delta económicamente atractivo, adaptable al cambio climático y ambientalmente sostenible. ¿En qué medida se han transformado y adaptado los discursos de los responsables políticos vietnamitas sobre seguridad alimentaria al contexto oportuno que ofrece el PDM? ¿Cómo podemos explicar los patrones de continuidad y cambio en sus discursos políticos a lo largo de los años? Basándome en la literatura sobre el estado ambiental autoritario y la teoría de la securitización, y en un análisis temático de 112 documentos oficiales de política, mi investigación presenta los siguientes hallazgos: (1) Si bien adoptan la idea de la diversificación agrícola, los responsables políticos vietnamitas no han abandonado el énfasis predominante en la producción y exportación de arroz al conceptualizar la seguridad alimentaria nacional; (2) sus discursos sobre seguridad alimentaria siguen encarnando el imperativo político profundamente arraigado en las preocupaciones por la legitimidad del régimen, que no solo giran en torno al crecimiento económico, la reducción de la pobreza, la estabilidad social y la mitigación de desastres naturales, sino que también se han expandido al mandato climático. y (3) los marcos de seguridad, higiene y calidad alimentaria están cobrando fuerza, incorporándose en discursos más recientes y en consonancia con la aspiración de las élites al reconocimiento internacional de la producción agrícola vietnamita. En general, sostengo que las élites gobernantes de Vietnam, impulsadas por los crecientes desafíos ambientales y los imperativos políticos, han actuado como actores estratégicos de securitización para remodelar los discursos sobre política alimentaria, respaldando, reforzando y ampliando las reivindicaciones de legitimidad en el contexto macropolítico facilitado por el PDM.
Suggested Citation
Phoebe Mengxiao Tang, 2025.
"(Re)securitizing Food Policy in Vietnam: The Mekong Delta Plan and the Discourse Metamorphosis,"
Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 42(6), pages 1387-1403, November.
Handle:
RePEc:bla:revpol:v:42:y:2025:i:6:p:1387-1403
DOI: 10.1111/ropr.70022
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:42:y:2025:i:6:p:1387-1403. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.