Arising from practical demands, alongside the work of preservation and conservation, culture also needs investment and mechanisms enabling it to develop independently through the momentum of innovation and abundant market capacity.
Under Resolution No. 28/2026/QH16 on the development of Viet Nam’s culture, the National Assembly allows the pilot establishment of Cultural and Arts Funds (Funds) from the central to local levels under a public-private partnership model. The Funds will operate as venture capital funds, using the State budget together with other lawful resources to support innovative projects, cultural start-ups, the development of cultural industries and valuable artistic products.
The newly issued mechanism accepts the possibility of risk in accordance with market principles while ensuring transparency, effectiveness and the prevention of capital loss and waste. The pilot implementation period will last until the end of 2035 at the latest. This is the first time a financial institution aimed at “nurturing ideas” has been clearly included in a thematic resolution on cultural development.
For many years, the cultural and artistic sector in Viet Nam has faced a paradox: talent and creative ideas are abundant, yet resources enabling them to be fully realised remain lacking. Under regulations governing the use of State budget funds, many projects struggle to demonstrate immediate economic efficiency in order to receive capital allocation. Meanwhile, private enterprises are often cautious about investment because the cultural sector requires a long period to generate value, profits are not quick and the level of risk is high.
Poet Pham Thuy Vinh, Vice Chairwoman of the Nghe An Literature and Arts Association and Editor-in-Chief of Song Lam Magazine, believes that the prolonged difficulties faced by the cultural and artistic sector stem from the fact that neither the public nor private sectors have yet established appropriate financial mechanisms for artistic activities. The public-private partnership fund model is meaningful as a form of “venture investment” for culture, accepting risks in exchange for the possibility of creating new values for society.
Around the world, many countries have used cultural funds as strategic tools to nurture talent and establish innovation ecosystems. The Republic of Korea is a typical example. The country has invested heavily in content industries through support funds for cinema, music and entertainment technology, laying the foundation for the global spread of Hallyu, the Korean cultural wave. Several European countries have also established arts funds under models in which the State works alongside enterprises and communities to protect classical arts, traditional heritage and support new artistic experiments. This approach not only creates sources of capital, but more importantly establishes a sufficiently trustworthy mechanism to mobilise society to participate in investing in culture.
Doctor Nguyen Huy Phong of the Central Theoretical Council stated that, in the context of limited cultural budgets, mobilising resources from the State, the business community and cultural practitioners both inside and outside the country is an urgent requirement. In addition to material support, the Funds also provide spiritual encouragement for artists, intellectuals and artisans, enabling them to devote themselves with peace of mind and commitment.
The National Assembly’s decision to permit a pilot scheme rather than nationwide implementation also demonstrates necessary caution, because culture is a special field whose effectiveness cannot be measured through ordinary indicators. An artistic film may not achieve large revenue but could contribute to enhancing the status of national cinema; a folk-art preservation project may not bring immediate economic benefits but could preserve cultural identity for generations. Without suitable evaluation methods, there is a risk of scattered and superficial investment, or of prioritising only highly profitable projects while neglecting foundational values.
Cultural researcher and musician Nguyen Quang Long, founder of the Xam Ha Thanh group, stated that the most important issue lies in how the Funds are operated, from fundraising, management, appraisal and sponsorship to ensuring transparency, proper targeting, proper objectives and fairness. Beneficiaries should not be limited to public units but expanded to organisations and individuals with feasible projects and social value. He proposed prioritising projects preserving national cultural and artistic heritage, highly innovative artistic experiments or necessary cultural research, while avoiding projects that merely follow commercial trends.
At the same time, a venture investment fund in the cultural sector cannot operate under conventional administrative thinking because if appraisal procedures become overly dependent on a “request-and-grant” mechanism, lack independent professional councils or lack transparency, it could easily create scepticism and reduce public trust. Artistic innovation requires a healthy competitive environment and should be evaluated based on the practical value of projects.
However, the Funds should not stop merely at “providing money”. From the perspective of a manager, poet Pham Thuy Vinh believes financial support should go hand in hand with training, communications, promotion and finding outlets for cultural products. This requires coordinated participation from management agencies, enterprises, communications experts, technology platforms and cultural consumers themselves.
International experience shows that an effective cultural fund usually needs to meet three basic conditions: flexible capital mobilisation mechanisms, independent professional appraisal councils and transparent supervision systems. Viet Nam also needs to consider incentive policies encouraging enterprises to accompany cultural development. Researcher Nguyen Quang Long proposed that enterprises sponsoring the Funds should be recognised, honoured and granted appropriate tax exemption and reduction mechanisms.
Doctor Nguyen Huy Phong argued that regulations on operations, organisational structures, capital mobilisation mechanisms and the rights and responsibilities of participating parties should soon be completed. According to him, the Funds must have clear evaluation criteria for commissioned works, independent projects, cultural activities in remote and isolated areas and high-value artistic works. At the same time, risks of commercialisation or misuse of the Funds for personal gain must be prevented.
If operated transparently, professionally and in the true spirit of encouraging innovation, the Funds could become an important lever for the breakthrough development of Viet Nam’s cultural industries, while also contributing to strengthening the nation’s soft power and cultural identity in the new development stage.
