Change in Consumer Prices expressed as a percent of change from the prior year (ADB)

GDP Growth (%) Government Statistics Bureau/ADB/IMF

1. The State reduced this figure from 7.5 to 7.1 in October 2001, which the World Bank supports.

2. Full year 2002 : 6.7% (#585 STW 21Dec02)

Index

GDP (converted to US$)   US$ 1 = VND 15,000 (constant) Reported in billion dollars

Index

GDP per capita (converted to US$)  VND 1 = US$  15,000¹ (constant) 

1 We caution readers that these numbers were previously converted at 1 US$ to 14,000 VND as a constant.

2 This number is derived by taking the most recently announced GDP for year 2000 of US$30.6 billion and dividing by the estimated total population of 79 million. The reports of Vietnam's per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) are all over the mark.  VBJ, an early source of our numbers (in blue), is no longer published.  While VET has been reporting that the GDP per capita was at and above US$ 301 since 1996, Vietnam Investment Review in mid-year 20000 - a publication of the MPI - reports:

 [T]he average income [broke] $250 a year for the first time....  Monthly income per person reached VND 295,000 ($21.07) in 1999, a 30.1 per cent increase on 1996 and equivalent to an annual $252.86. (455 VIR 4, 3-9 July 2000). 

VIR cites figures from the General Statistics Department of Vietnam.  The actual number is as elusive as are most official numbers in Vietnam and will remain so until Vietnam's reporting becomes transparent. However, as the GDP numbers are substantially under those of the "news" media, we suspect the GDP numbers are the more accurate.

3. It is claimed (VIR, Jan 2002 p10) that this reported range is determined under the Parity Purchase Power method (PPM).  No explanation is offered if this is the same as the United Nation's Purchase Power Parity (PPP) system, designed "to show the different levels of spending power on a country by country basis. A market basket of such items as average incomes, taxes, interest rates, insurance, utilities, gasoline, milk, newspapers and other typical expenses are compared and used to devise the PPP. The standard is based on the USA=100," or who the PPP is now made into a range and used by the State to report GDP.  For a more complete read on the PPP system developed by the United Nations, please write to VVG to receive a copy by E-mail.

The more widely accepted sum for year 2001 is $399.

Index

Foreign Capital Investment ¹

Caveat: All publications in Vietnam are subject to strict State censorship and State propagandizing.  The numbers reported here change dramatically from time-to-time. The numbers of projects seem to decrease or increase without regard to the value of the projects or the steel in the ground. There is rarely an explanation offered. 

Because the changes are so frequent and unsubstantiated, we encourage readers to refer to prior reports on line  or above for such historic details as they may need.  This is the most current and best data available from public sources, even though the accuracy of all these numbers is anyone's guess.

These numbers do not include ODA disbursements that in 2002 has been variably reported but in the range of  $750 million. These funds usually go towards infrastructure development.

As of July 20, 2003 (August 2003 VET) 

All Nations: Current projects number 4,069 [vs. 3,991 last report]  with Total Investment Capital $39.619 billion [vs. $39.047 billion last report] and Implemented Capital of $22.983 billion [vs. $22.665 billion last month]. 

Where the numbers increase or decrease month-on-month, we've added a corresponding +/- respectively. Where no change is reported, no symbol follows the number.  We have no explanations for the changes but invite readers to review the previous month's Economic Indicators for further research. Determining accuracy in these reported numbers is akin to reading tea leaves as the system lacks transparency.

Notes:

1. As reported earlier (here in March 2002 and April 2002, and in Vietnam Vignettes for May 2002) we see some fiddling with the reported numbers in the listings for Total Implemented Capital.  While most if not all financial reports from the State are still considered by leading foreign economists as overstated, undisguised errors highlight huge discrepancies and the questionable nature of these financial reports from Vietnam. In March 2003 we saw a reported loss in total FDI and yet the numbers for that month indicated an increase. The third Q 2002 loss of Russian investments amounting to $600 million in the Dung Quat project at that time seem to account for some of this down turn. The total capital numbers were down from 1.507 billion to 0.214 billion while implemented capital was down from 0.671 billion to 0.140 billion. January 2003 numbers were not published, which may have something to do with then current picture. Clearly the nation still needs transparency in reporting (that means access to accurate -- both current and historical -- numbers as well as accountability in reporting) to build investor confidence.

2. While the State authorized media report this list in rank order, we are not able to determine the basis of the rank order. In the past this listing had been ranked by the total capital invested, but that ordering system is long abandoned. Therefore, we suggest that no significance be attributed to the ranking number and readers should instead concentrate on the actual numbers presented in each of the several categories. The reported originating source is the Ministry of Planning and Investment.

Index

Foreign Investment By Sector ¹ Total Foreign Investment by Sector (US$) 

Caveat: As above in Foreign Capital Investment, these numbers are the best available and are published by State controlled media. For the reasons earlier stated, they are highly suspect.  We encourage readers to review archived monthly reports as they may have the need to review the accuracy of reporting. 

Where the numbers increased or decreased month-on-month, we've added a corresponding +/- respectively. Where no change is reported, no symbol follows the number.  Where there is substantial change worthy of note, we mark that with a double + or - (as ++ or --). While the public and we are given no explanations for the changes, we do invite readers to review the previous reports in  Economic Indicators for further research.  

As of July 20, 2003 (August 2003 VET)    

Notes:

1. As reported earlier (here in March 2002 and April 2002, and in Vietnam Vignettes for May 2002) we see some fiddling with the Sector Investments.  While most if not all financial reports from the State are considered overstated, recent undisguised errors  show huge discrepancies and the questionable nature of these financial reports from Vietnam. The third Q 2002 loss of Russian investment amounting to $600 million in the Dung Quat projects first was reported in February 2003 that seems to account for some of down turn seen in  the total investment numbers that were down from 3.195 billion to 1.953 billion while the implemented capital decreased from 3.511 billion to 3.346 billion. That the January 2003 numbers were not published may have something to do with the then current picture. Clearly the nation still needs transparency in reporting (that means access to accurate -- both current and historical -- numbers as well as accountability in reporting) to build investor confidence.

Index

 Foreign Investment By Province¹:

Caveat: 
Accurate investment figures are not readily available, and when published, they lack transparency. There is no logical reason for apparent reporting discrepancies.  Following a long, unexplained suspension, in September 2000, the State resumed its monthly reports on Implemented Capital, earlier called Capital Committed .  Estimates of this number differ among multinational institutions but currently run at between 25% to 50% of the official government statistics offered here. 

The numbers in this report as they are reported by the State for international use, and vary substantially from month to month. Sometimes the number of projects and capital increases but implemented capital decreases. The reverse also happens. It could be due to a reporting lag time or intentional fiddling with the numbers. There is no explanation offered to the public.

Where the following numbers increased or decreased month-on-month, we've added a corresponding +/- respectively. Where no change is reported, no symbol follows the number.  While we have no explanations for the changes, we do encourage readers to review prior reports on line as readers may have the need for historical accuracy.

Top Twenty Locations by Total Capital As of July 20, 2003 (VET August  2003)