Evaluation Research on Planning Implementation of Chinese Overseas Economic and Trade Cooperation Zones along the Belt and Road: Evidence from Longjiang Industrial Park, Vietnam

Abstract

Chinese Overseas Economic and Trade Cooperation Zones (COCZs) under the “One Belt and One Road” initiative are committed to promoting inclusive and sustainable industrialization, becoming an important platform for the countries and regions where they are located to achieve the sustainable development goals of the 2030 agenda. The planning of COCZs plays a strategic leading and rigid control role in the sustainable development of parks, and the planning implementation effectiveness evaluation has been a key to the sustainable development of COCZs. From the perspective of sustainable development, we established a rating system depending on the deconstruction “effectiveness = efficiency + effect + benefit + capacity” to measure the planning implementation effectiveness evaluation indexes of COCZs, and conducted empirical research based on the evidence of Longjiang Industrial Park, Vietnam. The research results show that Longjiang Industrial Park has a good planning implementation effectiveness with remarkable comprehensive economic, social, ecological and political benefits. It features a good efficiency, effect and benefit from an excellent production capacity, reflected in the consistency between spatial planning and implementation results and a high satisfaction with planning implementation. However, planning implementation is also faced with problems such as the lag of time, imbalance between profit and loss, uneven achievement of goals, and lack of a refined planning control system. To make COCZs more sustainable in development and planning, the suggestion is, on the one hand, to accelerate the establishment of a regular and institutionalized mechanism for the planning preparation and implementation evaluation of COCZs, and bring sustainable development into the management requirements, and, on the other hand, to promote the transformation of COCZs planning from “Function and Scale Orientation” to “Quality and Effectiveness Orientation”, and guide the creation of a model for sustainable development and the planning of COCZs.

1. Introduction

The aim of the “Belt and Road Initiatives” is to help the countries along the belt and road achieve their vision of sustainable development, and Chinese Overseas Economic and Trade Cooperation Zones (COCZs) under the “Belt and Road Initiatives” are committed to promoting inclusive and sustainable industrialization [1]. According to China’s Ministry of Commerce, by the end of 2018, COCZs had invested more than USD 40 billion, paying more than USD 3 billion in taxes and fees to host countries and creating more than 300,000 jobs for the local community. Over the past ten years, COCZs have developed into an engine for promoting trade and economic growth of host countries and an important platform for host countries to achieve their sustainable development goals of Agenda 2030 by actively integrating the development practice of China’s industrial parks with the development needs of the host countries, continuously sharing China’s experience in industrialization with global partners, and contributing to the economic and social development of the host countries. Two questions, addressing whether the industrial park can help achieve the goal of sustainable development and what the path is for its own sustainable development, have produced some exploratory academic achievements. For example, Lilian Bechara Elabras Veiga argued that industrial parks are an important tool to promote sustainable development [2], Huong T analyzed the strategies to promote the sustainable development of industrial parks in northern Vietnam [3], and Liu and Zhe made a comparative analysis of the sustainable development paths of industrial parks in China and Canada [4]. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development puts forward 17 sustainable development goals, including the elimination of all forms of poverty worldwide and adoption of sustainable consumption and production patterns. It also gives a further detailed description of each goal. The introduction of the concept of sustainable development to the “Belt and Road Initiative” enables the countries along the belt and road to keep their industrialization and urbanization in line with the sustainable development goals, and ensures the sustainable planning, development and operation of industrial parks outside China, playing an important role in promoting and driving the sustainable development of cities along the belt and road.

First of all, the development of industrial parks outside China has greatly contributed to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 9 (SDG9): build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation. COCZs have promoted the development of inclusive industrialization in cities along the “belt and road”. With a large number of Chinese companies, host country companies, and third-country companies gathered, the parks have increased the industrial added value and its share in the local city’s GDP, and have expanded industrial employment and the share of the total employed population in the local city, and upgraded the local industrial development infrastructure and business environment. Secondly, the development of COCZs has better contributed to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 8 (SDG8); that is, it has promoted sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all. The overseas industrial parks of China implement development-oriented policies, focusing on the development of high value-added and labor-intensive industries. By sticking to diversified business, technological upgrades and innovation, they have created decent employment opportunities for urban residents in host countries and improved the efficiency of the local resources used, while establishing entrepreneurship and innovative spirit in local communities and even larger regions. Thirdly, with the help of employment creation, and improvement of industrial infrastructure and the business environment, COCZs will also play an important role in aims such as no poverty (SDG1), zero hunger (SDG 2), good health and well-being for people (SDG3), responsible consumption and production (SDG12), and climate action (SDG13), showing great potential in promoting sustainable economic, environmental and social development and helping the host country realize the goals of the 2030 Agenda.

For sustainable development and operation, COCZs need to plan and play a strategic leading and rigid control role, where planning an implementation effectiveness evaluation has become a key link in the sustainable development of COCZs. It should be noted that “strategic leading” here refers to the fact that planning plays an encouraging and supporting role in the positive effect on human construction, mainly manifested in flexible goals and visions, alternative paths and strategies, consensual space programs and development directions; “rigid control” refers to the fact that planning plays a controlling and restraining role with regard to the negative effect in human construction, mainly manifested in protecting the ecological environment and prohibiting ecological destruction, saving resources and energy, controlling pollution, among others. As a vision and hope that the plan presents, “strategic leading” does not have to become a reality, while “rigid control” should or must be achieved, otherwise it may pose a threat to the sustainable development of a larger region.

In recent years, the research on sustainable development and planning of COCZs has gradually received the attention of industry and academic circles, and a number of important research results have emerged, including a case study on planning of the Sihanouk Ville Special Economic Zone in Cambodia [5], construction modes [6], current situations and trends of development [7], construction characteristics and development suggestions [8] of China’s overseas cooperation industrial parks along the Belt and Road, and China’s cross-border cooperation in building industrial parks in Africa [9,10], Southeast Asia [11,12], Central and Eastern Europe [13] and its impact. The development and planning of the development zone and China’s international cooperation parks in the context of globalization have also attracted the attention of scholars, reflected in the research results including a case studies on Suzhou Industrial Park jointly built by China and Singapore [14,15,16,17], interactive characteristics and the internal mechanism of globalization and the development of Chinese development zones [18], and international cooperation parks in China [19]. Overall, the existing research results still highlight the characteristics of “attaching importance to making plans while neglecting using them” [20], rarely involving the effectiveness of planning implementation [21] of COCZs, and also failing to incorporate the ideas and methods of sustainable development into the development and planning of COCZs. Whether the planning implementation achieves the purpose of the planning itself and whether it helps to carry out the follow-up planning in an orderly manner is related to the full play of the planning role of COCZs, and also directly affects the sustainable construction and development of COCZs [22]. In view of this, based on the public policy and the experience in urban planning implementation evaluation, this paper takes Longjiang Industrial Park (LJIP) in Vietnam as an example to carry out an empirical analysis, trying to construct a method system for planning an implementation effectiveness evaluation of COCZs from the perspective of sustainable development, to provide some reference for relevant theoretical research and practical work.

2. Theoretical Thinking and Method Construction

2.1. Logical Framework: Effectiveness = Efficiency + Effect + Benefit + Capacity

According to the Athens Charter, life, work, recreation, and transportation constitute four basic functions of a city. Industrial parks are the space carriers for creating job opportunities in most cities, especially in industrial cities. The relationship between industrial parks and urbanization has attracted the attention of relevant scholars, and industrial park planning has been generally incorporated into urban planning in academic research and practical work in many countries [23,24,25]. Industrial parks have become an effective tool for the government to promote sustainable development [26]. The performance evaluation of industrial parks has received much attention by scholars with a lot of leading research results. Maria Laura Franco Garcia has provided a set of more realistic sustainability indicators for Mexico Industrial Parks [27]. Maria Zenilda Da Silva, by the Multicriteria Methodology for Constructivist Decision Aid (MCDA-C), has established a qualitative and quantitative analysis model for the performance evaluation in the implementation stage of high-tech industrial parks, offering an important support tool to the management decision-making of the industrial parks [28]. Yang Jin put forward a multi-criteria framework for sustainable evaluations and applied it to the sustainability assessment of low-carbon industrial parks in Beijing, China, in the light of life cycle analysis [29]. By studying the comprehensive benefit assessment of eco-industrial parks, Zhao Haoran constructed a comprehensive benefit assessment framework for sustainable development in eco-industrial parks with nine quantitative indexes and four qualitative indexes in terms of economic benefit standard, social benefit standard and environmental benefit standard, and carried out empirical research using five cases [30]. However, there are few researchers to evaluate the performance of industrial park planning, except Ersin Türk who carried out exploratory research on the planning evaluation of industrial parks in Turkey with Izmir as an example [31]. INTERNATIONAL GUIDELINES FOR INDUSTRIAL PARKS puts forward definite requirements for key procedures such as the planning and implementation evaluation of industrial parks, but there is still a lack of necessary tools in practical operation. Overall, the performance evaluation of industrial park development is of great importance, but there is still a lack of effective tracking research and analysis tools. The performance evaluation of urban planning implementation has been mature, and it is of great reference value to the construction of the performance evaluation framework of industrial park planning.

Vitor Oliveira and Paulo Pinho divided the public policy and urban planning implementation evaluation into two basic concepts: conformance and performance, which has influenced the practice and theoretical research of planning implementation evaluation [32]. Alexander et al. presented the Policy-Plan/Programme-Implementation Process (PPIP) and Policy-Plan-Programme-Project (PPPP) models [33], and Oliveira et al. put forward the PPR (‘Plan-Process-Results) model [32,34], guiding the planning implementation evaluation towards a comprehensive evaluation. A planning implementation effectiveness evaluation is not equal to planning implementation performance evaluations, as the latter is performance-oriented and pursues the maximum output, while the former pursues the balance between output and capacity, which requires both a steady performance rise and sustained capacity growth, more in line with the concept of sustainable development. Now, there are few studies on the planning implementation effectiveness evaluation in academia—some that have covered this topic include: Zhu Jie’s study which argued that space-leading effectiveness has always been the core contents of evaluation on the implementation of city master plans [35]; frameworks for evaluating effectiveness of land-use planning in containing urban sprawl constructed by Shen Xiaoqiang [36] and Gennaio Maria-Pia [37], respectively; an analysis of controlling effectiveness of urban planning on urban growth [38] in Hangzhou by Wu Yizhou et al. and Longying’s evaluation of spatial and temporal heterogeneity of Beijing urban planning implementation effectiveness based on five urban master plans [39]. However, there are fruitful research results on planning implementation performance evaluation, including Faludi’s presentation of four types of “effective” planning [40], Yu Li’s proposal of establishing planning performance evaluation theory based on urban planning uncertainty analysis [41], Peng Kuntao and Zhao Min’s discussion on the urban planning from the inner mechanism of urban spatial performance [42], Wu Yizhou’s research on spatial–temporal evolution and its mechanisms for urban planning control performance [43], Cai Keguang’s evaluation and measurement of urban master planning performance [44], Yan Wentao’s analysis of urban-rural planning regulations’ environmental performance [45], and Sun Shiwen’s research on the main methods of implementing an urban master planning performance evaluation [46], laying the foundation to explore the planning implementation effectiveness evaluations.

The concept of effectiveness originated from physics, and was later introduced into social disciplines such as management and administration, to evaluate how much the functions or objectives of social activities are achieved under certain conditions. In terms of word formation, it can refer to efficiency, effect, benefit, productivity and energy, etc., externally including the output efficiency, effect and benefit, and internally function, ability and potential. The planning implementation evaluation of COCZs should include the sustainable development concepts, methods, tools, etc., to assess both the external output and the internal capacity. The planning implementation effectiveness can be deconstructed into four dimensions: efficiency, effect, benefit and capacity—that is, “Effectiveness = Efficiency + Effect + Benefit + Capacity”, to build a logical framework of planning implementation effectiveness evaluation methods for COCZs (Figure 1).

The construction of specific evaluation methods should give priority to determining the technical standards for evaluation, and the selection of evaluation standards should be determined according to the evaluation content [33]. An efficiency evaluation is based on execution and cost. The former emphasizes the time effect of planning implementation and execution, where the compliance and adherence of the planning administration to the planning is one of the essential conditions for planning to function and produce some output, and it evaluates how well the planning translates into decisions or actions based on its completion rate—for example, whether it is lagging, moderate or advanced [47,48,49], etc.—while the latter gives prominence to the analysis of input–output effectiveness or total factor productivity, measured by means of the input–output method or DEA(Data Envelopment Analysis) model [50,51]. An effect evaluation is based on consistency and satisfaction. The former employs evaluation techniques such as a spatial overlay analysis and goal-achievement analysis of the “planning-status quo” consistency, to analyze the fit between the implementation results and the planning [52,53,54,55,56], while the latter adopts qualitative analysis methods, such as questionnaires and interviews, to study and judge the satisfaction of stakeholders of the planning implementation on the improvement of well-being [57,58,59]. A benefit evaluation is based on value and effect, for measuring the combined influence of wholeness and macroscopicity planning implementation, covering economic benefits, social benefits, environmental benefits, management benefits and political benefits, etc., with an emphasis on the analysis and evaluation of how well the planning intention is achieved [60,61]. Focused on analyzing the applicability of planning for continuous implementation, a capacity evaluation is for a comprehensive analysis of planning implementation prospects and intentions by means of an environmental adaptability analysis of planning implementation and analysis of the intentions of the planning implementers [62,63]. The planning implementation effectiveness of COCZs is a converging compound of the output efficiency, effect and benefit of the practical planning implementation and the expected planning implementation capacity. The key to improving the planning implementation efficiency improvement is emphasizing the efficiency, effect, benefit and capacity.

2.2. Indication System

Different overseas industrial parks vary in development periods of a life cycle, and also in data and data richness. Based on the previous analysis, as well as public policies [64,65], urban planning [66,67,68,69], land-use planning [70] and other experiences in implementation evaluations, this paper constructs an indication system for evaluating the planning implementation effectiveness indexes of COCZs, and gets the weight parameter of each index through the Delphi method (

Table 1. Indication system for evaluating the planning implementation effectiveness indexes of COCZs.

Target Layer	Criterion Layer	Index Layer		Interpretation of Indexes	Weight
Indication system for evaluating the planning implementation effectiveness indexes	Efficiency	Plan implementation rate		Proportion of the planning implemented	6.0
		GDP/ total investment amount		Analysis of planning input and implementation output	7.2
	Effect	Output value target achievement rate		Analysis of planning objective achievement rate based on statistical data	8.2
		Employment target achievement rate			4.9
		Investment promotion achievement rate			6.3
		Consistency rate of spatial development results/planning		Spatial overlay analysis of planning and results	5.9
		Equipment rate of environmental protection facilities		Consistency analysis of planning objectives and construction results	5.2
		Planning implementation satisfaction		Planning implementation satisfaction questionnaire	6.6
	Benefit	Economy	Investment, current park/parks in the location	Analysis of the effect of planning implementation results on regional development results	6.2
			GDP, current park/parks in the location		7.0
		Society: employed population, current park/parks in the location			5.6
		Ecology: wastewater treatment rate, current park/parks in the location			5.1
		Politics: park level (value assignment)		Analysis of the influence of planning implementation on the upgrading of the park level	6.6
		Management: regional effects of planning rules		Questionnaire analysis of technology spillover of planning implementation and its promotion for and influence on local innovation	4.2
	Capacity	Planning environmental adaptability index		Analysis of the applicability and sustainability of the continued planning implementation	7.6
		Willingness index of the planning implementer			7.4

Note: For the park level value assignment, the national level is assigned a value 100, the provincial level 70, the prefectural and municipal level 50, well-known enterprise level (top 500 in China or the world) 30, other levels 10.

) in accordance with the requirements of data availability, comparability, accuracy and authenticity, with a sustainable development of the economy, society, environment and culture taken into full account. Scholars, researchers, planners, operators and entrepreneurs who know COCZs well, a total of 20, were invited to assign values to indexes 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9, with the average value as the weight. Planning implementation effectiveness indexes represent how well the planning is implemented or its implementation probability. By 20, 40, 60, 80, planning implementation effectiveness indexes are classified into five levels: worse, poor, average, good, excellent. From a sustainable development perspective, the purpose of planning implementation is to achieve a high effectiveness, which requires the planning implementation process to harvest as much of the current output as possible, while maintaining sustainable production capacity for the future. The staff association and local community residents constitute major stakeholder groups in the implementation of LJIP planning. However, limited by the difficulty in data acquisition, we regretfully failed to find appropriate representatives of social groups for the Delphi analysis in this exploratory research. We will make up for it in further research.

3. Empirical Research

3.1. Overview of Research Objects

As of November 2018, according to the data released by the Investment Promotion Office of China’s Overseas Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone, a total of 103 overseas industrial parks were counted statistically, including 20 assessed and confirmed by China. LJIP is an overseas economic and trade cooperation zone, a typical representative of COCZs. According to the Report on the Construction and Development of China Overseas Industrial Parks under the “Belt and Road Initiatives” (2018), LJIP gets a comprehensive evaluation score of 88.21, ranking first. Located in the Tan Lap 1 commune, Tan Phuoc District, Tien Giang, Vietnam, LJIP covers an area of 600 hm² and has a construction period of 50 years. It is planned, developed and operated by Zhejiang Qianjiang Investment Management Co., Ltd. In 2007, the Detailed Construction Plan of LJIP in Tien Giang–Tan Phuoc–Tan Lap 1 by 1/2000 (detailed construction plan of LJIP) was approved by the People’s Committee of Tien Giang, Vietnam, and revised in 2015. Since the planning objectives and general plan (Figure 2) have changed greatly after revision, this paper mainly evaluates the 2015 version.

According to the 2007 version of the plan, the park occupies an area of 600 hm², including a total plan of 540 hm² for the industrial and 60 hm² for residential service areas. The LJIP is dominated by industrial land, which covers 357.36 hm², accounting for 66.18% of the park. The industrial land is planned based on the road network, and the park is divided into 12 large industrial plots with three horizontal and two vertical main roads. It is planned to build infrastructure and public services with “nine supplies and one level”, equipped with ATM (Automatic Teller Machine), a telecommunication station, substation, water supply plant, sewage treatment plant and other facilities, to ensure the orderly and efficient operation of the park. After the 2007 version of the plan was approved by Vietnam’s Ministry of Construction, it encountered many difficulties in land acquisition, leading to its adjustment and the introduction of the 2015 version. The differences between the two versions mainly show in three areas. First of all, the land-use structure has undergone significant changes. In the 2015 version, the land for trees, areas of water, warehouses, wharfs and roads was reduced, while that for industry, technical engineering, centers and services was increased. Secondly, major changes have taken place regarding the spatial pattern, manifested in the relocation of the park entrance from the northeast of the park to the northwest, and the removal of the pool square at the entrance. Thirdly, the space for production land was divided into small patches instead of large plots, changing from 12 large industrial plots to 139 small patches, to enhance the adaptability of investment attractions and enterprise settlements.

3.2. Data Source and Processing

The data mainly come from the official website of Vietnam LJIP, the statistics bureau of Tien Giang, questionnaires, field research and the information collected. Data collection and analysis were mainly performed by the following process: the first step is to, via the Internet and the visit to the headquarters of the operators in China, collect documents and statistics of LJIP according to the needs of Table 1, including the text of its overall planning and detailed planning, research reports and news reports, as well as the data of total investment, GDP, output value, enterprises and the number of the employed population. The second step is to design the questionnaire and interview outline according to the needs of Table 1 and get the weight data by a Delphi analysis. The third step is to carry out field research in LJIP in June 2018. We conducted questionnaire surveys on park managers, entrepreneurs, staff, Vietnamese government officials, and interviewed key personnel. We collected relevant documents and statistics on GDP, the employed population, development planning and current situation of the industrial parks in Tien Giang from the visit to Vietnamese officials. The fourth step is to conduct a questionnaire survey using other stakeholders by means of online questionnaire, email and telephone counseling from October 2018 to April 2019, including scholars who have visited the park and scholars who are familiar with the park (not visited), and members of the public who are familiar with the park. The fifth step is to collect and process the questionnaires. A total of 50 questionnaires were issued and 42 were collected, including 37 valid from respondents at 62:38 male-to-female ratio, dominated by young people in terms of age, those with bachelor’s and master’s degrees in terms of the educational background, and the social public familiar with the park, the experts and scholars who have visited the park, and the park staff in the park in terms of identity (Figure 3).The sixth step is to analyze the current situation and changes of land use in LJIP by means of Google Earth and based on the field investigation report produced in the third step. The seventh step is to import the data obtained from the first step, the fifth step and the sixth step into Table 1, and enter the calculation results in

Table 2. Data processing results of planning implementation effectiveness index of LJIP.

Index	Index Value	Index Layer Score	Criterion Layer Score	Target Layer Score
Plan implementation rate	70	4.20	9.42 (71.38)	71.3
GDP/ total investment amount	72.53	5.22
Output value target achievement rate	24.18	1.98	26.89 (72.47)
Employment target achievement rate	66	3.23
Investment promotion achievement rate	86	5.42
Consistency rate of spatial development results/planning	98	5.78
Equipment rate of environmental protection facilities	106.67	5.55
Planning implementation satisfaction	74.59	4.92
Investment, current park/parks in Tien Giang	82.42	5.11	22.90 (66.01)
GDP, current park/parks in Tien Giang	30.28	2.12
Employed population, current park/parks in Tien Giang	22.34	1.25
Wastewater treatment rate	100	5.10
Politics: park level	100	6.60
Management: regional effects of planning rules	64.86	2.72
Planning environmental adaptability index	77.84	5.92	12.08 (80.55)
Willingness index of the planning implementer	83.33	6.17

Note: Data come from the official website of LJIP [71], the statistics bureau of Tien Giang [72] and questionnaires; figures in brackets are subject to the hundred-mark system.

. The data and materials not directly used in Table 1 and interview records were selectively used as supporting arguments and supplementary explanations in the result analysis as needed.

For an accurate understanding of the attitude of stakeholders, we selected 9 groups of people for the questionnaire survey, including: ① park planners, ② government officials in the park management departments, ③ park managers, ④ park entrepreneurs, ⑤ park staff, ⑥ residents around the park, ⑦ scholars who have visited the park, ⑧ scholars familiar with the park (not visited), and ⑨ publics familiar with the park. As this paper is an exploratory study, the questionnaires must be allocated reasonably according to some principles due to the limited number. After discussion by the research group and by referring to the opinions of experts participating in Delphi analysis, we adopted the following principles to allocate questionnaires. For the interest subjects of groups ① and ②, a small proportion of questionnaires was distributed due to the small number of participants. For the interest subjects of groups ③ and ④, a medium proportion of questionnaires was distributed besides interviews with some key personnel due to their great impact but small number. For the interest subjects of groups ⑤ and ⑥, a large proportion of questionnaires was distributed due to their great impact and large number. It is worth noting that due to language differences and other reasons, the survey questionnaires for the interest subjects of group ⑥ showed a low effective rate, so they seemed to be a small proportion in the total of effective questionnaires. For group ⑦, the interest subjects had a more objective and profound understanding of the park in spite of the relatively small number, so a large proportion of questionnaires were distributed and efforts were made to contact them as far as possible with the help of operators for the survey. There were a large number of interest subjects in group ⑧, but they had a limited understanding of the park with no field investigation in person, so a small proportion of questionnaires was arranged for supplementary explanations in some areas. The interest subjects of group ⑨ were in a large number and they had a more objective and profound understanding of the park, so a large proportion of questionnaires were distributed to them.

3.3. Result Analysis

For the Detailed Construction Plan of LJIP, its implementation effectiveness index is 71.3, efficiency index is 9.42 (71.38, subject to the hundred-mark system, the same below), effect index is 26.89 (72.47), benefit index is 22.90 (66.01), and capacity index is 12.08 (80.55) (Table 2), indicating that the planning implementation effectiveness, efficiency and effect are good with an excellent production capacity. It reflects that the planning has guided the development and construction of the park well as well as the investment promotion, and basically balanced the output and capacity of the planning implementation. However, there is still room for improvement in the overall planning implementation time schedule and cost benefits, as well as economic, social, ecological, political and other comprehensive benefits. The planning implementation has a high spatial consistency and public satisfaction, and the planning has a good environmental adaptability and a promising prospect for continued implementation.

3.3.1. Efficiency Evaluation: Time Lagging, Unbalanced in Profit and Loss, Good on the Whole

LJIP was planned to be completed in three phases by 2018. The park is implemented on schedule in accordance with the planning for the common aspiration of sustainable development between China and Vietnam. In 2018, the total area of the land used to start development of LJIP was about 420 hm² (excluding areas that have been leased or licensed but have not yet been put under construction). The planning implementation rate is about 70%, lagging behind the planning expectations. The lag in planning implementation is mainly affected by the international economic situation and Sino–Vietnamese relations, leading to the tortuous fluctuation of planning implementation, and significant changes in the scale of investment attraction and the number of enterprises stationed (Figure 4). Affected by the 2008 international financial crisis, the planning implementation lagged behind the expectations in the first phase and, especially in 2009, no new enterprises set up presence in the park; the second phase was well under way in general, but, affected by “5.13 Vietnam’s Attacks on Chinese-funded Enterprises” [73], the planning implementation was frustrated in 2014–2015 with hardship in investment attraction, in view of which, coupled with difficulties in park-land acquisition and demolition, the management committee started planning a revision and completed the 2015 version of the planning, benefiting from the “Belt and Road Initiatives” and the in-depth implementation of China’s international capacity cooperation strategy in the third phase. The planning implementation went well and a large number of Chinese enterprises settled in the park, driving the enterprises from Vietnam, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Switzerland, Singapore and other countries to gather in the park. The inconsistency between the actual time series of land development and the planning hinders the establishment of a centralized, continuous and progressive development pattern (Figure 5). In 2018, LJIP received an investment reaching up to USD 1.5 billion and created GDP worth USD 1.088 billion, with an economic return rate of 72.53%. However, an input–output balance was not yet achieved, due to the main reason that about 50% of the enterprises in the park were stationed within three years and they were still under construction. Overall, in spite of ups and downs in the planning implementation and many other problems such as time lag and unbalanced profits and losses, after more than 10 years’ of effort, the three phases of development and construction have been basically completed, and the park as a whole has moved from its planning and construction stage to the operation and management-oriented development stage.

3.3.2. Effect Evaluation: Varying Objectives Achieved, Consistency and Satisfaction High

(1) Evaluation of the achievement of planning objectives: there are good employment and investment results and a great gap of output value and performance.

The planning objective calls for a GDP worth USD 4.5 billion, employment of about 30,000 local workers, and admission of 40 to 50 businesses. In 2018, the park brought in a GDP of USD 1088 million, with the output value target achieved by only 24.18%, created safe and decent jobs for 198,00 local people with the employment target achieved by 66%, and ushered in 43 enterprises to settle, with the target of investment attraction and enterprise settlement achieved at 86%. The planning calls for a focus on developing new materials, fine chemicals, biomedicine, electromechanical manufacturing, agricultural and forestry products processing and other industries. In 2018, apart from fine chemicals and biomedicine in the planning meeting difficulties in development, other industrial chains and clusters were taking shape and integrated into the industrial chain and value chain of Tien Giang, Vietnam. The planning also proposes to build a “Travel to Vietnam” corporate public service platform of China. In 2018, a “one-stop” and “one-package” service system was built for enterprises in the park, helping enterprise development transform from “individual combat” to “group cooperation”, which has obviously improved the survival rate and anti-risk ability of Chinese-funded enterprises abroad, and brought the scale effect and cluster effect into full play.

(2) Consistency evaluation of the spatial planning/development results: the land layout is largely consistent, and industrial functions and supporting facilities are finely tuned.

The implementation rate of all kinds of land-use planning is generally over 67% (

Table 3. Analysis of land-use structure planning and actuality in LJIP.

Land Type	Planning	Actuality in 2018	Achievement Rate
Industrial Land	70	48.7	69.9
Warehousing land	3	2	66.7
Administration office land	5	4	80
Green land	12	8	66.7
Land for municipal facilities	1	0.8	80
Land for traffic	9	6.5	72.2

), but the consistency of land-use nature varies. The industrial layout planning for industrial land is not completely consistent with the results; the planned clustered industrial zoning has not yet come into being, contiguous industrial land plots show a low concentration ratio, and the industrial spatial functions are more mixed. For example, there are rubber and plastic products, agricultural and forestry product processing and light industry enterprises arranged in the planned machinery manufacturing industrial zone, machinery manufacturing and electromechanical enterprises in the planned light textile industrial zone, and only machinery manufacturing, new materials and paper-making enterprises in the planned biomedicine and fine chemical industry zone (Figure 6). Facilities for production, living and ecology are constructed with a high consistency. Production-supporting facilities—such as the power supply, water supply and drainage, communication, living service facilities, housing and apartments, supermarkets, banks, training centers, management centers, parking lots, eco-environmental protection facilities such as sewage treatment plants, industrial solid waste and residue treatment, and the actual road networks except for four sections—are largely in line with the planning (Figure 7). The main reasons for the inconsistency between the actuality and the planning include: ① the cancellation of branch roads due to the integrated development of multi-plots with the settlement of large enterprises; ②③④ difficulties in land acquisition and demolition as well as the effect of changes in development thinking in the outlying areas of the park.

From a macro perspective of the region, LJIP is about 50 km away from the center of Ho Chi Minh City, but commuting is rare as only some mid-to-top-level managers in the park live in the city. The business passenger flow of LJIP relies on Tan Son Nhat International Airport, and the container trade relies on Saigon Port. Now LJIP connects with Ho Chi Minh City International Airport and Saigon Port via the Ho Chi Minh–Trung Luong expressway and QL1A national highway. From the micro perspective of the region, to support the planning and construction of LJIP, Tien Giang has prepared and implemented a plan for San Fuk’s (Vietnam) southeast industrial city, covering an area of 3620 hm². The planning focuses on the construction of industrial parks and the government administrative center, and promotes the integrated development of education, business, residence and entertainment. The current implementation of Sinbog’s southeast industrial city plan has not achieved ideal results. Except LJIP and major roads (lines in red represent main roads and those in purple represent secondary roads), the construction of other industrial parks has not been started, nor has the government administrative center been built. Most of the land in the planned area is still farm fields, and the agricultural land in reality has not been transformed for industrial uses as directed by the planning. LJIP has a close commuting relationship between place of work and place of residence with Tan An in the northeast and Mỹ Tho in the south. The two communities are also the most important leisure and entertainment destinations for employees in the park on weekends or evenings.

(3) Satisfaction evaluation of planning implementation: the land-use structure is relatively consistent, the industrial functions are inconsistent, and the road layout is finely tuned.

The analysis in this section was based on 37 effective questionnaires, which have been completed very well.. For an exploratory survey, 37 questionnaires were less than enough. To minimize the error, we tried to maintain a relatively balanced number of questionnaires among all the surveyed groups. Satisfaction with the planning implementation scored 74.59 in questionnaires, where 59.46% of respondents chose “Satisfied” and no one chose “Very Unsatisfactory”. There was a high satisfaction with the planning implementation. The cross-analysis of identity satisfaction shows that the park planning makers, government officials of corresponding functional departments for park management (Vietnam) and entrepreneurs stationed in the park were 100% satisfied with the implementation of the park planning; the residents around the park, experts and scholars who have a good knowledge of the park, whether they have visited or not, were relatively satisfied with the planning implementation results; park managers, staff and the public who knew the park well were satisfied with the planning implementation results on the whole, except a small proportion who were not (

Table 4. Cross-analysis of identity-satisfaction in the planning implementation of LJIP (self-drawn).

	Very Unsatisfactory	Unsatisfactory	General	Satisfied	Very Satisfied
Park Planners	--	--	--	100	--
Government official	--	--	100	--	--
Park Managers	--	25	--	50	25
Park entrepreneurs	--	--	--	100	--
Park staff	--	14.29	--	57.14	28.57
Residents around the park	--	--	50	50	--
Scholars who have visited the park	--	--	--	85.71	14.29
Scholars familiar with the park (not visited)	--	--	66.67	33.33	--
Publics familiar with the park	--	12.5	50	37.5	--

Note: the numerical value in the table represents the percentage of five evaluations selected by the respondents of each identity; “--” indicates that no one chooses this evaluation.

).

3.3.3. Benefit Evaluation: A Growth Nucleus of the Economy, Society Converged, Comprehensive Benefits Significant

(1) Economic benefit evaluation: a growth nucleus of the local economy, a new platform for cluster development.

Before the construction of LJIP, the area was a state-owned farm in Vietnam, abounding with pineapples. Since the transformation of agricultural land for industrial use, the development performance of more than ten years has proved that the development of LJIP effectively gives rise to the local economy and plays a positive role in the real estate development of the surrounding communities. LJIP also drives the local urbanization, and promotes the development and appreciation of real estate. Many mentioned in the survey interviews that since the construction of LJIP, the park has witnessed an increase in peripheral real estate development, significant asset appreciation, an increase in non-Vietnamese home buyers and non-self-occupied house purchases, and a rise of annualized returns up to 15–20%, and a higher proportion of investment buyers (increased to 80%).

At present, four of the seven industrial parks approved by Tien Giang are in operation, and LJIP is the only large-scale industrial park in Tien Giang which is basically completed. In 2018, LJIP accounted for more than 80% of the total investment of all industrial parks in Tien Giang. Its total industrial output value accounted for 30.28% of the total created by all industrial parks in Tien Giang and about 20% of the total of Tien Giang. It has grown into a new engine for the transformation and development of Tien Giang from an agricultural economy to industrial economy, having injected tremendous impetus into the development of regional economy and the modernization of urban and rural areas. There are five of COCZs in Vietnam in different stages of development. According to the overall planning implementation results, LJIP, ranked second, next only to LinhTrung Export Processing Zone, has become a model of a “cluster-type entry to Vietnam” for Chinese enterprises in the process of jointly building the “Belt and Road” to promote production capacity cooperation between China and Vietnam.

(2) Social benefit evaluation: the innovative localization model, integrating into local social development.

In implementing the plan, the park actively promotes the localization of employees (talents), products, investment attraction and social services. Local residents are the major beneficiaries of LJIP construction. According to the official website of LJIP, the employed population increased from 507 in 2010 to 2400 in 2019, with an average annual growth of about 47%, playing an important role in solving the local unemployment problem. The employment training organized by the park and the enterprises settled has improved the quality of local labor force in an all-round way. At the time of investigation, the minimum wage of Tien Giang, where LJIP is located, was about 112 US dollars, the average income of residents in the surrounding communities of the park was about USD 150–200, and the average wage of workers in the park was about USD 290–350. The park has provided opportunities for local residents to engage in a stable and decent job. LJIP and the enterprises in the park have offered more than 500 technical and management positions for local residents, whose income is generally 1.5–2 times that of ordinary employees in the local area, and mid-to-top-level managers and technicians may receive up to 3 times or more. In 2018, the park created jobs for 22.34% of the employed population in all the industrial parks in Tien Giang, playing an active role in solving local employment, changing livelihood channels, improving living standards and achieving poverty alleviation. While making good use of local resources, LJIP and the enterprises in the park have been active in raising the income of the local poor farmers to help them out of poverty. Sichuan Tongwei Group, for example, produces livestock feed needed locally with local raw materials such as fishmeal and corn and sells it on the local market, bringing in a considerable income for poor fishermen and corn farmers.

The construction of LJIP has driven the population to gather and created new business opportunities for the residents in the surrounding communities. During the field investigation in Vietnam, we found that a large number of shops, restaurants, trade and logistics companies clustered around the park and along both sides of the main road leading to the park with the completion of LJIP. These private companies are mainly founded by residents in the surrounding communities, and they have significantly improved the living conditions of local residents and business operations. Besides, many residents in the surrounding communities have replaced their temporary huts with solid brick houses, which are being rented out to those coming from remote parts of Tien Giang and working in LJIP. To cope with the difficulties of land expropriation and relocation along roads in the north and east of the park, and after rounds of consultation with the local government and the surrounding residents, the management committee finely tuned the planning by retreating the park along the main road 100–200 m to retain farmers’ land, guiding surrounding residents to do business between the park border and the outer roads to help neighboring residents get rid of poverty and become rich, and creatively integrate into the local society. The implementation of the changed planning has driven a higher social satisfaction.

Moreover, the park attaches great importance to fulfilling its social responsibility, gets involved in public welfare and charity events actively, interacts with the surrounding communities or villages and towns in different ways, donates funds to build schools, roads and bridges, sponsors associations and supports poor families in the local place. The park has won honors such as “Prize for Excellent Completion of Economic Tasks” and “Award for Outstanding Contributions to Social Philanthropy” successively, widely praised by the local society and people. The park and the enterprises settled are actively involved in the local area, participate in local social charities, and fulfill their social responsibilities, while focusing on their own development. In the survey interview, the person in charge of LJIP said that in the past ten years, the park has donated a total of about USD 650,000 to public welfare establishments, which have contributed to the win-win development between the park, the enterprises and local residents.

(3) Evaluation of other benefits: ecological protection, political cooperation, technology communication benefits highlighted.

Planning implementation adheres to ecological priority and attaches importance to the construction of environmental management system and the application of environmental protection technology. Therefore, the park has developed Sewage Discharge Standards of LJIP. LJIP has built a plant for the centralized treatment of sewage, leading all the industrial parks in Tien Giang in the field of sewage treatment. LJIP has established a recycling and reuse system for waste resources, such as plastics, rubbers and metals. For example, Ningbo Yongfeng Packaging Company in Zhejiang produces woven bags using waste plastic caps collected locally, which has pushed the development of a circular economy in the park. With the implementation of the planning, the park was recognized as a state-level overseas economic and trade cooperation zone by the Ministry of Commerce of China in 2011, in 2013 was included as a model of Sino–Vietnamese investment cooperation in the Joint Statement between China and Vietnam, and in 2016 was included in the Guidelines for the Development and Distribution of Overseas Economic and Trade Cooperation Zones (2016–2025) of China, gradually upgraded from the enterprise level to national level. In this process, it has boosted and deepened economic, trade, investment and international political cooperation between China and Vietnam. Planning implementation has promoted the spread and dissemination of China’s industrial park planning and construction experience in Vietnam and 64.86% of the respondents believed that there were different degrees of “Planning Law” (Faludi A, 2009) (

Table 5. Cross-analysis of identity-planning law in the planning implementation of LJIP (self-drawn).

	Very Small	Small	General	Large	Great
Park Planners	--	50	50	--	--
Government official	--	100	--	--	--
Park Managers	--	--	50	50	--
Park entrepreneurs	--	--	100	--	--
Park staff	--	14.29	42.86	42.86	--
Residents around the park	--	--	50	50	--
Scholars who have visited the park	--	14.29	42.86	42.86	--
Scholars familiar with the park (not visited)	--	--	66.67	33.33	--
Publics familiar with the park	--	12.5	50	25	12.5

Note: the numerical value in the table represents the percentage of five evaluations selected by the respondents of each identity; “--” indicates that no one chooses this evaluation.

).

The Vietnamese government and enterprises have organized many visits to the park, and improved the park planning technology and methods, theoretical knowledge, and management concepts in Tien Giang, providing a reference for the improvement of the park planning system, planning regulations and planning technology in Vietnam. Here are two examples that relate to industrial planning technology and the idea of city and industry integration. Before the construction of LJIP, there was no detailed industrial planning for the industrial parks in Vietnam, and any enterprise could move into the park. According to the industrial planning of LJIP, the space is divided into three phases and four zones, including land development of 100 hm² in the first phase, 200 hm² in the second phase and 240 hm² in the third phase; it plans to develop mechanical, electronic and electrical industries in the first zone, wood products, textile, plastic rubber and light industry in the second zone, drugs, medical equipment, food and fine chemical industry in the third zone, and building materials, agricultural products and the paper industry in the fourth zone. During the implementation of the planning, operators select the appropriate industrial type of enterprises and settle in the corresponding zone space in the park, helping realize the stable and orderly development of the park. By referring to LJIP, other industrial parks in Tien Giang have developed their own industrial plans in the later development process. A 60-hectare supporting living quarter has been planned in LJIP, covering residential, office, retail, school, hospital, sports and entertainment functions, which is of great enlightening value for industrial parks in Tien Giang and even Vietnam to explore the coordinated development of industrialization and urbanization.

3.3.4. Capacity Evaluation: Adaptability and Willingness of Continued Implementation Are Both High

Adaptability of the planning implementation is scored 77.84 in questionnaires, where 51.35% of respondents chose “Large” and no one chose “Very Small”. The cross-analysis of identity applicability shows that 100% of the plan-makers and residents around the park think that the adaptability of continued planning implementation is high, while a small number of park managers and the public familiar with the park think that the planning is less adaptable to the future development environment and it should be modified or revised appropriately (

Table 6. Cross-analysis of identity-applicability in the planning implementation of LJIP (self-drawn).

	Very Small	Small	General	Large	Great
Park Planners	--	--	--	100	--
Government official	--	--	100	--	--
Park Managers	--	25	--	--	75
Park entrepreneurs	--	--	--	66.67	33.33
Park staff	--	--	14.29	42.86	42.86
Residents around the park	--	--	--	100	--
Scholars who have visited the park	--	--	42.86	42.86	14.29
Scholars familiar with the park (not visited)	--	--	33.33	66.67	--
Publics familiar with the park	--	12.5	25	62.5	--

Note: the numerical value in the table represents the percentage of five evaluations selected by the respondents of each identity; “--” indicates that no one chooses this evaluation.

). The willingness to implement the planning scored 83.33 in questionnaires, and 50% of the respondents showed a “Great (Very Strong)” willingness to continue the implementation of the planning. However, according to the field investigation, interviews and questionnaire feedback, the planning implementation is also faced with many problems, such as a lack of a fine planning control system, poor coordination with urban planning, insufficiency implementation of city-industry integration, Smart Parks and other new ideas in the park planning.

4. Conclusions and Discussion

With the in-depth implementation of the “Belt and Road Initiatives”, more than 100 COCZs have been built, and the demand for planning formulation and implementation of effectiveness evaluations is becoming increasingly urgent. Restricted by state and social institutions, difficulties in information and data acquisition and other factors, quantitatively applicable planning implementation effectiveness evaluations have become an important issue to be addressed for the scientific management and sustainable development of COCZs. By constructing a method system for planning implementation effectiveness evaluations of COCZs from the perspective of sustainable development based on the concept of “Effectiveness = Efficiency + Effect + Benefit + Capacity”, this paper takes LJIP in Vietnam as an example to carry out empirical research and the results show that the planning implementation effectiveness of COCZs represented by LJIP is good on the whole, featuring the continuous profitability of operators, sustained taxation received by host governments, continued protection and improvement of the regional environment, and sustained employment and income for local residents. It brings remarkable comprehensive benefits, and largely achieves balance between planning implementation output and capacity. However, it also faces the problems of a time lag, unbalanced profit and loss, varying objectives achieved, lack of a refined planning control system, and poor coordination between park planning and urban planning. To improve the sustainability of the development and planning of COCZs, from the perspective of national control, it is suggested that China speed up the establishment of a normal and institutionalized evaluation mechanism for the planning implementation of its overseas industrial parks, introduce management methods or guidance on planning formulation and implementation evaluations, and incorporate sustainable development concepts, methods and tools into the management requirements. From the perspective of the healthy development of the park, it is suggested to bring the planning implementation effectiveness evaluation into the periodic assessment to have the parks with a lower effectiveness index drive the revision of the park planning from “function and scale orientation” to “quality and effectiveness orientation”, guide the creation of a model for sustainable development and the planning of COCZs, encourage the parks and their enterprises to attach more attention to the economic development, social progress and environmental protection in the location, making greater contributions to help countries or regions along the belt and road achieve the development goals of Agenda 2030.