Vietnam's Policy Changes and Foreign Real Estate Investment: A Systematic Review of Foreign Direct Investment and Land Law Evolution
POLICY SHIFTS AND FOREIGN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT IN VIETNAM: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT AND LAND LAW EVOLUTION
GPT Abstract Summary
This study systematically reviewed Vietnam's foreign direct investment (FDI) and land law policy changes from 1992 to 2024 and analyzed their impact on real estate investment trends. Using the PRISMA framework and mixed methods, a comprehensive review of major legal changes, policy reforms, macroeconomic fluctuations, and investment data found that investors' confidence in the real estate sector is closely linked to legal transparency, clarity of land acquisition regulations, and macroeconomic stability. Major policy changes such as the 2006 Investment Law and the 2013 Land Law were associated with increases in foreign real estate investment. However, frequent legal amendments and land tenure ambiguities hindered investment inflows. The 2024 Land Law introduced progressive provisions, but issues such as dual pricing and unclear compensation mechanisms persist. The study offers policy recommendations to enhance legal certainty, improve dispute resolution systems, and reform land regulations to meet the expectations of international investors.
Key Points
- Foreign real estate investment in Vietnam is heavily dependent on legal transparency and clarity of land acquisition regulations.
- Key legal amendments in 2006 and 2013 are associated with increased investment, while frequent legal changes weaken investment incentives.
- Despite improvements to the Land Law in 2024, unresolved issues such as dual pricing and unclear compensation systems remain.
Scope and Limitations of the Summary
This English translation is based on a Korean summary generated from the source abstract. It is not a review of the full paper. Consult the original for detailed methods, figures and the scope of the conclusions.
This summary is based on the paper's abstract and does not include detailed research methodology, data analysis specifics, or in-depth empirical evidence review. Therefore, the study's limitations and applicability range are difficult to ascertain solely from the abstract.
This summary does not represent the official views of Professor Haksoo Ko or the Center for Law & Economics at Seoul National University.
Summary based on original abstract · Model: gpt-4.1-mini · Generated: 2026. 10. 12. 06:06 (Korean Standard Time)