For many years, the story of sidewalks in major cities has been almost repeated in a familiar cycle. When the encroachment situation becomes serious, functional forces "launch troops" to handle it massively.
After each "campaign", the sidewalks are clear for a while, and then everything returns to normal.
Everything is back to square one, not because localities are not decisive in handling and how to do it. But clearly, the management method mainly based on manual inspection and campaign handling has revealed many limitations.
To change this situation, Ho Chi Minh City has begun to build a relatively complete digital management system. There, registration dossiers, licensing, location management, expiration dates, and sidewalk usage fees are all uploaded to software and displayed on digital maps.
This is a different approach from most localities today, where sidewalk management is still mainly assigned to each district and ward to handle according to the actual situation.
Even in large cities like Hanoi or Da Nang, sidewalk management in the past time has still favored direct inspection, handling violations or organizing peak periods to restore urban order. Some places do it well on some central streets, but overall, there is still a lack of a common data system for continuous and transparent monitoring.
Another notable point of Ho Chi Minh City compared to other localities is that although opening licensing software, the city still maintains a fairly clear view that business and trading activities are not eligible for temporary sidewalk use licensing according to current regulations.
In other words, Ho Chi Minh City maintains the principle that sidewalks must first serve traffic and public space.
This is easy to say, but not easy to do. Because in reality, for a long time, in many places, sidewalks have almost become a default livelihood space for a part of urban residents.
If it is tightened too much without appropriate alternative solutions, the risk of re-encroachment is very high. But conversely, if it is relaxed or licenses are issued rampantly, pedestrians will continue to be the first to suffer.
Of course, the software for managing, licensing and collecting fees for temporary use of roads and sidewalks is not a "magic wand".
If the data is not synchronized, if the locality still handles inconsistently, or if the situation of misuse after licensing is not controlled, then applying technology is also difficult to solve the root of the problem.
More importantly, the sidewalk problem is actually deeply related to livelihoods, planning and the quality of urban infrastructure.
When many areas lack parking lots, lack legitimate small business spaces, and lack a true pedestrian street, the pressure on sidewalks will be very large and obvious.
However, Ho Chi Minh City's approach still needs to be encouraged and supported.
Because if this model operates effectively, it is very likely that the story of sidewalk management in Vietnamese cities will enter a different phase, more transparent, stable and less dependent on short-term campaigns that are time-sensitive.
