The role of risk mitigation and adaptation measures in climate resilience: A case study of Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam

2.1. Global Flood Governance Research

Previous research has delved into the complexity of urban flood risks and climate change. At the macro level, urban flood risks are linked to the presence of assets and the access to such resources to residents. In the case of two cities in France, Orléans and Château, several networks‒the power grid, internet, pipelines, and roads‒were used to evaluate the vulnerability to increased flood risk through a geographical information systems-based approach (Lhomme et al., 2013). Based on their analysis, Lhomme et al. suggest that relatively unprotected or marginalized areas could be identified and compare whether each city’s climate adaption strategies were sufficient to enhance resilience. Moreover, Abdrabo and Hassaan (2015) emphasize the need to incorporate ‘socioeconomic, physical, environmental, institutional and climate change hazard aspects’ beyond the response to the rapid onset of disasters in the context of sea level rise in the Nile Delta. While such conceptual analysis signifies the importance of an integrated framework, the complexities involved in the lack of spatially disaggregated data limit the applicability and precision of resilience assessment.

Beyond a city’s assets, another dimension to account for is the time it takes for interaction among ‘discursive, institutional, and contextual factors’ for policies to evolve and transform (Vitale and Meijerink, 2023) and contribute to sound flood risk management policies. In the context of cities in Italy, authors report that top-down governance and limited non-structural measures hindered the effective adoption of standards imposed on hydraulic infrastructure and even more inclusive policies that utilized spatial planning and community involvement. By applying the IAD, the authors highlight how enduring path dependence in Italian flood risk policies collectively impedes the transition to a more holistic, risk-based flood management paradigm. Hence, Vitale and Meijerink (2023) highlight the necessity for adaptive governance and the inclusion of diverse, bottom-up initiatives to overcome potential barriers to enhance resilience against future urban flood risks.

2.2. Urban Flooding Mitigation and Adaptation Measures in HCMC and Vietnam

In the case of cities in Vietnam, scholars have primarily analyzed how climate change will affect the city, especially considering the city’s rapid urbanization and socioeconomic factors. Exacerbated by risks of climate change, over 50% of the city’s urban area is now affected by regular floods (Duy et al., 2018). Vietnam’s vulnerability to flooding is particularly acute due to the high population density and the concentration of economic assets in low-lying areas and river deltas. Consequently, the country has implemented various flood risk assessments that incorporate hazard, vulnerability and risk-based approaches (Nguyen et al., 2020). However, the effectiveness of flood adaptation strategies remains limited, primarily due to institutional challenges and difficulties in contextualizing flood risk management at the local level (Huynh and Stringer, 2018). This gap between assessment and implementation highlights the need for more integrated analysis to identify institutional factors and locally tailored flood resilience measures for long-term flood adaptation strategies.

For HCMC, scholars have primarily analyzed how climate change will affect the city. Exacerbated by risks of climate change, over 50% of the city’s urban area is now affected by regular floods (Duy et al., 2018). Using the geographic information system (GIS), Duy et al. (2018) found that the lack of urban planning measures has increased flood vulnerability in newly emerging development districts within HCMC. The local government has continued to increase investments in further housing development despite the lack of adequate flood risk management. Advocating for resilient transport systems has, therefore, been recognized as a solution to mitigating flood vulnerability in HCMC (Duy et al., 2019). Since HCMC is heavily reliant on a “ground-level road network,” prioritizing investments in resilient infrastructure will inevitably lead to developments that enhance accessibility, including housing and related systems such as sustainable drainage systems. Nonetheless, in addition to housing projects, the resilience of the transportation system in HCMC has also been overlooked, even though the increased frequency of flood incidents poses a higher risk to its stability (Duy et al., 2018, 2019).

Research on flood resilience in HCMC has also revealed complex dynamics between socioeconomic factors and adaptive capacities. Low-income households in marginalized districts of HCMC face heightened vulnerability to urban flooding due to lower livelihood security (Duy et al., 2018). However, these households have demonstrated adaptive behaviors over time, often implementing mitigation measures such as improving house floors, rather than relying solely on institutional support during flood events (Tu et al., 2024)

Despite these adaptive efforts, significant disparities in resilience persist, particularly along gender lines. Urban women in HCMC, especially those from disadvantaged groups, exhibit lower resilience due to unequal access to resources. This vulnerability is exacerbated by limited participation in decision-making and adaptation programs at the district level, largely due to the prevailing “top-down decision-making process” (Tran and Downes, 2023).

Recent research also highlights that resilience levels may vary within the private sector. Diez et al. (2024) found that small businesses, which comprise nearly 86% of all firms in HCMC, demonstrate a high willingness to participate in collective flood resilience efforts. While 70% expressed interest in joining flood awareness initiatives, 39% indicated openness to financial contributions if costs were shared among businesses and local authorities.

However, small businesses face considerable challenges compared to larger firms engaged in international value chains, particularly in finance and operations. This disparity is further emphasized by Le and Pham (2022), who observed that larger firms generally have easier access to environmental finance from Vietnam’s Environment Fund (EF) than their smaller counterparts. The information asymmetry between firms and the EF is a key barrier to assessing green finance. Many businesses, especially smaller ones, remain unaware of available financial support, even when initiating environmentally friendly projects. This information gap underscores the need for improved communication strategy to ensure that businesses can access the resources necessary for implementing flood adaptation measures regardless of size.

At the institutional level, Vachaud (2019) further highlights the existing challenges within HCMC in breaking down urban planning policies into “national, regional, and urban levels. Urban planning strategies in HCMC often focus on a single-sector or single-project approach, which fails to take into consideration the specific context of varying districts across the city. At the city level, Scheiber, David, et al. (2023) therefore emphasizes the need for incorporating flexible mitigation measures within low-elevation coastal zones of HCMC and advocates for a combination of large-scale flood protection infrastructure, e.g., ring dikes and smaller-scale decentralized rainwater detention systems. Their findings indicate that a lack of city-level assessment restricts the ability to implement more scalable, low-regret adaptation options that are resilient to urbanization and climate change trends.

3.1. IAD Framework in the Context of Climate Resilience

Numerous analytical approaches have been used to evaluate climate risk and resilience, such as GIS-based flood modeling and creation of vulnerability indices. Although risk modeling provides projected estimates of flood exposure, less emphasis is placed on institutional or governance factors. For instance, while GIS-based hydrodynamic modeling can support urban flood mitigation efforts, it overlooks governance considerations (Hawchar et al., 2020). Vulnerability indices demonstrate whether there are socio-economic impacts but do not assess the effectiveness of corresponding policies (Tanir et al., 2024; Wehbe and Baroud, 2024).

The Institutional Analysis and Development framework (IAD) addresses these gaps by offering a structured, multi-level analysis of institutional coordination, stakeholder dynamics, and policy effectiveness, and thus, it is particularly valuable for assessing governance challenges in climate adaptation. IAD, developed by Polski and Ostrom (1999), provides a structured approach to analyzing complex institutional arrangements and their influence on policy outcomes. This structured approach enables integrating multiple participants, such as those directly invested in the policy outcomes. The IAD helps analysts and stakeholders to minimize potential oversight or simplifications that could produce policy failures (Polski and Ostrom, 1999) by dissecting complex social issues into manageable actions. Vitale and Meijerink (2023) applied the framework to examine urban flooding challenges in Italy, focusing on institutional and contextual factors that influence policy stability. Their study highlights how historical path dependence and centralization in flood risk policies can impede the transition to a holistic approach. The IAD is therefore useful to analyze the “ways institutions operate and change over time” (Roggero et al., 2018). The three components‒exogenous variables, action arena, and outcomes‒of the framework enables a comprehensive assessment of flood mitigation and adaptation strategies.

In the academic literature on climate adaptation, the IAD has been recognized by many scholars as a useful framework, as it not only provides a structured evaluation of how institutions influence climate adaptation processes but also reflects the collective choice arrangements and public actor adaptations (see review of papers by Roggero et al., 2018). In particular, Molenveld and Buuren (2019) analyze flood risk governance in the Netherlands using the IAD and demonstrate how governance structures have transitioned from rigid, prevention-based flood management to more adaptive resilience strategies. The application of the IAD identified barriers to achieving adaptive governance, such as fragmented decision-making or institutional inertia. Findings also indicate that multi-stakeholder governance is needed to design more adaptive flood risk management strategies.

Moreover, the IAD has also been applied to explore financial sustainability amid climate change. For example, Mok (2023) applies the IAD to study how institutional arrangements impact financial sustainability. He emphasizes the significance of regulatory policies and talent management in enabling the financial market to incorporate sustainability. Additionally, Mok (2023) points out how climate change policies and market regulations affect institutional capacity, investment flows, and risk management strategies within financial markets through the IAD. Therefore, the IAD emphasizes the necessity of cultivating sustainable finance talent to achieve long-term financial stability in the face of climate-related challenges.

Similarly, Kiesling (2024) applies the IAD to explore financial sustainability within the electricity sector amid climate change. The study emphasizes that regulatory inflexibility and antiquated financial models hinder investments in low-carbon and decentralized energy technologies. Applying the IAD reveals a critical issue where financial mechanisms do not facilitate climate-oriented energy transitions. Consequently, Kiesling (2024) highlights the importance of aligning institutional policies with climate objectives and technological advancements to promote sustainable energy investments.

Against this backdrop, this study applies the IAD to analyze flood resilience strategies in HCMC, emphasizing the need for an adaptive flood resilience strategy that integrates institutional coordination, policy design, and local engagement into long-term urban flood governance (Fig. 1). The IAD for the study is grounded in its capacity to systematically evaluate governance structures, stakeholder interactions, and institutional constraints that shape urban flood resilience efforts in HCMC. Given the multifaceted nature of flood mitigation‒encompassing governmental policies, community participation, and infrastructural development‒, this framework offers an integrative perspective to evaluate the effectiveness of flood governance.

Fig. 1.

Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework developed in the context of HCMCSource: Authors’ own depiction adapted from Polski and Ostrom (1999), Vitale and Meijerink (2023).

Regarding the IAD’s relevance to urban flood resilience, this framework facilitates an in-depth exploration of how formal and informal institutions interact within the urban flood governance system (Polski and Ostrom, 1999). In the context of HCMC, flood mitigation is not solely dictated by top-down government directives but is also influenced by local district policies, international funding agencies, and community-based adaptation measures (Vitale and Meijerink, 2023). By applying the IAD, the study examines the coordination (or lack thereof) among these diverse actors and identifies institutional gaps that hinder effective policy implementation. While risk assessment primarily focuses on evaluating the “time- and location-specific” (Li et al., 2024) probability or potential impact of flooding events, resilience assessment examines the capacity of institutions, urban systems, and communities to adapt and recover from such climate-induced disruption (Marolla, 2024). Unlike risk assessments, which are often predictive, resilience assessment incorporates long-term adaptive strategies and governance effectiveness that influence the overall sustainability of flood mitigation efforts.

Thus, the study employs a qualitative analysis to analyze the effectiveness of HCMC’s urban flood mitigation and adaptation policies in building climate resilience in a lower-middle-income country. National policies regarding urban flooding and climate change, literature reviews, governmental reports, and policy papers are examined to comprehensively assess the outcome of key national policies and programs. Quantitative measures, such as changes in the frequency or intensity of floods over time or advancements in drainage systems, will also be examined to analyze HCMC’s adaptation efforts. Hence, this study aims to provide insight into the interaction between institutional, socioeconomic, and environmental factors in shaping urban flood resilience in the city.

Within the IAD, the selection of exogenous variables‒biophysical characteristics, socioeconomic disparities, policy decisions, and interventions‒was based on their direct influence on flood vulnerability and governance effectiveness in HCMC. The city’s low-lying terrain and tropical climate exacerbate flood risks (Duy et al., 2018), while socioeconomic disparities influence adaptive capacity (Truong et al., 2022). Governance fragmentation further impacts policy implementation (Phi et al., 2015; Vitale and Meijerink, 2023). Using the IAD, the study further examines the institutional gaps, aligning with Roggero et al. (2018), who highlight the framework’s role to analyze climate adaptation measures and resilience-building strategies.

The action arena focuses on the interactions among various stakeholders involved in the policymaking or implementation process. Key actors would include government officials, district-level authorities, or urban planners responsible for developing and implementing flood mitigation and adaptation policies, international organizations (IOs) that promote advocacy campaigns and community-based resilience programs. Vietnam’s urban flood governance is mostly shaped by multi-level governance structures, where national policies, municipal authorities, and district-level initiatives interact (Phi et al., 2015). The IAD is useful for analyzing multi-tiered governance systems as it provides a structured methodology to assess how policy decisions at different levels align or conflict with each other (Vitale and Meijerink, 2023). Such application of IAD for flooding policies in Italy is relevant for HCMC, since the city also relies on national policies for flood management although there is variation across regions of both countries, i.e. exposure to oceans, rivers, and mountains. As a result, similar to Italian cities, urban flood resilience strategies in HCMC vary significantly across districts (rural versus urban), often leading to uneven policy outcomes (Duy et al., 2019).

The patterns of interactions in this study refer to coordination among key stakeholders, such as government agencies, municipal authorities, international organizations, and local communities, to implement flood mitigation and adaptation policies in HCMC. Vitale and Meijerink (2023) emphasize that fragmented governance can undermine resilience efforts, highlighting multi-level institutional coordination as a critical factor in policy effectiveness. Therefore, this study captures how institutional coordination and governance structures influence the implementation of flood resilience strategies in HCMC.

The evaluative criteria focus on institutional adaptability, policy effectiveness, and resilience outcomes. Institutional adaptability was assessed by how well governance structures integrate climate adaptation into urban planning. Policy effectiveness captures implementation success, stakeholder participation, and financial sustainability. The study assesses flood resilience outcomes by comparing flood-affected urban and suburban areas in HCMC. This comparison is vital because urban flooding policies are implemented under different governance structures (Dieperink et al., 2018; Kinyanjui, 2024), infrastructure conditions, and rates of urbanization.

Although fully urbanized regions are often expected to be equipped with well-developed flood control infrastructure, this is not always the case. Francisco et al. (2023) point out that some densely urbanized cities still experience flooding due to outdated or insufficient drainage systems, rendering them susceptible to severe weather events. Similarly, Moon et al. (2024) argue that rapid urban growth can outpace infrastructure development, creating deficiencies in flood mitigation measures even in established cities.

Nevertheless, suburban areas usually possess less effective drainage systems than urban areas, which can be attributed to lower investment in infrastructure or decentralized floodwater management. By examining both types, this study offers a comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness of these policies, highlighting weaknesses and differing impacts of flood resilience strategies across various urban environments. This approach ensures that policy recommendations address the needs of both highly urbanized and transitioning areas, improving overall flood management in HCMC.

Hence, as the IAD encompasses the political and economic context, the application of IAD enables an evaluation of how governance structures either facilitate or hinder the integration of climate resilience into HCMC’s flood management strategies. By highlighting institutional constraints, the framework offers context-specific and adaptive strategies for policymakers to improve urban flood resilience (Polski and Ostrom, 1999).

3.2. Data Collection and Selection

This study examines climate resilience strategies in HCMC through qualitative assessment of national policy documents, evaluations of flood management, and climate adaptation frameworks sourced from both national and local levels. The criteria for selecting relevant information included the relevance to flood mitigation and adaptation policies from 2000 to 2023 and their applicability to HCMC's urban and rural districts. Other than national policy documents, reports from government agencies (e.g., HCMC People’s Committee, MONRE), international organizations (UNDP, World Bank), and academic research were prioritized due to their credibility and relevance to climate resilience, in particular, flood mitigation and adaptation.

In addition, qualitative and quantitative data regarding socioeconomic vulnerability in flood-prone areas is analyzed to understand the socioeconomic dimensions of flood vulnerability and resilience. Quantitative data on rainfall intensity and frequency trends and urbanization and land use changes are also tracked to examine environmental conditions that contribute to urban flood resilience. The analysis was further guided by the IAD as proposed by Vitale and Meijerink (2023), which facilitated a comprehensive examination of the institutional arrangements and policy processes. The time frame for the analysis spans from 2000 to 2023 due to its significance in the context of HCMC’s urban development and flood management initiatives.

Table 1 below represents the initiatives analyzed in this paper. In such a period, eight national efforts have been introduced to reduce urban flood risks relevant to the context of HCMC (Table 1). The First Master Plan (2001), supported by the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), aimed to improve storm sewer systems and landfills. Although 40% of the flood control projects were completed after 15 years, significant improvements were observed, particularly in the city’s central areas (Phi et al., 2015). In 2008, the National Target Program to Respond to Climate Change was introduced, emphasizing climate-adaptive urban planning, flood-resilient residential areas, and disaster prevention measures (MONRE, 2008). This was followed by the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) (2012~2022), proposed by Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung. The NAPCC aimed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, strengthen climate monitoring and early warning systems, and implement urban flood mitigation through flood control projects, infrastructure improvements, and technical guidance (Nguyen, 2012). HCMC was identified as a key area requiring these initiatives.

Table 1.

Vietnam's key measures for urban flood mitigation and adaptation with relevance to HCMC

In 2023, the Mekong Urban Flood Resilience and Drainage Program was implemented as the second phase of Vietnam’s Flood Proofing Program, focusing on strengthening urban flood resilience in the Mekong Delta, including HCMC. Funded by the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) and executed by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), the program emphasized integrating flood risk analyzing, drainage planning, and disaster risk management to protect urban homes and livelihoods (GIZ, 2017). Around the same period, the HCMC Flood Risk Management Project was launched HCMC Steering Center of the Urban Flood Control Program (SCFC, 2015), following the 2014 Law of Environmental Protection. This project, aligned with World Bank regulations, sought to enhance drainage systems and flood resilience in critical urban areas, reinforcing Vietnam’s broader environmental protection and poverty reduction objectives.

Recognizing the increasing flood risks, the Vietnamese government introduced the National Strategy for Natural Disaster Prevention, Response, and Mitigation in 2020 and 2017. This strategy prioritized urban flood management for sustainable socioeconomic development and national security, promoting forecasting improvements, relocation of at-risk populations, and green infrastructure integration, such as water retention systems and urban green spaces (Vietnam Government, 2021). In 2019, the Law on Natural Disaster Prevention and Control was passed, outlining disaster prevention responsibilities for government agencies, organizations, and individuals. The Law mandated the periodic adaptation of natural disaster prevention strategies every ten years and required local disaster response plans to incorporate climate change risk assessments (Climate Change Laws of the World, 2019).

The most recent development in urban flood mitigation is the National Strategy on Natural Disaster Prevention, Response, and Mitigation to 2030 (NDPRM 2030) introduced in 2021. This long-term strategy sets ambitious targets, including reducing flood-related casualties by 50% compared to the 2011-2020 period covered by NDPRM 2020, enhancing forecasting and early warning capabilities, and strengthening community-based disaster preparedness. Additionally, NDPRM 2030 aims to ensure that all government agencies receive comprehensive disaster prevention training and that national and regional disaster prevention databases are fully developed. Raising awareness of flood risks and implementing proactive measures to reduce flood damage are also emphasized in NDPRM 2030 (Vietnam Government, 2021). This sequence of policies and initiatives demonstrates Vietnam’s evolving approach to urban flood resilience management in HCMC, integrating structural and non-structural measures, international cooperation, and long-term climate mitigation and adaptation strategies.

4.1. Exogenous Variables

Flood risks in HCMC are shaped by a combination of biophysical, socioeconomic, and institutional factors that influence governance responses and mitigation and adaptation measures. In terms of biophysical geography, HCMC’s low-lying geography, exposure to sea-level rise, and rapid urban expansion contribute to high exposure to urban flooding. GIS-based flood hazard mapping and municipal hydrology reports indicate that Districts 7, Nha Be, and Can Gio are among the most flood-prone areas, where urbanization has affected natural drainage patterns, exacerbating inundation risks (Duy et al., 2018).

Seasonal monsoon flooding has also worsened due to the inadequacy of existing drainage networks to handle increasing surface runoff, particularly in rapidly developing districts (Ho, 2007; Ho et al., 2014). Similarly, Scheiber, David, et al. (2023) note that low-elevation coastal zones face increased vulnerability to flooding due to overlapping pressures from urbanization, climate change, as well as the poor quality of infrastructure. In these areas, not only do environmental factors increase urban flood vulnerability, but human-induced factors such as groundwater extraction or land subsidence also exacerbate the situation.

Socioeconomic disparities further contribute to uneven flood resilience across districts. Tu et al. (2024) also reveal that low-income residents in peri-urban districts, such as Binh Chanh and Nha Be, face significant challenges in accessing government-supported flood mitigation projects. While wealthier districts, including Districts 1 and 3, benefit from major investments in underground drainage systems and tidal embankments, lower-income communities rely on self-financed adaptation measures, e.g. constructing informal flood barriers or relocating to higher ground (Ho, 2007; Ho et al., 2014; Tu et al., 2024). Additionally, women-led households and marginalized groups have limited access to financial aid or adaptation support (Tran and Downes, 2023). These findings suggest that the effectiveness of flood mitigation and adaptation policies is shaped by economic inequalities and social vulnerabilities.

At the institutional level, Vietnam’s flood risk management strategies have progressively evolved, integrating climate change considerations into national and local governance frameworks. The NDPRM 2020 initiated the enhancement of forecasting systems and upgrading flood control infrastructure, which includes the establishment of zoning maps or plans to assess flood risks (Vietnam Government, 2007). Moreover, national programs aimed to strengthen the capacity of flood forecast and warning in the Mekong River Delta, along with management of erosion-prone areas. The NDPRM 2020 also introduced a structural program to strengthen sea dike systems, aligning flood control efforts corresponding to the geographic and socioeconomic conditions of districts in HCMC. However, the strategy’s implementation faced challenges due to inconsistencies in time-bound indicators, where some initiatives, such as sea dike improvements, had fixed timeframes (2007~2015). In contrast, broader flood management efforts lacked a clear deadline (Vietnam Government, 2007).

Building on these efforts, the NDPRM 2030 introduced a more comprehensive and adaptive framework for climate resilience. In contrast to the NDPRM 2020, the NDPRM 2030 prioritizes non-structural measures, e.g. the development of a database to improve government coordination across national, regional, and local scales. Moreover, the strategy sets quantifiable resilience targets, such as reducing fatalities from flash floods by 50% compared to 2011~2020 levels and ensuring that all government agencies, organizations, and households receive training in natural disaster prevention. Furthermore, the strategy highlights the need for a more transparent and consistent policy framework to enhance climate resilience against urban flood risks (Vietnam Government, 2021).

Despite these advances, governance fragmentation and financial constraints remain key barriers to effective policy implementation in HCMC. Phi et al. (2015), for instance, reveal a misalignment between national flood risk policies and their execution at the province and district levels. For instance, findings indicate that multiple agencies‒including the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, the HCMC People’s Committee, and district authorities‒operate in silos, leading to coordination challenges and overlapping responsibilities.

Furthermore, budget constraints have also impeded large-scale flood resilience programs. The 2016 HCMC Flood Control Master Plan, which proposed extensive infrastructure projects, was halted in 2018 due to funding shortages, demonstrating the financial sustainability challenges of such initiatives. While international donors such as the World Bank and JICA have provided funding and technical expertise, Lempert et al. (2013) indicate that many of these externally funded projects struggle with long-term integration into local governance structures. These institutional challenges highlight the need for improved multi-level governance coordination, financial sustainability mechanisms, and localized resilience strategies to support HCMC’s climate resilience.

4.2. Action Arena

The governance of flood management in HCMC involves multiple actors, yet coordination gaps between national, province, and district authorities seem to remain a key barrier to effective flood resilience.

At the national level, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE) and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) lead flood management policies. This is evident through national initiatives—the National Strategy for Natural Disaster Prevention, Response, and Mitigation (2021) and the National Target Program to Respond to Climate Change (2008)—that demonstrate Vietnam’s commitment to climate mitigation and adaptation. These policy efforts aim to promote infrastructure improvements, early warning systems, and community engagement, yet the effectiveness varies across HCMC.

The key limitation is city-level data on implementation. For instance, while the HCMC Steering Center of the Urban Flood Control Program has initiated local projects to enhance drainage systems, reports indicate that only about 40% of its planned flood control projects were completed after 15 years of implementation due to funding and capacity constraints (Phi et al., 2015).

Furthermore, while HCMC’s district-level authorities and urban planners were responsible for implementing national guidelines into effective local action, disparities across districts create uneven impacts. For example, the newly urbanized districts‒Districts 2 and 7‒have suffered from frequent flooding, exacerbated by a lack of cohesive flood prevention infrastructure. District authorities in vulnerable regions further struggle with limited resources and data to adapt national policies, which results in inconsistent mitigation measures.

In the context of international cooperation, various development actors have a marked presence in HCMC flood management. World Bank, JICA, UN-Habitat, and GGGI were prominent contributors to Vietnam’s flood resilience efforts, primarily through financial support, advocacy, and capacity building. For instance, the Green Growth City Development Strategy, initiated by UN-Habitat and GGGI in 2012 and 2013, aims to incorporate green infrastructure and sustainable urban planning practices in flood-prone areas and provides valuable insights that could be applied to flood-prone areas in HCMC (GGGI and UN-Habitat, 2019).

Yet, the amount of involvement or effectiveness of such international cooperative agencies remains unclear due to limited available literature. Additionally, the World Bank’s RDM model, introduced in HCMC in 2013, further represents a city-specific approach to managing climate-related disaster risks, aiming to support local authorities in making flexible decisions under climate uncertainties Lempert et al. (2013), Nonetheless, assessing the effectiveness of such efforts in HCMC revealed challenges due to the lack of city-specific and timely data collection. As highlighted Lempert et al. (2013), the data gap in “reliable [and] high-resolution data” continues to act as a barrier to providing more localized climate adaptation solutions for the city. Such gap often leads international organizations to rely on national-level data, which disables formulation of specialized approaches in HCMC’s urban landscape.

Community-based adaptation efforts have contributed to HCMC’s flood resilience strategies, but their integration into formal governance structures remains inconsistent. Recent studies indicate that informal adaptation measures, such as household floodproofing, are more prevalent in peri-urban and rural districts where government intervention is limited (Nguyen et al., 2020; Tu et al., 2024). This trend is particularly evident in Districts 6 and Nha Be, areas with unequal access to government flood relief programs, resulting in the lack of long-term adaptation support (Pham, 2017; Truong et al., 2022).

Participatory planning initiatives have shown some success in urban districts but remain underdeveloped in peri-urban communities (Pham, 2017; Phi et al., 2015). Moreover, women-led social networks and local advocacy groups play a significant role in disaster response and risk communication for flooding. However, these efforts receive minimal institutional support for long-term resilience planning (Lempert et al., 2013; Tran and Downes, 2023). Hence, strengthening multi-stakeholder collaboration and formalizing community engagement in decision-making processes may also be necessary for improving flood resilience outcomes, similar to findings in Vitale and Meijerink (2023).

4.3. Outcomes