“Development of industrial parks and a new livelihood strategy for the people in Vietnam”

This study is designed to analyze the influence of industrial park (IP) development on the lives of people living around the IPs in Vietnam and on new livelihood strategies for people after the industrial park was built and developed. Data were collected from a survey of 409 people living around industrial parks in three regions of Vietnam (Northern, Central, and South Vietnam). The findings show that the livelihood resources, such as financial resources, physical resources, social resources, and natural resources, have a positive relationship with people’s livelihoods after industrial park construction and development; though, the degree of influence of these resources is different. Whereas human resources have a positive effect (through the item – additional jobs created by the industrial park) and a negative effect on income (through the object – the unemployed labor by the industrial park built and developed). The findings also show that most households surveyed responded that their lives had changed for the better (about 41.36% compared to nearly 28.91% of households surveyed who said their income had decreased).


INTRODUCTION
The development of industrial parks has become an inevitable trend in countries, including developing ones such as Vietnam. The development of industrial parks has contributed to creating a technical infrastructure, thereby contributing to attracting investment capital from domestic and international investors. From there, contribute to the economic development of countries, as well as solve problems of employment and social difficulties for host countries.
The development of industrial parks brings benefits to the country by creating more jobs for local people, promoting economic development of localities where the IPs are located, etc. Since then, it contributes to stabilizing people's lives and socio-economic development.
However, besides those benefits, the development of IPs will also cause some difficulties, which are as follows: Firstly, when IPs are built, it is necessary to acquire a part of the agricultural land and residential land of the people. At that time, people will receive compensation money from the acquisition of that land. But if the compensation is not used reasonably, it will lead to unemployment due to the loss of capital goods in the future, people's life will become more difficult. Secondly, the IPs built will attract a great workforce from diverse places to work in projects and enterprises.
From that, there will arise social problems in the locality where the IP is built if not managed well. New requirements for health, education, and infrastructure will also be higher at the local level.
In Vietnam, by the end of October 2020, there are 369 IPs established, the total natural land area is about 113.3 thousand ha, industrial land for lease is about 73.6 thousand ha. Among them, 280 IPs are in operation with industrial land for a lease of about 56.6 thousand hectares. Investors rented about 39.8 thousand hectares of industrial land (occupancy rate of industrial land is about 70.1%). IPs in operation have attracted about 9,845 domestic projects with a total investment of about VND 2.34 million, while projects with foreign investment capital -about 10,055 projects with a registered capital of about USD 198 billion.
However, besides these achievements, the construction of IPs also caused disadvantages to the lives of people whose land is acquired as follows: According to the statistics of the Ministry of Labor, War Invalids and Social Affairs, on average 1 hectare of agricultural land creates jobs for 13 to 15 workers, and each household whose land is acquired to build an IP will have 1.5 unemployed. Thus, taking the land to develop IPs in Vietnam causes high unemployment in the countryside. Since then, the social problems that arise are relatively large.
The effects of IP development on people's lives in Vietnam are relatively large, with residents affected (both positive and negative) from IPs; Residents living around industrial parks will need new livelihood strategies to cope with the changes caused by the IPs development. Livelihood strategies related to new jobs, changing new resources to generate income for their own families, etc. For the positive effects of IP development on the people, new livelihood strategies are needed to bring into these positive impacts, and these new livelihood strategies could be new jobs, using new means of labor to generate additional income for people. For the negative influences, people need to have plans to adapt to the new conditions to ensure their own and their families' lives.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Studies of the influence of IP construction on socio-economic development of countries mentioned by the authors, the data used in these studies have a relatively large homogeneity, the data used through the direct survey of subjects directly affected by the development of IPs. Typical for these studies are those by Milan et al. (2013); the authors used data collected through surveying enterprises operating in IPs of the Czech Republic. The objective of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of IPs as an effective tool to support the socio-economic situation of the Czech Republic. Meanwhile, Susur   These studies focus on those who lose agricultural land to build IPs, the impact of this target group, so there are appropriate recommendations suggesting new de-signs of fertility strategies for them. However, according to the research team's point of view, the construction of IPs affects not only the groups of people whose land is acquired, but also the people living around the IPs. Besides, the effects include both direct and indirect effects, positive and negative effects. Therefore, having inherited the above research, the research team should develop and implement this research on a wider scale.
Moreover, some authors focused on the factors affecting the livelihoods of households due to the effects of industrialization and urbanization (Le, 2007;Benayas et al., 2007;Bryceson, 1996;Jansen et al., 2006, etc.). The data was collected from the survey of household lives affected by industrialization and urbanization of the selected site. These studies have compared the income of households between two times before and after being affected by this process. Some factors identified by the research team that affect the livelihoods of households include education level, number of employees per household, gender, the land area acquired due to industrialization, urbanization, socialization, participation in social organizations, etc. Also focusing on research on the effects of industrialization on people's livelihoods, Nguyen et al. (2018), Ramcharran (2017), and Nguyen and Nguyen (2020) concentrate more on defining livelihood strategies for households whose land is acquired. Additionally, these studies assess the important role of households' education level and land acreage in people's new livelihood strategies when affected by industrialization. Based on those research findings, recommendations are given to build people new plans to stabilize their lives. Specifically, Saumik and Sarma (2013) analyzed the positive and negative effects of IP development on people's livelihoods; there is a negative impact, the author pointed out, because withe the development of the industrial zone, the transportation system is better, but the local people's income decreases. The reason is that people in that area, in the past, had a livelihood strategy of agriculture and fisheries; when the IP was built, they lost their labor materials, leading to a decrease in income. Tran (2013) and Nguyen and Bui (2011) analyzed factors affecting people's income, including education level, labor size, support policies, etc. However, Tran (2013) research subjects are households whose land is acquired in urban areas in Vietnam, while the research subjects of Nguyen and Bui (2011) are households of the Mekong Delta region. Both of these studies used data from direct surveys of people in the study area.
The above studies focus on analyzing the effects of industrialization and urbanization on people's livelihoods in different approaches. However, the common points of the above studies aim to examine the direct influences of urbanization and industrialization, develop IPs for households whose land is acquired, and grow a new livelihood strategy for these subjects. The research framework used is quite unanimous when using the DFID research framework (1999). However, in the view of the authors, the development of IPs affects two groups of people whose land is acquired, as well as people who do not have land acquired but live around IPs. IP development brings numerous benefits besides the negative impacts on people's lives.
Residents living around industrial parks will need new livelihood strategies to cope with the changes caused by the IPs development. Livelihood strategies related to new jobs, changing new resources to generate income for their own families, etc. For the positive effects of IP development on the people, new livelihood strategies are needed to bring into these positive impacts, and these new livelihood strategies could be new jobs, using new means of labor to generate additional income for people. For the negative influences, people need to have plans to adapt to the new conditions to ensure their own and their families' lives.

Data collection methods
To have data for analysis and research, a survey sample of households living around and affected by IPs was developed. The authors' survey questionnaire was based on the survey sample of Household living standards of the General Statistics Office (GSO, 2006). In this survey form, the team was divided into three parts: Part 1 is the information of the survey object, Part 2 is the content on impacts of IP development on people's livelihoods (divided by livelihood resource groups), and Part 3 is the new livelihood strategies of the people.
For the survey, three provinces were surveyed, representing three regions of Vietnam, namely: • The Bac Ninh province is a representative province in the North of Vietnam; • Da Nang City is a locality that represents the central region of Vietnam; and • The Binh Duong province is the locality representing the southern region of Vietnam.
All three of these provinces are among the leading IPs in Vietnam. Therefore, when studying the effects of IP development on people's livelihoods, it will also correctly reflect a general impact of IP development on people in Vietnam.
About the survey scale: According to Nguyen (2014), the minimum number of observations for statistical calculations is 100. The author discovers questionnaires in three regions of Vietnam; each region will issue 200 survey forms; the total number of questionnaires is 600. After issuing the questionnaires, a direct survey of the surveyed subjects was conducted; the results collected 483 survey forms.
With 483 surveys collected, the authors entered data and discarded unsatisfactory surveys, 409 questionnaires were satisfying the survey information requirement retained to perform statistical calculations. Time of survey: From January 2020 to June 2020.

Data analysis method
To analyze the level of influence of IP development on people's livelihoods, the OLS regression model is used; below are the variables.

Independent variables
The independent variables were selected based on an overview of previous studies and based on the framework of the analysis of sustainable livelihoods of DFID (1999) with groups of livelihood resources, namely: • For human resources of households, the scales selected include: Age of the household head (Age), the number of additional jobs after the IP is built and developed (Emp); and the number of unemployed workers due to construction and development of IPs (Unemp). Each of these scales (items) has the direction and degree of influence on household income; in particular, the following is expected: Age of the household head (Age) is positively related to the household income; however, these heads of households are in the working-age group,  (2011), the whole household's cost of living (cost) will increase as the household's income increases. Therefore, the relationship between these two variables is predicted to be in the same direction.
According to Nguyen and Bui (2011) (2014), physical resources are taken into account when affecting people's livelihoods, including the transportation system (Infr), electrical system (Elec), and water system (Wat). These factors will have a positive impact on people's income if provided well, will support daily activities, as well as production and business of households. However, according to Saumik and Sarma (2013), when the transport system is better, the household income will decrease, because it directly affects the livelihood strategy of the households living in river areas, where the survey was carried out.
• Natural resources: According to Nguyen

RESULTS
It is necessary to examine and check the suitability of the model with existing data, as the results show that the Adjusted R Square coefficient = 0.837, coefficient Sig = 0.000, and F = 175.946; the test shows that a study using a regression model is appropriate.  Thus, it can be seen that a huge part of people has new jobs after the IP is built and developed, accounting for about 78.97% of the total number of survey observations in the studied area. The number of new jobs created mainly from self-employment accounts for about 33.25%. Selfemployment is the job of people around the IP, it provides specific ancillary services such as housing construction and accommodation management for workers working in the IP to rent, provides services such as dining, motels, entertainment, etc. Another part with enough professional qualifications and skills is recruited to work in enterprises, production, and business establish-ments of IPs. A part of people cannot adapt to new conditions, leading to unemployment, which greatly affects families' lives.
Concerning financial resources, the selected scales have the same relationship with the household's income, but the degree of influence is different. Specifically, the standardized coefficient of investment is 0.43, while the standardized coefficient of the additional variable is 0.263, which are two variables representing the new livelihood strategy of the people being applied. Every year, people reinvest to generate more income.  The results of the survey showed that using compensation money by households is calculated on average and as a percentage (%) of the amount of compensation received (this calculation only applies to families whose capital goods are revoked); households use the money according to various purposes.
Households that use their compensation money to invest in new production and business account for 36.82% of total income from compensation. This investment, if profitable, will lead to a better life, and vice versa. The second-largest amount of money that people use is savings in credit institutions; they think that depositing money in credit institutions will be safe, and they will have savings to spend due to deposit interest each year. A large portion of these funds are used for daily expenses and to build and repair homes.
In conclusion, when used appropriately, the finance will help change people's lives in a more positive direction.
Social resources: The findings show that participation in social organizations, outreach to social organizations, and supportive policies of the government, as well as local ones, will contribute to supporting people's lives more actively  The creation and development of an IP has a positive effect on household income thanks to new livelihood strategies. About 41.36% of the total surveyed households answered that their profits increased compared to the pre-industrial park period. However, nearly 28.91% of households said that their earnings decreased, and the decrease was caused by using compensation for the wrong purpose, or their family was unemployed. Roughly 29.73% of surveyed households stated that their family income had not changed.
The research results are the basis for proposing recommendations that help improve the lives of families who are able to adapt to changes in external conditions.

DISCUSSION
The goal of IP development is to promote the socio-economic development of nations, localities, the fact that the development of IPs in Vietnam has achieved probable results. One of the particular expressions is the livelihood change, which changes the lives of people living around the area where IPs are built and developed.
In addition to the positive impacts that industrial parks have brought to people's lives after construction and development, there are also adverse effects. Minimizing the dark side and promoting the bright side, creating new livelihood strategies are essential and thereby further improving people's lives.
There should be policies to support people in their livelihood transformation such as policies on job creation, social security policies, etc. In particular, the issue of creating jobs for workers after losing productive land is extremely important. With the workers still old enough to be recruited to work in enterprises, there should be preferential policies in career transition training and recruitment priority; they can get into the business. With out-of-date employees, it is necessary to have an orientation to help them choose production and business plans, use the compensation money reasonably and effectively. All these policies must be implemented prior to land acquisition so that workers can change careers immediately after land acquisition and households can sustainably change their livelihoods.
There is a policy for people to contribute capital with land use rights. With this solution, when households have their land acquired, they immediately get compensation money to contribute capital to invest in factories built on their land. So, they become shareholders of the business and enjoy benefits such as ease of admission to work at the enterprise with a stable salary and other preferential regimes such as body insurance, health insurance; receiving profit from investing capital in a business. Besides, enterprises also benefit in the clearance, shorten construction time, quickly put enterprises into operation, avoid project stalling due to failure to reach agreement on clearance with people who lose land; additional capital mobilization channel for enterprises.
Households that need to use compensation money appropriately should invest in business or invest in career change training, actively research the market, or learn from other households' experiences to change livelihood strategies from agricultural production to handicraft production and services.
The fact is that they feel that IP construction has had a positive impact on their lives; in particular, it is easier for them to get jobs, and their income is higher after they have IPs. Achieving this de-pends on the policies of the authorities at all levels, the development policies of enterprises, and the initiative and creativity of each household. If the local government has clear socio-economic and land-use planning orientations and plans, enterprises have the support and preferential policies for local workers and families that are proactive in converting their livelihoods; the impact of IPs on household economic development in particular and the socio-economic development is generally very positive.

CONCLUSION
The study aimed to analyze the effect of IP development on the lives of people living around industrial parks in Vietnam. New livelihood strategies are proposed for people living around industrial parks, especially those unemployed due to land acquisition for IPs development in Vietnam. The research results made it possible to achieve the set research objectives, namely: The results of the study have shown that the development of IPs has a positive impact on the lives of people (About 41.36% of the surveyed people answered that their income increased after having an industrial park). The IP was formed and developed, and this contributed to creating new jobs for people, including direct employment in industrial parks and indirect jobs; these jobs have contributed to changing livelihood strategies for people, opening up new lives for them.
Besides, the development of IPs has also brought benefits such as improved infrastructure, life quality of people changing in a positive direction, thereby giving them opportunities to learn and open up new knowledge, the social communication from different cultures would be the easiest. Research results show that natural resources, social resources, and physical resources have a positive effect on people's lives.
However, in addition to the positive results of the development of IPs, it also causes adverse effects when part of the population does not have a suitable new livelihood strategy and cannot adapt to a new life after losing means of production. These are also shortcomings in the development of industrial parks in Vietnam.
The negative aspects have not been deeply analyzed, and new livelihood strategies formulated for groups of people who are negatively affected by the development of industrial parks are the limitations of this study. This will also be the next research for authors in the future when focusing on exploiting the adverse effects of industrial park development on people's livelihoods, and a new livelihood strategy is proposed specifically for this target group.