Summary of Key Points
This article compares the logic behind administrative division reforms in Vietnam, South Korea, and China:
- Vietnam: By merging smaller provinces and establishing more municipalities directly under the central government, Vietnam aims to create economic growth hubs and accelerate its transition to a high-income country.
- South Korea: The country is merging provinces and cities to address the issue of Seoul's dominance and the redundancy in administrative divisions caused by a declining population.
- China: China has not established any new municipalities directly under the central government in the past 30 years because its current administrative layout meets strategic needs, and stability is prioritized, with a focus on the coordinated development of urban clusters.
1. Vietnam: Is the Rapid Establishment of Municipalities Directly under the Central Government a Way to “Catch Up” Economically?
Vietnam has recently promoted Guangning and Binh Dinh to the status of municipalities directly under the central government, bringing the total to 9 (one-quarter of the provincial-level administrative units), with plans to increase this to 11 (one-third). Additionally, Vietnam has merged 63 provinces into 34 and abolished all county-level administrative divisions, resulting in the reduction of nearly 100,000 government jobs.
The reasons for this rapid change are:
- Creating New Growth Hubs: Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City are traditional economic centers, but the border provinces of Guangning and Binh Dinh, being close to China, have significant industrial potential and serve as key entry points for foreign investment. Elevating them to the status of municipalities directly under the central government grants them more authority to drive economic development.
- Achieving GDP Growth Targets: Vietnam aims for annual GDP growth of over 10% in the next five years and to become a high-income country by 2045 (with a per capita income of $5,000, similar to China's level in 2011). This goal requires efficient resource allocation and administrative reforms.
- Practical Needs: The original 63 provinces were too small; merging them makes for more efficient governance. Municipalities directly under the central government, similar to China's vice-provincial cities, can concentrate resources for development.
2. South Korea: Are the Mergers of Provinces and Cities a Result of Population and Regional Imbalances?
South Korea has just merged the province of South Jeolla with the metropolitan city of Gwangju to form the “Integrated Special City of South Jeolla and Gwangju.” Further mergers are planned, reducing the number of provincial-level units from 17 to 12-13.
The motivations for these changes are:
- Seoul's Dominance: Seoul accounts for half of the country's population, 50% of GDP, and 80% of the top 100 companies, leading to underdevelopment in other regions.
- Population Crisis: South Korea is facing a population decline, with more than 60% of its territory experiencing population loss. The existing administrative divisions, designed based on population growth, are now obsolete, necessitating mergers.
- Fragmented Administration: Some provinces have very small populations, resulting in inefficient resource allocation. Unlike Vietnam, South Korea's reforms involve multi-stakeholder coordination and do not involve widespread job cuts.
3. China: Why No New Municipalities Directly under the Central Government in 30 Years?
China currently has four municipalities directly under the central government: Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing, and no new ones have been added in the past 30 years.
The reasons include:
- Strategic Goals Already Met: Each municipality directly under the central government has a specific role: Beijing as a political and cultural center, Shanghai as an economic and financial hub, and Tianjin as a traditional industrial center. There are no major strategic needs that would justify creating new municipalities.
- Administrative Stability: The government emphasizes the need for stability in administrative divisions, and even the reduction of counties to districts has been delayed.
- Economic Considerations: Establishing new municipalities directly under the central government could dilute the economic strength of existing provinces and create new administrative barriers, conflicting with the goal of a unified market. China is focusing on the development of urban clusters and regions, such as the Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta, to promote competitive development among cities.
4. A Common Logic in the Reforms of All Three Countries: Administrative Divisions Must Adapt to Development Needs
Although the approaches differ, the underlying principle is the same: administrative divisions must align with the country's development stage and goals:
- Vietnam: As a developing country, Vietnam needs to concentrate resources to create growth hubs and rapidly boost its economy.
- South Korea: Facing population decline and regional imbalances, South Korea is optimizing resource allocation.
- China: In the pursuit of high-quality development, China focuses on administrative stability and the coordinated growth of urban clusters.
In summary, the administrative reforms in these three countries are all aimed at adapting to their respective development stages. The use of clear and accessible language makes these concepts understandable to a general audience.