Land Conversion for Tourism Development under Vietnam’s Ambiguous Property Rights over Land
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Author,
Please allow me to clarify my doubts in reading order:
1. I can not find information on the spatial distribution of land use change against the whole country. I think it will be interesting to see a map of such changes for the whole of Vietnam. How big is the extent of change, how important are the changes described for the country?
2. I miss the reference to a wider currency (Euro, US dollar) when considering amounts on pages 2 and 6. On page 4, the amounts are converted into euros - this makes it very easy for an international reader to understand the problem.
3. Two examples of transformations relate to the situation before 2013 (example of Kim No village on the outskirts of Hanoi for golf courses, EcoPark Satellite City Project in Hung Yen), one of the most strongly emphasized changes in 2013, so I was surprised by these dates. I think that the summary should be increased so that the emphasis is not only on 2013.
4. I also wonder about the scope and prices of changes. Are the scope and prices of the changes caused by the purpose of the place? Is transformation into a hotel base treated the same as a golf course?
There are some editing mistakes in bibliography, please check:
12. VNAT, Vietnam's Annual report on Tourism
2015
28. Nguyen, T.B., A curious case of property privatization, Ho Chi Minh City- Vietnam
PhD Thesis, 2017.
39. Vo, D.H., et al., State of Land in the
Mekong Region. 2018.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
There are only few comments to the paper.
The paper lacks predictive elements.
In the future, I suggest using also quantitative analysis. It would be valuable to investigate the political contexts of the process. One could refer to the history in the context of the earlier division of the country into North Vietnam and South Vietnam and the resulting consequences for the problem under investigation.
The figures in national Vietnamese currency - đồng (VND) - should be also indicated in American dollars or euros (so that the reader knows what is the real value of the given figures) at the beginning of the paper. Such information appeared only on page 8.
The word “compulsory” is misspelled in the title: Figure 3. “Procedures for compulosry land acquisition”.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper deals with Land conversion for tourism development under Vietnam’s ambiguous property rights over land. The topic fits the scope of the journal and the case is relevant. The manuscript describes applied research which has practical value, the results and methods used are clearly presented. I propose to accept the manuscript for publication in the present form.
Author Response
Thanks!
Reviewer 4 Report
I thought the paper provided a very useful insight into the issues surrounding expropriation of land in Vietnam. The mixture of compulsory and voluntary acquisitions illustrated the contrasting approaches that are adopted, and the diversity of stakeholders interviewed provided a range of perspectives on the key issues. The findings were perhaps a little unsurprising and confirm previous empirical research in this area but worth reporting nonetheless.
My main suggestion for the paper is to provide a theoretical framework. I think such a framework would set the context for the research and provide justification for the focus of the paper. Vietnam, along with other countries has a State that owns all of the land in the country on behalf of the people. It is the latter part of this sentence that is important here, and the paper would benefit from some investigation of what ‘on behalf of the people’ means. It suggests a great responsibility in terms of the administration of property rights, land use planning, development control and so on. Moreover, there are undoubtedly significant social and economic ramifications following a State’s decisions on these matters. This paper illustrates some of these ramifications from the point of view of tourism development and that is why the broader context is important, I think.
For example, it is clear from the paper that there are two parallel land acquisition mechanisms in place in Vietnam, a compulsory one and a voluntary one. When they relate to the same kind of scheme – tourism development in this case – the differences are apparent. How does the State justify its lower acquisition price? Is one tourism development more ‘on behalf of the people’ than another? How does the State justify a lower compensation figure to the existing occupier? Is it trying to stimulate a market in tourism development on the one hand while trying to undermine it on the other?
Some of these questions have been addressed in published literature, with a focus on what is meant by public purpose in the context of compulsory acquisition. Is it infrastructure and public works only? Is economic development a public purpose? Is economic development led by the private sector public purpose? How should compensation be assessed? If the land is owned by the State then how is the market value of land determined? Is a formula used instead? If so, on what is the basis for the formula? Is it the optimum use of the land or the use that is being assigned to it by the State?
Perhaps more fundamentally, if the State owns all the land, does that mean it owns all the use rights too? So if a change of use is decreed on a piece of land, is the occupier entitled to any compensation at all, other than compensation for improvements to the land and disturbance compensation for having to relocate? But then how does this fit with the voluntary acquisition of land where the purcahser is potentially compensating for the future economic benefit of land use rights? Perhaps that is the problem Vietnam faces, its dual approach to land acquisition, and that could provide the framework for the paper.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Land conversion for tourism development under Vietnam’s ambiguous property rights over land
This research has some merits but needs extensive rephrasing of different paragraphs and reorganizing the contents. Some of the specifics are given below.
Abstract
Sentence structure:
Since the implementation of economic reform, tourism has developing rapidly in Vietnam, and investment in tourism is actively encouraged by the Vietnamese government.
The abstract needs to include core research findings. It needs to be rewritten and condensed but comprehensive information.
Introduction
Please rephrase this paragraph
Land is evidently a crucial factor in tourism development, and rapid tourism development, therefore, has contributed significantly to increase demand for land [1]. At the same time, land is also an essential factor for livelihoods of people, particularly in an agricultural country. Therefore, when the government applies land conversion mechanisms to accommodate the demands of land for tourism development, it might affect various land users including both farmers and non-farmers.
Very verbose, rephrasing will make this sentence easier to read
While many studies have analysed the issue of (agricultural) land conversion for urban development [2-5], the focus of this paper is on the land conversion process for tourism accommodation development before and after the implementation of new land law in 2013, aiming to investigate the influence of the transition of the regime of property rights over land on the land acquisition process in Vietnam.
- Tourism development in Vietnam in brief
Please revise this section fully. Rewriting can help to avoid repetition.
Page 3, please combine Figure 1 in one figure with Primary and Secondary Axes.
Page 3, Figure 2, it will be informative if you combine revenue generated from hotel accommodation rather than having accommodation and room availability.
Page 4, this is not clear, what does transitional land conversion mean.
In these countries, the land development process is still strongly influenced by the transitional land conversion process [3].
Page 19: spelling error
“Land pricse for compensation are currently unfair for affected people. They should receive higher compensation prices. Additionally, the compensation package can also be paid in the form of capital contribution or involvement in tourism projects”
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
No Comments.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We have carefully checked and corrected some typos in the manuscript.
Reviewer 5 Report
Dear Authors:
Your paper has good merits, but you might want to do the following:
a. Condense the abstract with more results;
b. Expand introduction with succinct information from all sections of the paper, and also put some theoretical justifications for this research.
c. Follow citation styles of the MDPI, for example, under Land and Property development in transitional economies,
According to Alchian and Demsetz [17], this is done when the references starts at the beginning of a sentence.
I have attached the entire paper with highlights where changes may improve the reading of the paper.
You have responded to my previous concerns.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
