Agriculture, forestry, and fishery exports achieved a record 70.63 billion USD in 2025, far exceeding the set targets—a figure reflecting the impressive expansion of Vietnamese agriculture into the global market. Yet, behind this lies a thought-provoking reality: 70% to 80% of agricultural products are exported raw, value-chain linkages cover a mere 13% of cooperatives, post-harvest losses hover at high levels from 10% to 40% depending on the product type, and farmers still sell at prices dictated by others.

Looking at the global agricultural export rankings, Vietnam is present in almost every flagship commodity sector: top 3 in rice, top 2 in Robusta coffee, number 1 worldwide in pepper, number 1 worldwide in cashews, and among the frontrunners in shrimp and pangasius. In 2025, the total export turnover of agriculture, forestry, and fishery products reached 70.63 billion USD, far exceeding expectations. These figures are no accident; they are the fruits of tens of millions of diligent agricultural laborers and a sequence of sector restructuring policies implemented persistently over many years.

However, behind these figures lies another reality, which deserves rigorous analysis. Rice growers in Soc Trang, coffee farmers in Dak Lak, and pepper cultivators in Binh Phuoc still include those living hand-to-mouth each season, worrying about debts at the start of every crop cycle, and selling their harvest at prices dictated by others. The gap between record export turnover and the actual income of direct producers is a structural issue that Vietnam's agricultural sector cannot resolve overnight.

This article does not harbor the ambition of delivering a comprehensive solution. It is a synthesis of the author's personal observations based on publicly available data and information to look directly at the fracture points confronting Vietnamese agriculture.

Leading output – value left unclaimed

According to numerous sector studies and evaluations, the vast majority of Vietnam's exported agricultural products remain in raw or primary processed forms. The added value remains low, characterized by a lack of brands, a lack of product narratives, and an absence of international-standard traceability systems. Consequently, buyers at the other end of the global supply chain hold full authority over pricing. Sellers—the Vietnamese farmers—are left with only two choices: accept that price or leave it.

The reality of the coffee industry best illustrates this paradox. Vietnamese Robusta coffee beans are exported as green coffee at an average price of around 2–3 USD/kg. However, once roasted, ground, packaged, and branded in developed markets, the retail price can reach 30–50 USD/kg. That colossal portion of added value—from roasting, packaging, branding, to distribution channels—completely evades the hands of the growers.

Similarly, ST25 rice, crowned the world's best rice in 2019, represents a matching narrative but in a different direction. In 2025, Vietnam's average rice export price reached 555 USD/ton, surpassing Thailand, India, and Pakistan within the same segment. Yet, consumers in Tokyo or Amsterdam still struggle to find a Vietnamese rice brand on supermarket shelves. They are well-acquainted with Thailand's Jasmine Rice or Japan's Koshihikari because those products have been backed by structured branding and distribution networks for decades. Vietnam possesses excellent products, but lacks the narrative and the channels to tell that story to the right consumers.

Invisible barriers – losses, chemicals, and market reliance

Vietnamese agricultural production still relies predominantly on small-scale smallholder farms, averaging less than 0.5 hectares per household. Lacking a unified cultivation process and synchronized input standards, output quality fluctuates from one plot to another. When international buyers require 10,000 tons of rice uniform in grain size, moisture, and plant protection chemical residues, hundreds of disjointed households cannot fulfill that mandate—even if individual farmers produce excellent yields.

This is a structural problem, not an individual fault. When each household independently decides which seed to plant, which fertilizer to apply, which chemical to spray, and to whom to sell, fragmentation inevitably generates inconsistent quality. This weakens the broader competitiveness of the entire raw material zone. This also explains why premium markets like Japan, the EU, and South Korea demand growing area certifications, strict traceability, and cold-chain management that smallholders can hardly satisfy on their own.

China remains Vietnam's largest agricultural import market, particularly for fresh fruits, vegetables, rice, and cassava. Over-reliance on a geographically adjacent market creates a distinct concentration risk: whenever borders tighten quarantine controls or adjust import policies, tens of thousands of tons of agricultural products end up congested at border gates, forcing farmers into fire sales at rock-bottom prices.

While an increasing share of formal exports to China in recent years serves as a positive indicator for transaction standardization, market dependency risks remain an equation that has not been thoroughly solved.

In certain fresh agricultural groups, particularly fruits and vegetables, the post-harvest loss rate in Vietnam ranges from 10% to 40% depending on the commodity—ranking among the highest in Southeast Asia. The root cause lies in the shortage of cold storage systems, refrigerated transport vehicles, and primary processing facilities with sufficient capacity near raw material zones. The direct consequence: farmers must sell immediately after harvest because they have nowhere to store their goods. Traders hold the upper hand to squeeze prices, knowing the sellers have no alternative. Value is eroded right during transportation and preservation before the goods can even reach the buyers.

Value-chain linkages – why do they repeatedly break?

Vietnam does not lack policies promoting value-chain linkages in agriculture. Decree No. 98/2018/NĐ-CP has been deployed since 2018, the large-scale field model has expanded across multiple localities, and hundreds of new agricultural cooperatives continue to be established annually.

However, according to statistics from the Vietnam Cooperative Alliance system, although the country logged around 2,000 new cooperatives in 2025 with total membership estimated at nearly 7.1 million, only slightly over 4,700 cooperatives participate in value chains—equivalent to about 13%. This indicates that substantive linkages remain quite constrained.

The issue does not stem from a lack of policy, but from recurring "fracture points" in actual operations—challenges that legal documents alone cannot automatically resolve.

According to feedback from numerous cooperatives and enterprises, breaches of off-take contracts occur on both sides. When market prices surge a segment of farmers bypasses agreements to sell to outside traders for immediate premiums. When market prices slump some enterprises refuse procurement or find ways to squeeze prices back on the producers.

This is the vicious cycle of a market lacking long-term trust: when commitments are repeatedly broken, the value of contracts deteriorates, and neither side remains willing to commit long-term.

This problem is rooted in the risk asymmetry between farmers and enterprises. Farmers shoulder the entire risk throughout the production season: weather, diseases, and input price fluctuations. Enterprises procure post-harvest; they do not bear production risks but capture the majority of the premium margins when the market turns favorable. This asymmetric distribution of benefits and risks is the root cause making linkages highly fragile whenever price shocks occur.

Cooperative capacities and the export requirement gap

According to data from the Department of Cooperative Economics and Rural Development, the proportion of effectively operating agricultural cooperatives has improved significantly, rising from under 30% in 2017 to over 70% by 2020—a highly commendable advancement. However, a massive gap persists between a cooperative that operates effectively regarding internal management and one that possesses enough capacity to negotiate export contracts, comprehend international certification demands (GlobalG.A.P, Organic EU, Rainforest Alliance...), and construct collective brands.

Many modern cooperatives are fully capable of organizing internal production, but lack personnel who understand export markets, lack capital to invest in primary processing and preservation, and lack connectivity with reputable export enterprises. This is the precise void that cooperative support programs need to target, rather than merely focusing on expanding the absolute number of newly established cooperatives.

On the flip side, within current value chains, farmers often only know the price traders offer at the farm gate; they remain blind to the actual selling price in destination markets or the certification requirements set by international landscapes. Export enterprises understand quality mandates clearly, but this information is rarely transmitted fully and timely to producers. Consequently, farmers cultivate without sufficient data to adjust techniques and select inputs based on real market demands, creating an ongoing disconnect between what is produced and what the market is truly willing to pay a premium for.

Where value chains operate best—such as the rice model in An Giang, the coffee model in Lam Dong, or the shrimp model in Ca Mau—they all share a common denominator: export enterprises make genuine investments in pushing market information down to the farmers, providing technical support, and sharing risks during price fluctuations. This is not driven by policy; it is a business decision made by individual enterprises. It proves that value chains can function exceptionally well when the benefits of each link are designed to complement one another rather than compete.

Outlook and what can be done differently

Looking directly at the aforementioned fracture points does not equate to holding a pessimistic view of Vietnamese agriculture. On the contrary, the record export turnover of 70.63 billion USD in 2025, far exceeding targets, stands as living proof that the sector's potential is real and is being exploited more effectively by the day. The world holds an expanding appetite for safe, traceable, and sustainably produced food. Vietnam, with its diverse climate conditions and abundant agricultural labor resources, possesses the foundational baseline to fulfill that demand.

The European Union's Farm to Fork strategy sets a target to slash chemical pesticide usage by 50% by 2030. Japan and South Korea are consistently tightening Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs). While these represent barriers, they simultaneously act as opportunities: these markets are actively searching for compliant suppliers to replace non-conforming sources. Clean, organic, and traceable agricultural products from Vietnam can capture substantial market shares if value chains and quality control systems are fortified adequately.

The EVFTA has generated significant tariff advantages for Vietnamese agricultural products entering the EU market. However, tariff advantages only yield results when commodities satisfy the technical and quarantine requirements of the importing market. This is precisely what linked chain models are gradually demonstrating—not yet on a sector-wide scale, but within specific raw material zones, specific cooperatives, and enterprises that have invested seriously in quality and certifications.

One of the fundamental shifts that Vietnam's agricultural sector is gradually embracing is the application of digital technology into chain management: running from electronic cultivation logs and QR code traceability systems to transparent, real-time pricing data. These tools do not just help enterprises manage risks; they actively transform the bargaining position of farmers. When clear data regarding growing zone quality is established, good growers possess the evidence to demand higher prices, and enterprises possess the foundation to pay them.

The fracture points within value chains—ranging from broken contracts and post-harvest losses to information asymmetry—are by no means unchangeable. They are areas where individual organizations, enterprises, and localities can begin doing things differently, starting from the smallest scale. The gap between export value and grower income is a real divide, but it also represents actual remaining room to exploit, provided the chain is structured better.

The potential of Vietnamese agriculture is indisputable. Generations of production expertise, ecological diversity, and an experienced labor force are assets that not every nation possesses. The challenge does not rest on production; Vietnam has proven its capability to achieve that on a global scale. The true challenge lies in transforming output into value, and value into proportional income for the people directly producing the grain of rice, the cashew nut, and the coffee bean.

Source: Bao dien tu Dan Viet