Abstract: In an era where international trade is increasingly intertwined with
sustainability standards, the EU–Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) has
evolved beyond a mere economic instrument to become a critical test of
Vietnam’s environmental governance capacity. Chapter 13 of the EVFTA
establishes a rigorous legal framework on environmental protection, mandating
the Parties to uphold high levels of environmental protection, refrain from
lowering standards for trade advantages, and ensure transparency, monitoring,
and stakeholder participation. This article identifies significant legal and
institutional gaps in Vietnam’s implementation process, particularly regarding
the incorporation of the “non-lowering of standards” principle,
inter-ministerial coordination, environmental data transparency, and
enforcement capacity. These shortcomings constrain Vietnam’s ability to
demonstrate compliance and pose risks to its access to the EU market. Drawing
on the EU’s enforcement experience, the paper proposes key legal and
institutional reforms: enacting an inter-ministerial decree to guide Chapter 13
implementation, codifying the equivalence principle in environmental
protection, developing a national Measurement–Reporting–Verification (MRV)
system, establishing an open environmental data portal, and shifting inspection
models toward risk-based approaches. Such measures would strengthen Vietnam’s
compliance capacity, enhance regulatory transparency, and solidify its position
within the global green value chain.
Keywords: EVFTA; environmental obligations;
effective enforcement; data transparency; non-regression; MRV system;
environmental governance.
I. Introduction
In the context of international trade undergoing significant changes toward stricter environmental and sustainable development standards, the European Union (European Union - EU) has emerged as one of the pioneering actors in integrating environmental requirements into trade policy. The adoption of new mechanisms such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism - CBAM)[1], the EU Deforestation-free Regulation and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (EU Deforestation-free Regulation - EUDR)[2] clearly demonstrates the EU’s orientation toward prioritizing environmental protection in trade and investment activities. Within the EU legal framework, the Free Trade Agreement between Viet Nam and the European Union (EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement - EVFTA)[3] not only expands market access opportunities but also establishes new legal requirements in relations between Viet Nam and the EU with respect to ensuring environmental protection and sustainable development standards. Chapter 13 of the EVFTA on Trade and Sustainable Development has established a set of environmental norms with a higher degree of binding force compared to traditional environmental treaties. These norms include maintaining non-regression in levels of environmental protection, ensuring effective enforcement of environmental law, enhancing transparency in policy formulation and implementation, promoting the participation of communities and civil society organizations, as well as maintaining regular dialogue and cooperation with the EU. A notable feature of the EVFTA lies not only in the substance of its commitments but also in its enforcement mechanisms based on transparency, independent monitoring, and the accountability of state authorities.
The practical implementation of the EVFTA reveals a significant gap between the Agreement’s requirements and Viet Nam’s enforcement capacity. The EU’s continued maintenance of the yellow card warning against Vietnamese seafood exports, together with the limited progress in implementing the timber legality assurance system under the Voluntary Partnership Agreement on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (Voluntary Partnership Agreement on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade - VPA FLEGT)[4], reflects structural shortcomings in environmental governance. Although the legal framework on environmental protection and related sectors has undergone important changes, particularly following the adoption of the Law on Environmental Protection 2020, the Fisheries Law 2017, and the Forestry Law 2017, Viet Nam’s ability to meet the EVFTA’s implementation requirements remains subject to numerous challenges. These challenges stem not only from the incompatibility of certain legal provisions but also from limitations in inter-agency coordination capacity, policy harmonization, data collection, and enforcement capacity across different levels of government.
From this practical context, the implementation of environmental protection obligations under the EVFTA by Viet Nam raises pressing legal requirements, thereby necessitating the proposal of several orientations aimed at improving the legal framework and enhancing environmental governance capacity. Fully meeting the EVFTA’s environmental requirements is not only a legal obligation of the State Party but also a prerequisite for Viet Nam to maintain and expand its competitive advantages in a global trade environment that is increasingly shifting toward a sustainable development model.
II. Identifying the Concept of Implementing Environmental Obligations under the EVFTA
The implementation of international treaties constitutes a foundation of modern international law, reflecting the degree to which a State Party respects the commitments established under a treaty. Under the traditional approach, implementation is primarily understood as the conformity between national law and State conduct with treaty provisions, emphasizing legal compatibility and the domestication of international norms[5]. However, alongside the development of international relations and the increasing complexity of global issues, this concept has expanded considerably. Under the modern approach, implementation is not limited to textual conformity but encompasses the entire process of organizing and carrying out measures to ensure that international obligations are fulfilled effectively and efficiently, based on three core pillars: the organization of obligation performance, the assurance of accountability, and the maintenance of enforcement capacity[6]. In Viet Nam, this understanding is similarly adopted, whereby implementation is identified as the process of applying lawful and appropriate mechanisms to ensure that international norms are respected in practice, including enactment, application, monitoring, and regular evaluation[7]. Several studies further emphasize that treaty implementation also entails the political responsibility of the State and requires inter-agency coordination, particularly in technical fields such as environmental protection, where data capacity and enforcement play a decisive role[8].
On that basis, the implementation of environmental treaties exhibits certain specific characteristics of international implementation mechanisms due to the complex and interdisciplinary nature of their content. Most multilateral environmental agreements (Multilateral Environmental Agreements - MEAs) are designed following a model that combines substantive obligations with procedural obligations[9]. Because environmental obligations are long-term in nature and dependent on scientific data, MEA implementation mechanisms tend to prioritize recommendations, financial assistance, capacity building, and technical cooperation rather than direct coercive sanctions[10]. This creates a distinction between the implementation of international environmental treaties and that of other international treaties, which rely more heavily on traditional enforcement mechanisms[11].
For developing countries such as Viet Nam, the implementation of MEAs faces particular challenges. The tension between economic growth objectives and environmental protection often results in delayed or merely formal compliance with international obligations. Within the evolution of international implementation mechanisms, the implementation of environmental provisions under the EVFTA is characterized by a high and complex level of required compliance. The EVFTA not only inherits the requirement of legal compatibility inherent in treaty implementation and the structure of substantive and procedural obligations typical of MEAs, but also introduces a market-oriented implementation model, whereby environmental compliance is directly linked to trade and access to the EU market. Accordingly, the level of implementation under the EVFTA is reflected through requirements relating to transparency, social dialogue, verifiable data, and independent monitoring mechanisms.
First, the substantive obligations under Chapter 13 of the EVFTA require the maintenance of non-regression in environmental protection standards, the effective enforcement of environmental law, and compliance with MEAs to which both parties are members[12]. These obligations are equivalent to, or even exceed, those found in many MEAs, and are regarded by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - OECD) and the United Nations Environment Programme (United Nations Environment Programme - UNEP) as instruments that indirectly support the implementation of MEAs within the context of international trade. However, the more significant distinction lies in the procedural obligations. The EVFTA requires State Parties to ensure information transparency, public consultation, policy disclosure, periodic reporting, and participation in internal monitoring bodies such as the Trade and Sustainable Development Committee (Trade and Sustainable Development Committee - TSD Committee) and the Domestic Advisory Group (Domestic Advisory Group - DAG). These procedural obligations generate continuous reform requirements and constitute a distinctive feature of the Trade and Sustainable Development chapters integrated by the EU into its free trade agreements, as they establish an independent monitoring model based on social dialogue[13].
Second, the requirement of effective enforcement[14]. The EVFTA assesses enforcement effectiveness based on the ability to prevent violations, consistency in the application of law, and the operational capacity of inspection and monitoring systems[15]. This presents a significant challenge for developing countries such as Viet Nam, where environmental inspection bodies suffer from shortages of personnel, limited risk-monitoring technology, and a lack of consistency among local authorities. In addition, the EVFTA requires State Parties to provide verifiable data to demonstrate compliance. This reflects the EU’s predominant governance approach, which demands transparent, standardized, and independently verifiable data systems[16]. The EVFTA adopts a model characterized by low formal legal coercion but very high compliance expectations. Chapter 13 of the EVFTA does not employ trade sanctions; disputes are primarily resolved through consultations and expert panels. Nevertheless, the EU places strong compliance expectations on transparency mechanisms, verifiable data, the operation of DAGs, and social dialogue, rendering the enforcement mechanism “soft in legal terms but hard in governance terms.” For Viet Nam, where economic growth objectives continue to exert strong influence and enforcement capacity remains limited, this requirement creates a relative disadvantage compared to partners with more developed environmental governance systems.
Thus, identifying the concept of implementing environmental obligations under the EVFTA reveals an evolution from the implementation of international treaties, to the implementation of environmental treaties, and ultimately to implementation within the framework of new-generation free trade agreements. The EVFTA represents the highest level of implementation requirements, characterized by greater complexity and stricter implementation conditions. For a developing country such as Viet Nam, implementing the EVFTA constitutes not only a legal challenge but also a test of national governance capacity, requiring profound reforms to narrow the gap between commitments and actual implementation capacity.
III. Content of Environmental Obligations under the EVFTA
3.1. The Principle of Non-regression
The principle of non-regression in Chapter 13 of the EVFTA constitutes one of the core standards of the commitments on trade and sustainable development. Article 13.3 of the EVFTA requires each Party to maintain and not to reduce the level of environmental protection established under its national law at the time the Agreement enters into force. The significance of this provision lies in ensuring that the promotion of trade and investment between the Parties does not lead to a lowering of environmental standards, does not weaken the quality of environmental protection, and does not create unfair competitive advantages in trade activities. The adoption, amendment, or repeal of environmental policies must not be carried out for the purpose of reducing compliance costs for enterprises or supporting trade growth in a manner detrimental to the environment. This requirement ensures that national environmental policies are not transformed into negative trade competition instruments, which are often regarded as a form of implicit subsidy or standard-lowering that distorts the market. In addition, the non-regression principle under the EVFTA also encompasses the obligation not to delay the implementation of established environmental standards. Any delay or suspension in enforcing environmental law for economic or trade-related reasons may be considered inconsistent with the EVFTA if it results in a reduction in the level of environmental protection. This obligation is particularly significant in contexts such as forest protection, fisheries exploitation, or emissions control, which are often directly affected by economic pressures and sectoral interests.
The EVFTA requires States Parties to demonstrate that any changes to environmental laws or policies are not motivated by trade-related objectives. This creates an obligation of accountability for a State Party when amending environmental policies in areas that may affect bilateral trade, such as fisheries exploitation, timber exports, industrial waste management, or greenhouse gas standards. This approach reflects an evidence-based monitoring method, whereby compliance assessment is based not only on the content of legal texts but also on the intent and the actual impact of policies on trade and the environment[17].
Numerous international studies confirm that the principle of non-regression is one of the most progressive standards embedded in EU free trade agreements. The non-regression principle is a key mechanism to prevent a “race to the bottom” among countries competing to expand export markets, while at the same time ensuring coherence between trade objectives and environmental objectives[18]. This mechanism plays a role in safeguarding the integrity of national environmental legal systems, as it restricts the possibility of policy adjustments driven by short-term economic interests rather than long-term environmental interests[19]. For Viet Nam, the non-regression principle under the EVFTA has particularly significant implications. The context of rapid economic growth, strong demand for investment attraction, and competitive pressures from resource-extractive industries heightens the risk of lowering environmental standards. Therefore, the full implementation of the non-regression principle is not only a legal obligation but also a mechanism to protect the national environmental legal system against economic and trade pressures in the process of international integration.
3.2. The Obligation of Effective Enforcement
Article 13.4 of the EVFTA establishes the obligation of effective enforcement of environmental law for the Parties (shall effectively enforce its environmental law), which constitutes a crucial condition for ensuring the substantive nature of the commitments on sustainable development. Effective enforcement is a standard widely recognized in international environmental law, reflecting the requirement not only to adopt legal instruments but also to ensure that the law is applied in a timely, consistent manner and produces tangible impacts on the conduct of relevant actors. This content is consistent with international guidelines on the assessment of enforcement effectiveness, particularly in studies by the International Union for Conservation of Nature on legal indicator systems, research conducted by EU expert groups on environmental law enforcement, and various enforcement guidelines[20]. Accordingly, the obligation requires that environmental law be enforced consistently, without variation based on sectoral characteristics, the scale of establishments, or geographical location. EU studies on environmental law enforcement indicate that inconsistency in the application of standards, especially across local authorities, is one of the primary causes of declining effectiveness in environmental governance[21]. Therefore, the EVFTA requires Parties to develop clear enforcement guidance mechanisms, to delineate responsibilities among competent authorities, and to maintain consistency within the enforcement system.
The EVFTA also requires Parties to establish sufficiently strong and timely mechanisms for handling violations. This is an important international standard aimed at ensuring the coercive force of environmental law. IUCN reports on the assessment of legal effectiveness emphasize that sanctions must be proportionate to the level of harm, must be applied within an appropriate timeframe, and must be sufficiently deterrent to prevent recurrence. Where penalties are too lenient or enforcement is excessively delayed, overall effectiveness is significantly undermined and may generate incentives for systematic non-compliance[22]. Weak enforcement resulting from prolonged processing times and disproportionate sanctions remains one of the most significant barriers to effective environmental law enforcement in many developing countries[23]. In addition, effective enforcement requires the application of risk-based inspection models. This approach seeks to allocate inspection resources according to the level of environmental impact and the likelihood of violations[24]. It is a method recommended by EU institutions, the OECD, and the IUCN, particularly in contexts where inspection resources are limited. Risk-based inspection enhances the detection of violations, reduces compliance costs, and strengthens control over sectors with significant environmental impacts, such as fisheries exploitation, agricultural processing, industrial emissions, or waste management[25].
From the above analysis, it can be seen that the obligation of effective enforcement under the EVFTA has a broad and specialized scope, combining legal requirements on the application of law with modern governance standards relating to inspection, sanctioning of violations, and the evaluation of enforcement effectiveness. This obligation provides an important basis for assessing the current state of environmental law enforcement in Viet Nam, particularly in sectors directly linked to EVFTA commitments, such as fisheries exploitation, forest management, greenhouse gas regulation, and the transparency of environmental information.
3.3. Transparency obligations
Transparency is one of the core obligations in Chapter 13 of the EVFTA, reflecting the EU’s approach to promoting sustainable governance through access to information, public participation, and the accountability of state authorities. Article 13.14 of the EVFTA requires the Parties to ensure that information related to environmental protection is disclosed in a full, timely, and accessible manner to the public. Transparency obligations under the EVFTA go beyond the mere publication of information and encompass requirements aimed at improving the quality of policymaking processes and enhancing society’s capacity for oversight.
First, the Parties are required to disclose environmental information at an adequate and appropriate level, including data on environmental quality, impact assessments, environmental permits, inspection results, and reports related to the enforcement of environmental law. Public disclosure of information is regarded as a prerequisite for society to assess compliance and to monitor the conduct of public authorities as well as organizations and enterprises[26]. Ensuring information disclosure also contributes to improving enforcement quality, as published data provide a basis for independent evaluation and facilitate the timely detection and handling of violations.
Second, transparency under the EVFTA includes the obligation to ensure transparency in the process of formulating and adopting environmental policies. The Parties must enable the public to access information on draft policies, proposed legal amendments, impact assessment reports, and relevant databases[27]. Transparency in policymaking processes helps ensure evidence-based decision-making, reduces the risk of capture by narrow interest groups, and enhances public trust in state authorities[28]. Within the EVFTA framework, policy transparency also enables the EU to assess the compatibility of Viet Nam’s legal system with international environmental standards, thereby supporting policy dialogue and coordination between the Parties.
Third, the EVFTA’s transparency obligations require the Parties to publish legal instruments, regulations, administrative decisions, and data related to the implementation of environmental commitments. Timely publication of such documents ensures the predictability of policy, supports enterprises in complying with legal requirements, and limits arbitrary application of the law[29]. Transparency obligations are thus reflected not only as formal legal requirements but also as tools to enhance enforcement effectiveness through social oversight and policy comparison[30]. In EU free trade agreements, particularly the EVFTA, the publication of legal documents is also linked to the obligation to provide information to oversight bodies such as the Domestic Advisory Group and the Trade and Sustainable Development Committee.
Accordingly, transparency obligations under the EVFTA are multidimensional, combining information disclosure, procedural transparency, and the publication of legal instruments. They constitute a key mechanism for ensuring the quality of implementation of environmental obligations, while also serving as the foundation for accountability, social monitoring, and dialogue between Viet Nam and the EU. These requirements enable evidence-based assessment of compliance and contribute to guiding improvements in the environmental governance capacity of the Parties.
3.4. Social consultation obligations
Social consultation obligations in Chapter 13 of the EVFTA constitute one of the key safeguard mechanisms for promoting transparency, accountability, and the quality of implementation of environmental and sustainable development commitments. Articles 13.15 and 13.16 of the EVFTA establish requirements for the participation of relevant stakeholder organizations in monitoring, feedback, and policy dialogue, in line with the EU’s approach of recognizing stakeholder organizations as integral components of sustainable trade governance. The EVFTA requires the establishment and operation of the Domestic Advisory Group. This mechanism is designed to bring together representatives of relevant stakeholder organizations to participate in monitoring the implementation of the EVFTA’s commitments on environment and sustainable development. This consultation model is intended to ensure diversity, relative independence, and the capacity to provide expert feedback on the implementation process, thereby assisting state authorities in identifying policy gaps and improving enforcement effectiveness[31].
In addition to the establishment of the domestic DAG, the EVFTA requires the maintenance of regular dialogue mechanisms with the EU on environmental and sustainable development issues. These dialogue mechanisms take various forms, including bilateral dialogues, meetings of the Trade and Sustainable Development Committee, and open discussion sessions with representatives of stakeholder organizations from both Parties. Such dialogue serves as an important tool for assessing implementation progress, exchanging technical information, clarifying emerging issues, and enhancing mutual understanding of each Party’s policy priorities[32]. In the context of the EVFTA, dialogue with the EU is particularly significant in areas subject to close scrutiny, such as fisheries management, forest exploitation, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
Social consultation obligations also create conditions for public participation in the formulation and implementation of environmental policies. This includes the disclosure of draft policies, the organization of community consultations, the receipt of feedback, and the publication of responses to such feedback. These requirements are consistent with international standards on public participation in environmental governance[33]. Public consultation not only improves policy quality but also contributes to ensuring the practical feasibility of environmental law in implementation.
Accordingly, social consultation obligations under the EVFTA have a broad scope, encompassing the establishment of stakeholder mechanisms through the Domestic Advisory Group, the maintenance of dialogue with EU institutions, and the обеспечение of public participation in environmental policymaking. These mechanisms play an important role in strengthening transparency, accountability, and the balance between trade objectives and environmental protection objectives. At the same time, they provide a foundation for evidence-based compliance assessment and social feedback, thereby contributing to enhanced effectiveness in the implementation of the EVFTA’s environmental commitments by the Parties[34].
3.5. Reporting and cooperation obligations
Reporting and cooperation obligations under Articles 13.17 and 13.18 of the EVFTA constitute an important supporting mechanism to ensure the monitoring, evaluation, and coordination of environmental and sustainable development commitments between Viet Nam and the EU. These are procedural obligations associated with modern trade governance models, in which information, dialogue, and periodic review mechanisms play a foundational role in maintaining substantive compliance[35].
First, each Party has the responsibility to report on progress in implementing environmental commitments under the EVFTA. Such reports include information on legal amendments, policy implementation, inspection outcomes, handling of violations, and measures to enhance management capacity. According to international guidelines on assessing the effectiveness of environmental law enforcement, periodic reporting is regarded as a central tool for identifying implementation gaps, determining support needs, and providing a basis for policy dialogue[36]. Data-based evaluation is considered a minimum requirement of a sustainable development governance system[37].
Second, the EVFTA requires Parties to maintain active participation in the activities of the Trade and Sustainable Development Committee. This is a joint body tasked with monitoring implementation progress, exchanging technical information, discussing emerging issues, and issuing policy recommendations. Analyses from EU studies on new-generation free trade agreements indicate that this Committee serves as an important forum for enhancing mutual understanding, assessing the degree of compatibility between legal systems, and reviewing areas with potential non-compliance risks[38]. Proactive participation in the Committee’s activities not only demonstrates cooperative intent but also contributes to strengthening domestic policy coordination capacity.
Third, Article 13.18 of the EVFTA stipulates obligations to provide information, respond to consultations, and address recommendations from the EU side. This mechanism is intended to ensure transparency and accountability throughout the implementation process. Responding to consultations reflects the responsibility of a Party to explain its policies, provide information on the effectiveness of implementation measures, and incorporate feedback to improve environmental governance quality. Information exchange and responses to recommendations are key elements in maintaining constructive dialogue and preventing the escalation of disputes, particularly in sensitive areas such as fisheries management, forest exploitation, or greenhouse gas emission control[39].
Accordingly, reporting and cooperation obligations under the EVFTA are not merely procedural in nature but play a direct supporting role in ensuring the effective implementation of environmental commitments. These mechanisms help enhance transparency, strengthen inter-agency coordination, facilitate information sharing, and reinforce institutional capacity of the Parties. At the same time, they provide an important foundation for evidence-based compliance assessment, consistent with contemporary trends in international environmental governance.
IV. Challenges to the implementation of environmental protection obligations under the EVFTA in Viet Nam and existing legal gaps
First, the principle of non-regression has not been fully internalized. Article 13.3.2 of the EVFTA provides for the obligation “not to reduce the level of environmental protection afforded in its law in order to encourage trade or investment”. However, Viet Nam’s legal system has not internalized this principle in any form. The Law on Environmental Protection 2020 does not contain any provision requiring the State to maintain the level of environmental protection already achieved. The principles set out in Article 4 of the Law on Environmental Protection 2020 remain at a general orientation level, such as “prevention”, “response”, and “protection of human health”, but do not prohibit the lowering of environmental standards for economic objectives. Article 5 of the Law on Environmental Protection 2020 likewise does not stipulate any responsibility to maintain existing standards. Article 6 of the Law on Environmental Protection 2020 assigns the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (now the Ministry of Agriculture and Environment – MAE) the authority to promulgate technical standards “in conformity with development conditions”, while Article 60 of the same Law allows the extension of roadmaps for the application of standards to production facilities. These provisions may lead to the lowering of environmental standards under pressure for economic growth or investment attraction.
Moreover, Viet Nam does not have any internal control mechanisms to prevent regulatory rollback. Specifically, Viet Nam lacks: (i) an impact assessment mechanism for amendments to environmental standards, whereas the EU model requires Impact Assessment prior to any change that may reduce the level of protection; (ii) a mandatory accountability obligation for ministries and sectors to explain before the Government or the National Assembly when proposing the relaxation of environmental standards; and (iii) an independent review or complaint mechanism against decisions lowering standards. The absence of such control mechanisms demonstrates that Vietnamese law not only fails to recognize the non-regression principle, but also lacks institutional safeguards to protect the level of environmental protection already achieved. This creates a significant gap in the implementation of Article 13.3 of the EVFTA, making it difficult in practice for Viet Nam to demonstrate that it does not lower standards for trade or investment purposes.
Second, there is a lack of inter-sectoral guidance instruments for the implementation of the EVFTA. Viet Nam has not adopted any inter-sectoral guiding document addressing the environmental obligations under the EVFTA that would consolidate, interpret, and allocate responsibilities for implementing Chapter 13 of the Agreement among ministries and agencies. The implementation of commitments in the field of environment and sustainable development has largely relied on integration into existing sector-specific legislation, without a unified legal mechanism for coordination, monitoring, and evaluation. As a result, implementation is fragmented across numerous legal instruments: the Ministry of Agriculture and Environment is responsible for environmental reporting, the implementation of multilateral environmental agreements, fisheries management, forestry, and combating illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; the Ministry of Industry and Trade manages trade and serves as the EVFTA focal point; the Ministry of Home Affairs manages labor-related matters; and the Ministry of Justice oversees the monitoring and review of treaties. However, Viet Nam lacks a unified coordination mechanism to ensure that these obligations are implemented coherently, on schedule, and in accordance with the transparency standards required by the European Union. Although Resolution No. 102/2020 of the National Assembly dated 08 June 2020 on the ratification of the free trade agreement between Viet Nam and the European Union contains provisions on organizing the implementation of the EVFTA through the identification of general tasks, it does not establish inter-sectoral coordination procedures in the field of environment. This weakens implementation effectiveness and creates difficulties for Viet Nam in demonstrating compliance to the European Union.
Third, there is insufficient transparency of environmental data. Vietnamese law and the EVFTA are not fully compatible with respect to environmental information transparency obligations. Although Vietnamese law contains progressive provisions on the disclosure of environmental information[40], it still falls short of the requirements of the EVFTA. Article 13.14 of the EVFTA requires the Parties to disclose environmental information in a timely and transparent manner, including full access to source data, methodologies, calculation models, impact maps, and technical documentation necessary for independent monitoring and verification. In contrast, the Law on Environmental Protection 2020 requires only the disclosure of environmental monitoring results, without mandating the disclosure of source data, modeling data, comprehensive environmental impact assessment data, or emission calculation parameters. As a result, Vietnamese law meets only a minimum portion of the EVFTA standard, leaving significant gaps with respect to data layers that the European Union considers essential for transparency obligations. This constitutes a structural gap leading to a considerable level of incompatibility with Article 13.14 of the EVFTA. In practice, key datasets related to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, the Voluntary Partnership Agreement on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade, environmental impact assessment, and greenhouse gas emissions are not published as open data. For example, the vessel monitoring system required under the Law on Fisheries 2017 and Government Decree No. 37/2024 dated 04 April 2024 amending and supplementing a number of articles of Government Decree No. 26/2019 dated 08 March 2019 is used solely for internal purposes; environmental impact assessment reports under Articles 31 to 35 of the Law on Environmental Protection 2020 disclose only conclusions rather than underlying technical datasets; and greenhouse gas data under Government Decree No. 119/2025 dated 09 June 2025 amending and supplementing a number of articles of Government Decree No. 06/2022 dated 07 January 2022 remain at the data collection stage and are not publicly disclosed on a regular basis. This fragmentation and lack of transparency hinder Viet Nam’s ability to demonstrate compliance with the EVFTA, reduce credibility in technical dialogues with the European Union, and contribute to the continued maintenance of warnings such as the illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing “yellow card”.
Fourth, enforcement measures remain ineffective in practice. A prominent illustration of the shortcomings in EVFTA implementation is the continued weakness in Viet Nam’s efforts to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, as reflected by the European Union’s maintenance of the “yellow card” since 2017. Although the vessel monitoring system is mandatory under the Law on Fisheries 2017 and Government Decree No. 37/2024, it remains unstable in operation, frequently losing signal[41], failing to transmit continuous data[42], and not meeting the level of reliability required by the European Union for traceability purposes. Sanctions for illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing violations remain insufficiently stringent and inconsistently applied, despite increased penalties under Government Decree No. 38/2024 dated 05 April 2024 on administrative sanctions in the fisheries sector. Fishing vessels continue to violate foreign waters; the handling of vessel owners and captains varies significantly among provinces; and measures such as suspension, confiscation of fishing gear, or withdrawal of licenses are rarely applied[43]. Consequently, the deterrent effect remains limited and insufficient to change behavior, resulting in slow progress in addressing illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and failure to meet the effective enforcement standard required by the EVFTA and the European Union for the fisheries sector. These shortcomings demonstrate that illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing is a clear example of weaknesses in enforcement and environmental data transparency in Viet Nam, directly affecting the country’s ability to implement EVFTA commitments, particularly in a context where the European Union assesses compliance based on evidence and comprehensive traceability data.
V. Proposals for improving Vietnamese law to ensure effective implementation of environmental protection obligations under the EVFTA
5.1. Improving the legal framework for implementation in a systematic and coordinated manner
The legal framework for implementing Chapter 13 should be improved in a systematic, inter-sectoral, and evidence-based manner. Viet Nam should promulgate an inter-sectoral Government Decree on the implementation of Chapter 13 of the EVFTA as a central coordination mechanism to replace the current fragmented implementation model. This Government Decree should not merely assign responsibilities to individual ministries and sectors, but must design a comprehensive operational mechanism consisting of four mandatory components.
First, an inter-ministerial coordination mechanism should be established through the creation of an EVFTA–Environment Coordination Board with binding authority, comprising the Ministry of Agriculture and Environment, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the Ministry of Justice, and the Ministry of Home Affairs. This Coordination Board should be vested with the authority to coordinate, urge implementation, assess progress, and recommend corrective measures against ministries and sectors that fail to properly fulfill their obligations.
Second, the Government Decree must stipulate a mandatory data-sharing mechanism in accordance with European Union standards, covering data on illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, forest law enforcement, governance and trade, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental impact assessment, and environmental inspection. Such data sharing must be based on standards for assessing the quality of environmental data, supply chain data, and implementation reporting data under the EVFTA, namely traceable[44], verifiable[45], and timely[46], in order to ensure uniform internal data sharing among ministries and sectors.
Third, a semi-annual reporting regime should be established and applied uniformly to all relevant ministries and sectors. Reports must follow a standardized structure suitable for technical dialogue with the European Union and must disclose at least a minimum set of contents to strengthen accountability.
Fourth, the Government Decree must establish an internal accountability mechanism for early warning, inspection, and handling of violations. This includes (i) early warnings for ministries and sectors that are delayed in implementation; (ii) an independent inspection mechanism carried out by the Coordination Board; and (iii) administrative measures or public disclosure of responsibility where ministries or sectors fail to complete their obligations in accordance with the EVFTA roadmap. This mechanism is a prerequisite for addressing the situation of “no legal consequences” for delays, which remains a major weakness in the current implementation governance framework.
The promulgation of an inter-sectoral Government Decree incorporating all four components above would create a unified coordination framework, remedy the fragmentation of obligations, lack of transparency, and weak accountability, and at the same time enhance Viet Nam’s capacity to meet the implementation standards of Chapter 13 of the EVFTA.
5.2. Improving regulations on implementation principles
The legal system should be strengthened by codifying the non-regression principle to ensure compatibility with Article 13.3 of the EVFTA. Such codification must be designed through three mandatory legislative steps in order to create substantive binding force rather than a mere policy declaration.
First, the non-regression principle should be explicitly incorporated into Article 4 of the Law on Environmental Protection 2020. This provision has high normative and guiding value, ensuring that all subsequent activities of environmental law-making and law enforcement are subject to the requirement of maintaining the level of environmental protection already achieved.
Second, a regulatory impact assessment mechanism for the lowering of environmental standards should be introduced. Any proposal to amend or relax environmental technical standards or regulations must be accompanied by a regulatory impact assessment analyzing environmental impacts and demonstrating that the proposed change is not intended to create unfair trade advantages. This internal control mechanism, similar to the European Union’s impact assessment model, would help prevent uncontrolled lowering of standards.
Third, a mandatory accountability mechanism before the National Assembly must be established when amending or repealing core environmental standards. This would ensure transparency and create a necessary layer of political and legal oversight over changes that may affect EVFTA commitments. The National Assembly should have the authority to require ministries and sectors to provide scientific evidence and impact assessment data before approving any adjustment of standards.
The establishment of this three-tier mechanism would not only enable Viet Nam to fully comply with the non-regression obligation under the EVFTA, but also create a legal foundation to protect the stability and enhance the quality of the environmental legal system in the long term.
5.3. Development and operation of the national MRV framework
Viet Nam needs to develop and operate a national MRV framework compatible with EU standards, particularly in the context of CBAM and the roadmap for the operation of the domestic carbon market under the Law on Environmental Protection 2020. This MRV framework must be oriented toward a Measurement – Reporting – Verification system capable of generating installation-level emissions data that are traceable and independently verified in accordance with international standards. At the same time, Viet Nam should promulgate the Vietnam MRV Technical Guidelines, similar to the EU MRV Regulation, specifying in detail measurement/estimation methods, standardization of emission factors, reporting procedures, data formats, and information disclosure obligations. This constitutes a mandatory technical basis enabling enterprises in CBAM-affected sectors such as steel, cement, fertilizers, aluminum, hydrogen, etc., to generate emissions data compatible with EU calculation templates. Another urgent requirement is the standardization of traceability systems for fisheries, timber, and agricultural products, in accordance with IUU, FLEGT/VNTLAS, and EUDR standards. The traceability system must be centrally managed, capable of interoperability with the EU, and compliant with the chain-of-custody data principle. These requirements need to be clearly stipulated in sector-specific Government Decrees, ensuring consistency among ministries and sectors.
In addition, Viet Nam needs to establish emissions verification bodies recognized in accordance with the EU ETS and CBAM models. The establishment of a national verification institution, licensed and supervised by the Ministry of Agriculture and Environment, is a prerequisite for enhancing the reliability of the emissions data chain.
Moreover, Viet Nam needs to urgently organize the pilot operation of the domestic carbon exchange in strict accordance with the roadmap defined under Article 139 of the Law on Environmental Protection 2020 and Government Decree No. 29/2026/GD dated 19 January 2026 on the domestic carbon exchange, while simultaneously linking the MRV system with quota allocation mechanisms and credit trading. The domestic carbon market can operate effectively only when MRV ensures the accuracy and verifiability of enterprise-level emissions data. The pilot operation of the carbon market will help to practically test MRV capacity, complete the national database, and gradually establish long-term compatibility with the EU ETS.
5.4. Development of the national open environmental data portal
Viet Nam needs to promptly develop a national open environmental data portal with a unified technical architecture, operating as an open, centralized, and interoperable environmental data platform, allowing individuals, enterprises, and state authorities to access, use, and verify environmental data in accordance with open standards and to connect all environmental data at the national level. This data portal must be designed with clear data groupings, including: (i) the Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment data group (Strategic Environmental Assessment – SEA); (ii) the greenhouse gas MRV data group; (iii) the FLEGT/VNTLAS data group; (iv) the IUU data group; and (v) the environmental monitoring data group. Such data layering helps to standardize data structures and ensure verifiability in line with EU requirements.
In terms of infrastructure, this data portal must be directly integrated with the National Data Portal in accordance with Government Decree No. 278/2025/GD dated 22 October 2025 of the Government on mandatory data connection and sharing among agencies within the political system for the use of shared data repositories and the application of open data format standards. This integration not only ensures alignment with the national digital infrastructure but also guarantees inter-ministerial connectivity in environmental data sharing, thereby addressing fragmentation in implementation. The data portal needs to establish data verification mechanisms, including checks for data consistency, completeness, source matching, and mechanisms for recording and tracing changes. These are conditions for data to be accepted in EVFTA dialogue processes, as well as for serving EU risk assessments relating to IUU, FLEGT, or CBAM. This common data portal meets the requirements of enterprises exporting to the EU, particularly in sectors such as timber, fisheries, steel, cement, fertilizers, textiles and garments, etc., to integrate environmental data into internal governance systems in accordance with CBAM, EUDR, and the EU Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence (Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive – CSDDD). The development of an open environmental data portal with such a comprehensive technical structure not only enables Viet Nam to approach EU transparency standards but also establishes a data-driven environmental governance foundation, strengthens the accountability of public authorities, and enhances persuasiveness in EVFTA dialogue. This is an essential condition to ensure substantive implementation of Chapter 13 and to mitigate trade risks in sectors subject to heightened EU scrutiny.
5.5. Enhancing enforcement capacity
Enforcement capacity should be enhanced through a shift in the inspection model toward risk-based inspections, in line with EU standards on environmental law enforcement. For this model to have binding legal effect, Viet Nam needs to legalize the risk assessment mechanism by amending Government Decree No. 05/2025/GD dated 06 January 2025 of the Government on amending and supplementing a number of provisions of Government Decree No. 08/2022/GD dated 10 January 2022 of the Government detailing a number of articles of the Law on Environmental Protection, with a view to strengthening the role of environmental inspection along three core dimensions.
First, the Government Decree needs to supplement sector-based risk classification with a system of quantitative criteria, applicable to sectors with high levels of emissions or significant impacts such as steel, cement, chemicals, fisheries exploitation, wood processing, and energy. This classification must be based on a set of risk indicators including compliance records, emissions data, violation history, and the level of environmental and social impact. This approach is similar to the EU system for identifying sectors with high environmental and social risks (High-Impact Sectors).
Second, the inspection mechanism must mandatorily use automatic monitoring data as an official legal data source. This includes real-time access by inspection authorities to automatic monitoring systems pursuant to Article 109 of the Law on Environmental Protection 2020, while requiring enterprises to maintain continuous data transmission and prohibiting data disconnection. Reliance on manual inspections or paper-based reporting, as currently practiced, is inconsistent with the EVFTA model of law enforcement based on data transparency[47], information provision[48], and accountability[49].
Third, a risk-score-based enforcement mechanism should be established, whereby inspection frequency, enforcement measures, and levels of supervision are determined directly by the risk score of each facility. Facilities with high risk scores must be subject to frequent inspections, ad hoc inspections, and expanded information disclosure obligations, while facilities with low risk scores may benefit from reduced inspection frequency in order to save resources. This model is consistent with OECD best practices on risk management in environmental inspections.
Fourth, environmental inspection forces need to be granted enhanced powers and equipment, including the right to access real-time data; the right to require enterprises to provide source data; the authority to apply suspension measures in cases of serious violations; and the right to access MRV data for cross-checking in accordance with EU standards. Only when the risk-based inspection mechanism is fully legalized can Viet Nam meet the criterion of effective enforcement under Article 13.4 of the EVFTA and enhance its credibility in dialogue with the EU.
VI. Conclusion
The EVFTA establishes a high-level set of environmental standards, built upon core pillars including the non-lowering of standards, effective enforcement, transparency, consultation, and periodic cooperation, all of which are directly linked to access to the EU market. Compared with multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), Chapter 13 demonstrates a clearer and more demanding level of implementation, as it requires not only legal compatibility but also proof of governance capacity through verifiable data, independent monitoring mechanisms, and clear accountability. For Viet Nam, although the legal system has made significant progress, existing gaps in the principle of non-lowering of standards, inter-sectoral coordination, MRV serving CBAM, data transparency, and enforcement capacity indicate that implementation capacity still needs to be substantially improved to meet the requirements of the EVFTA. Improving the implementation framework is not only aimed at addressing the “yellow card” warning in the fisheries sector and complying with CBAM and the EU’s new supply chain standards, but also represents an opportunity to upgrade the national environmental governance model toward a modern, data-driven, and accountability-based approach.
Accordingly, it can be affirmed that the implementation of environmental protection obligations under the EVFTA goes beyond mere treaty compliance. It constitutes a critical means of identifying and strengthening Viet Nam’s environmental governance capacity and is a necessary condition for maintaining its position within a global trading system that is rapidly shifting toward sustainable development standards.
1. European Commission, Recommendation 2001/331/EC providing for minimum criteria for environmental inspections in the Member States (RMCEI), Article 4, 4 April 2001.
2. European Parliament and the Council, Regulation (EU) 2023/956 establishing a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, 10 May 2023.
3.
European Parliament and the Council, Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 on the making available on the Union market and the export from the Union of certain commodities and products associated with deforestation and forest degradation, 31 May 2023.
4. Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law, 8th ed., Cambridge University Press, 124-126 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316979815 truy cập ngày 29/10/2025.
5. Abram Chayes & Antonia Handler Chayes, The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements, Harvard University Press, 9-12 (1995).
6. Le Mai Anh (ed.), Textbook on International Law, Hanoi Law University, People’s Public Security Publishing House, 25th reprint, 13 (2023).
7. Nguyen Thi Thuan, Improving Vietnamese Law on the Conclusion and Implementation of International Treaties in the Context of International Integration – Theoretical and Practical Foundations, Doctoral Dissertation in Law, Hanoi Law University, 16 (2008).
8. Patricia Birnie, Alan Boyle & Catherine Redgwell, International Law and the Environment, Oxford University Press, 241-250 (2009).
9. Edith Brown Weiss & Harold K. Jacobson, Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental Accords, MIT Press, 3-10 (1998).
10. Hoang Ly Anh, “Positive Treaty Management – A Contemporary Approach to Ensuring the Implementation of International Environmental Treaties”, Journal of Legal Studies, Special Issue “45th Anniversary of Hanoi Law University (1979–2024)”, 203–205 (2024).
11. OECD, Regional Trade Agreements and the Environment, 10 (2023).
12. James Harrison, “Labour and Environmental Standards in EU FTAs”, University of Edinburgh, 35-42 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745618000204 accessed on 29/10/2025.
13. BERNHARD A. MÜLLER, Ensuring Effective Enforcement of EU Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, 12-18 (2022).
14. Clara Brandi, Sustainability Provisions in EU Trade Policy: A New Approach to Compliance, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), Bonn, 12-18 (2020).
15. OECD, Fostering Environmental Compliance through Trade Agreements, OECD Publishing, Paris, 22-30 (2021).
16. Lorand Bartels, “Social Issues: Labour, Environment and Human Rights”, in Bilateral and Regional Trade Agreements, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 6–8 (2015), DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511575983.013, accessed on 19/10/2025.
17. IUCN, Measuring the Effectiveness of Environmental Law through Legal Indicators and Quality of Implementation, Gland, 5–8 (2020).
18. Ludwig Kramer, “Improving Environmental Compliance: Lessons from EU Practice”, EU Law Enforcement Blog, No. 8 (2020), https://eulawenforcement.com/?p=8188, accessed on 22/10/2025.
19. Greenwatch Uganda, Enforcing Environmental Laws: A Guide for Practitioners, Kampala, 22–30 (2020), https://greenwatch.or.ug/sites/default/files/documents-uploads/Enforcing%20environmental%20laws.pdf, accessed on 19/10/2025.
20. OECD, Best Practice Principles for Regulatory Enforcement and Inspections, OECD Publishing, Paris, 17-25 (2018).
21. European Commission, Environmental Compliance Assurance – Guidance Document, Brussels, 14-18 (2019).
22. UNEP, Environmental Rule of Law: First Global Report, Nairobi, 120-122 (2019).
23. OECD, Trust and Public Policy: How Better Governance Can Help Rebuild Public Trust, OECD Publishing, Paris, 52-55 (2017).
24. European Commission, Report on the Implementation of EU Trade Agreements, Brussels, 141-150 (2022).
25. UNECE, Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention), Geneva, Điều 4-9 (1998).
26. European Commission, Trade and Sustainable Development Review, Brussels, 52-60 (2021).
27. Thanh Nga, “Fishermen Proactively Install VMS Devices but Still Need Support”, Agriculture and Environment, 29/10/2025, https://nongnghiepmoitruong.vn/ngu-dan-chu-dong-lap-dat-thiet-bi-vms-nhung-can-tro-luc-d765691.html.
28.Minh Tan, “Numerous Shortcomings Remain in the Implementation of Legal Provisions on VMS”, Inspectorate, 29/10/2025, https://thanhtra.com.vn/an-sinh-AFA9C5670/con-nhieu-bat-cap-trong-thuc-hien-cac-quy-dinh-phap-luat-ve-vms-D0A56C14.html.
29. Luu Huong, “Strict Handling of ‘Ghost Vessels’ and Vessels Losing VMS Connection: Addressing Difficulties in Fishing Fleet Management”, Government Electronic Newspaper, 29/10/2025, https://baochinhphu.vn/xu-ly-nghiem-tau-ma-tau-mat-ket-noi-vms-go-kho-quan-ly-doi-tau-ca-102250807154509929.htm.
[*] Master of Laws, Lecturer, Faculty of International Law, School of Law, Hue University. Email: linhnhk@hul.edu.vn. Date of approval for publication: 27/01/2026.
[**] Doctor of Laws, Lecturer, Faculty of International Law, Hanoi Law University.
[1] Regulation (EU) 2023/956 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 May 2023.
[2] Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2023.
[3] The EU–Viet Nam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA), signed on 30 June 2019, approved by the National Assembly of Viet Nam on 8 June 2020, and entered into force on 1 August 2020.
[4] The Voluntary Partnership Agreement on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade between Viet Nam and the European Union, signed on 19 October 2018 and entered into force on 1 June 2019, establishing a legal framework to ensure that timber and timber products exported to the EU have legal origin and to operate the Vietnam Timber Legality Assurance System (VNTLAS).
[5] Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law, 8th Ed., Cambridge University Press, 124-126 (2017). DOI: Https://Doi.Org/10.1017/9781316979815 truy cập ngày 29/10/2025.
[6] Abram Chayes & Antonia Handler Chayes, The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements, Harvard University Press, 9-12 (1995).
[7] Le Mai Anh (ed.), Textbook on International Law, Hanoi Law University, People’s Public Security Publishing House, 25th reprint, 13 (2023).
[8] Nguyen Thi Thuan, Improving Vietnamese Law on the Conclusion and Implementation of International Treaties in the Context of International Integration – Theoretical and Practical Foundations, Doctoral Dissertation in Law, Hanoi Law University, 16 (2008).
[9] Patricia Birnie, Alan Boyle & Catherine Redgwell, International Law and the Environment, Oup, 241-250 (2009).
[10] Edith Brown Weiss & Harold K. Jacobson, Engaging Countries, Mit Press, 3-10 (1998).
[11] Hoang Ly Anh, Positive Treaty Management – A Contemporary Approach to Ensuring the Implementation of International Environmental Treaties, Journal of Legal Studies, Special Issue “45th Anniversary of Hanoi Law University (1979–2024)”, 203–205 (2024).
[12] OECD, Regional Trade Agreements and the Environment, 10 (2023).
[13] James Harrison, Labour And Environmental Standards In Eu Ftas, University Of Edinburgh, 35-42 (2019). DOI: Https://Doi.Org/10.1017/S1474745618000204 truy cập ngày 29/10/2025.
[14]
Article 13.4 of the EVFTA.
[15] Müller, Bernhard A, Ensuring Effective Enforcement of EU Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, 12-18 (2022).
[16] Clara Brandi, Sustainability Provisions in EU Trade Policy: A New Approach to Compliance, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (Idos), Bonn, 12-18 (2020).
[17] OECD, Fostering Environmental Compliance Through Trade Agreements, Oecd Publishing, Paris, 22-30 (2021).
[18] Clara Brandi, ibid., 16 (2020).
[19] Lorand Bartels, Social Issues: Labour, Environment and Human Rights, Bilateral and Regional Trade Agreements, Edition: 2nd, Cambridge University Press, 6-8 (2015). DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511575983.013 truy cập ngày 19/10/2025.
[20] IUCN, Measuring the Effectiveness of Environmental Law Through Legal Indicators and Quality of Implementation, Gland, 5-8 (2020).
[21] Ludwig Kramer, Improving Environmental Compliance: Lessons from EU Practice, EU Law Enforcement Blog, No. 8 (2020), https://eulawenforcement.com/?p=8188, accessed on 22/10/2025.
[22] IUCN, ibid., 20–25 (2020).
[23]Greenwatch Uganda, Enforcing Environmental Laws: A Guide for Practitioners, Kampala, 22–30 (2020), https://greenwatch.or.ug/sites/default/files/documents-uploads/Enforcing%20environmental%20laws.pdf, accessed on 19/10/2025.
[24] OECD, Best Practice Principles for Regulatory Enforcement and Inspections, OECD Publishing, Paris, 17-25 (2018).
[25] European Commission, Environmental Compliance Assurance – Guidance Document, Brussels, 14-18 (2019).
[26] UNEP, Environmental Rule of Law: First Global Report, Nairobi, 120-122 (2019).
[27] OECD, Trust and Public Policy: How Better Governance Can Help Rebuild Public Trust, OECDPublishing, Paris, 52-55 (2017).
[28] James Harrison, ibid., 28–34 (2019).
[29]
OECD, ibid., 25–33 (2018).
[30] IUCN, ibid., 18–23 (2020).
[31] James Harrison, ibid., 35–42 (2019).
[32] European Commission, Report on The Implementation of EU Trade Agreements, Brussels, 141-150 (2022).
[33] UNECE, Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, Geneva, Điều 4-9 (1998).
[34] UNEP, Environmental Rule of Law: First Global Report, Nairobi, 120-122 (2019).
[35] James Harrison, ibid., 40–46 (2019).
[36] IUCN, ibid., 18–20 (2020).
[37] UNEP, ibid., 130–135 (2019).
[38] European Commission, ibid., 141–150 (2022).[39] European Commission, Trade and Sustainable Development Review, Brussels, 52-60 (2021).
[40] Article 114 of the Law on Environmental Protection 2020.
[41] Thanh Nga, “Fishermen Proactively Install VMS Devices but Still Need Support”, Agriculture and Environment, 29/10/2025, https://nongnghiepmoitruong.vn/ngu-dan-chu-dong-lap-dat-thiet-bi-vms-nhung-can-tro-luc-d765691.html.
[42] Minh Tan, “Numerous Shortcomings in the Implementation of Legal Provisions on VMS”, Inspectorate, 29/10/2025, https://thanhtra.com.vn/an-sinh-AFA9C5670/con-nhieu-bat-cap-trong-thuc-hien-cac-quy-dinh-phap-luat-ve-vms-D0A56C14.html.
[43] Luu Huong, “Strict Handling of ‘Ghost Vessels’ and Vessels Losing VMS Connection: Addressing Difficulties in Fishing Fleet Management”, Government Electronic Newspaper, 29/10/2025, https://baochinhphu.vn/xu-ly-nghiem-tau-ma-tau-mat-ket-noi-vms-go-kho-quan-ly-doi-tau-ca-102250807154509929.htm.
[44] Article 9, EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) – Regulation (EU) 2023/1115.
[45] Article 8, CBAM Regulation – Regulation (EU) 2023/956.
[46] Article 13.14 of the EVFTA.
[47] Article 13.14 of the EVFTA.
[48] Articles 13.17 and 13.18 of the EVFTA.
[49] Article 13.14 of the EVFTA.
