Social Prescribing and Healthy Ageing in Viet Nam: Where Could Community Connection Add Value?

Social Prescribing and Healthy Ageing in Viet Nam: Where Could Community Connection Add Value?

Healthy ageing is sometimes understood simply as reaching older age without disease. That is not how the World Health Organization defines it. WHO describes healthy ageing as developing and maintaining the functional ability that enables well-being in older age. Functional ability depends on a person's intrinsic physical and mental capacities, the environments in which they live, and the interaction between the two.[1]

This distinction matters for social prescribing. Medical care can diagnose and treat disease, but whether an older person is able to remain active, maintain relationships, participate in community life, continue learning, contribute to others and do the things they value also depends on what is available outside healthcare.

Social prescribing may have a role at this interface. By helping people identify what matters to them and connect with appropriate non-clinical resources, it could support some dimensions of healthy ageing that healthcare alone cannot provide. But the limits should be clear. Social prescribing is not a healthy ageing strategy by itself, and it cannot substitute for primary health care, rehabilitation, mental health care, integrated care, long-term care, social work, social assistance, accessible transport, age-friendly environments or adequate income security.

This question is becoming increasingly relevant for Viet Nam. UNFPA reported in February 2026 that within roughly a decade, more than one in five people in Viet Nam will be over 60. It also highlighted a gap between life expectancy, around 74.7 years, and healthy life expectancy, around 65.4 years, meaning that many people may spend a significant period of later life living with illness or functional limitations.[2]

The opportunity is therefore not simply to help people live longer. It is to help people retain health, ability, dignity, relationships, purpose and participation for as long as possible.

Key Points

• Healthy ageing is about maintaining the ability to do things that matter, not simply avoiding disease.

• Social prescribing could support some dimensions of healthy ageing by helping older people connect with meaningful physical, social, cultural, educational, practical or volunteering opportunities.

• Evidence in older adults is promising in areas such as social connection, psychosocial well-being and quality of life, but remains heterogeneous and is concentrated largely in high-income settings.

• Community connections should reflect the individual. Older people should not automatically be directed to activities simply because of their age.

• Social prescribing is not the same as WHO's Integrated Care for Older People approach, or ICOPE, and should not replace assessment, rehabilitation, clinical care or long-term care.

• Viet Nam already has substantial community infrastructure, particularly Intergenerational Self-Help Clubs. These resources should not simply be renamed as social prescribing.

• Viet Nam's current legal and policy direction already emphasizes healthy participation, dignity, community engagement and the contribution of older people. Social prescribing could complement this direction where a connecting function is genuinely useful.

• Early implementation should test whether community connections actually help people do what matters to them, rather than simply count referrals.

Healthy ageing is about ability, not simply the absence of disease

Ageing is highly diverse. Two people of the same chronological age may have very different physical capacities, cognitive abilities, social networks, financial circumstances, interests and aspirations. Chronological age alone tells us relatively little about what someone is able to do or what they want from later life.

WHO's healthy ageing framework reflects this diversity. Functional ability includes the health-related attributes that enable people to be and do what they have reason to value. It results from the interaction between intrinsic capacity, meaning a person's physical and mental capacities, and the physical and social environments around them.[1]

This makes community life directly relevant to healthy ageing. An older person may live with several well-managed chronic conditions and still remain mobile, socially connected, involved in family or community life and able to pursue activities that matter to them. Conversely, someone with relatively few diagnosed illnesses may experience declining well-being after losing mobility, relationships, meaningful roles or opportunities to participate.

The United Nations Decade of Healthy Ageing 2021–2030 identifies four interconnected areas of action: changing how we think, feel and act towards age and ageing; ensuring communities foster the abilities of older people; delivering person-centered integrated care and primary health services responsive to older people; and providing access to long-term care when needed.[3]

Social prescribing could potentially contribute most directly to the community dimension, while helping build connections between community life and person-centered health and social care. It should not be confused with the broader healthy ageing agenda itself.

Where could community connection add value?

Social participation and belonging are obvious areas where community connection may matter. Retirement, bereavement, family migration, caregiving changes, declining mobility or changes in health can alter social networks in later life. For some people, a carefully facilitated connection with a local group, volunteering opportunity, cultural activity or peer network may create relationships and roles that are meaningful.

The objective should not simply be to make older people “socialize more.” A person may already see family regularly but still lack a sense of purpose or contribution. Another may value one trusted relationship more than joining a large social group. A meaningful connection depends on the person, not simply on the number of people around them.

Physical activity is another area where community resources may add value. Walking groups, tai chi, gardening, dance or other forms of community activity can combine movement with participation and enjoyment. For some older people, combining movement with an enjoyable and socially supportive activity may make participation more meaningful and sustainable than approaching physical activity only as a medical instruction.

Learning and creativity also matter. Healthy ageing is not limited to physical function. Community classes, arts activities, reading groups, digital learning, music, crafts and intergenerational activities can support stimulation, identity, confidence and opportunities to continue developing skills.

Volunteering and contribution are equally important. Older people should not be viewed primarily as recipients of services. Many want to continue contributing knowledge, experience, time and care to their families and communities. A useful social prescribing conversation therefore moves beyond asking “What service does this older person need?” and also asks “What does this person want to do, contribute to or remain part of?”

This is consistent with WHO's healthy ageing framework, which includes the abilities to meet basic needs, learn, grow and make decisions, remain mobile, build and maintain relationships and contribute to society.[1]

Age should never become a shortcut for deciding what an individual needs. One person in their late sixties may want to return to paid work, while another wants to learn digital skills. Someone in their seventies may want vigorous exercise, while another person may need transport support before community participation becomes realistic. One older adult may want more social contact, while another already has a strong social network and is looking for intellectual stimulation or a meaningful role.

The pathway should therefore begin with what matters to the individual. Useful questions might include: What has become harder recently? What would you like to be able to do again? What gives you enjoyment or meaning? Is there something you want to learn or contribute to? What is currently preventing you from doing it?

The answers may point towards a community resource, but they may also reveal that something else is needed.

What does the evidence currently support?

There is now a substantial body of social prescribing research involving older adults, but quantity should not be mistaken for certainty.

A major evidence and gap map published in 2026 included hundreds of primary studies and reviews relating to social prescribing for older adults. Research was concentrated particularly around psychosocial interventions, lifestyle-related activities and arts-based approaches. Well-being and quality of life were commonly measured, while community-level outcomes, equity, unintended effects and implementation outcomes received far less attention. Many of the systematic reviews were judged to be of low methodological quality, and much of the evidence came from high-income countries.[5]

That matters for Viet Nam. Research conducted in health and social systems with different family structures, community organizations, transport, financing and formal care arrangements cannot simply be assumed to produce the same results here.

Some recent effectiveness findings are nevertheless encouraging. A 2026 meta-analysis included 26 randomized trials involving 3,892 community-dwelling adults aged 60 years and older. It reported improvements in quality of life and reductions in loneliness, with particularly favorable results for some arts-based interventions.[6]

However, the review used a relatively broad definition of social prescribing, including structured arts, physical and social activities. Its findings therefore tell us more about the potential value of certain structured community interventions than about the effectiveness of every social prescribing referral pathway. The activity itself, how the person reaches it, whether it fits their interests and abilities, the duration of participation and local context can all influence outcomes.

The wider social prescribing literature supports the same cautious interpretation. A 2026 global scoping review of 115 peer-reviewed empirical studies frequently reported improvements in areas such as confidence, purpose, participation and social connection, but also found substantial variation in intervention models, implementation and study quality.[7]

The appropriate conclusion is therefore not that social prescribing has been proven to produce healthy ageing. It is that there are plausible mechanisms and encouraging findings, particularly around meaningful participation and social connection, that justify careful testing and evaluation.

Social prescribing should complement ICOPE, healthcare and long-term care

An important distinction for healthy ageing is the relationship between social prescribing and WHO's Integrated Care for Older People, or ICOPE.

The second edition of WHO's ICOPE guidance, published in September 2025, provides a person-centered pathway for primary care and community settings. It includes assessment of intrinsic capacity across areas such as cognition, mobility, vitality, vision, hearing and psychological capacity; assessment of social support and care needs; development of a personalized care plan; and implementation and monitoring of that plan.[4]

Social prescribing is not another name for ICOPE.

ICOPE is an integrated care approach concerned with identifying declines in capacity and care needs and developing appropriate personalized responses. Social prescribing could potentially complement an ICOPE-informed pathway when a person's goals or care plan indicate that a meaningful community resource may add value. For example, someone whose mobility has been clinically assessed and appropriately managed may benefit from a suitable community activity, while someone experiencing social isolation may benefit from support to reconnect with an activity or group that matters to them.

The distinction is important because community connection cannot replace clinical assessment, rehabilitation or treatment. Someone experiencing declining mobility may need medical assessment, physiotherapy, assistive devices or environmental adaptations before participating safely in community activities. An older person experiencing cognitive decline may continue to benefit enormously from community participation, but that does not replace appropriate assessment and care.

The same principle applies to mental health. Social interaction and meaningful activities can support well-being, but an older person experiencing significant depression, anxiety or another mental health condition may also need professional assessment and treatment.

Social prescribing is also not long-term care. When someone experiences substantial loss of capacity and requires continuing assistance with activities of daily living, appropriate long-term care and support may be necessary. Community groups and volunteers can complement a care system, but they should not be expected to absorb responsibilities that belong to trained caregivers, health professionals or formal social services.

This distinction is particularly important for Viet Nam because family members continue to provide much of the day-to-day support for older people. UNFPA's work on the care economy estimates that the number of older people requiring assistance with activities of daily living could rise from around 4.7 million in 2025 to approximately 6.5 million by 2035.[12] This reinforces the need to strengthen formal, community-based and home-based care rather than assume that community participation can substitute for care.

Social prescribing may help someone remain connected to community life. It cannot replace the care infrastructure required when functional dependency becomes substantial.

Viet Nam already has community assets. Social prescribing should build on them

One of Viet Nam's strengths is that community-based support for older people does not have to be created from nothing.

The Intergenerational Self-Help Club model is an important example. These clubs bring older people and other community members together around mutual assistance, health-related activities, social participation, livelihoods, volunteering and peer support. UNFPA describes the model as an important part of community-based ageing support, with roles in strengthening social connection, intergenerational solidarity and mutual assistance.[2]

The Government reinforced this direction through Decision No. 1648/QD-TTg of 1 August 2025, approving the project to expand Intergenerational Self-Help Clubs through 2035.[11]

These clubs are clearly relevant to social prescribing, but they are not automatically social prescribing.

A community resource exists independently of the pathway used to reach it. If a health or social service identifies that an older person wants or may benefit from a particular type of community participation, explores what matters to them and facilitates an appropriate connection with an Intergenerational Self-Help Club, that facilitated connection could form part of a social prescribing pathway.

The club itself does not need to be renamed or reorganized around social prescribing. Its community identity, leadership and purpose should remain its own.

This principle matters well beyond Intergenerational Self-Help Clubs. Viet Nam already has older people's associations, cultural and religious communities, exercise groups, local learning activities, volunteer networks and many informal forms of mutual support. Social prescribing should add connectivity where useful rather than claim ownership of community infrastructure that already works.

Viet Nam's policy direction already supports participation and healthy ageing

Social prescribing should also be understood within Viet Nam's existing ageing policy rather than presented as a new policy agenda.

The current consolidated Law on Older Persons, issued as Consolidated Document No. 23/VBHN-VPQH on 26 February 2026, regulates the rights of older people and the responsibilities of families, the State and society in their care and in promoting their roles. The law contains provisions supporting older people's participation in cultural, educational, physical, sporting, recreational and other activities.[9]

At the strategic level, Decision No. 383/QD-TTg of 21 February 2025 approved the National Strategy for Older Persons to 2035, with a vision to 2045. The Strategy explicitly recognizes older people as an important social resource and emphasizes promoting their knowledge, experience and contribution in areas such as culture, society, education, employment and economic life in accordance with their needs, wishes and abilities.[8]

The health component has also continued to evolve. Decision No. 1116/QD-TTg of 22 June 2026 amended the national Older Persons Health Care Programme to 2030.[10] The Ministry of Health's population authority has described this direction as moving beyond physical healthcare alone towards more comprehensive attention to mental well-being, social life and the continued role of older people within families and communities.

Together with the national expansion of Intergenerational Self-Help Clubs, these policies already create an environment in which participation, community life and maintaining older people's roles are important.

Social prescribing should therefore not be presented as the missing national solution to healthy ageing. Viet Nam already has healthcare services, social assistance, family networks, older people's organizations, community clubs and emerging models of integrated and long-term care.

The more useful question is where older people currently fall between these systems and whether a more structured linking function would help them reach opportunities that already exist.

Ageing in place, equity and agency all matter

Many older people want to remain within familiar homes and communities for as long as possible. Community connection can support this by helping people maintain relationships, activities, confidence and access to local resources.

But ageing in place should not be romanticized. Remaining at home is beneficial only when the home and community environment are safe and appropriate and when necessary healthcare, long-term care, transport, housing, income and support are available. An older person with significant care needs should not be expected to manage at home simply because volunteers or community groups exist.

Equity is equally important because older people are not a single population. Experiences of ageing differ according to income, gender, disability, geography, family circumstances, ethnicity, education, employment history and many other factors accumulated over the life course.

UNFPA has highlighted particular vulnerabilities among older women, people with disabilities, rural populations, ethnic minority communities and people who spent much of their working lives in the informal economy.[2] These differences can directly affect whether social prescribing is realistic.

A person living in a large city may have multiple nearby options for exercise, cultural activities and social participation. Someone in a remote area may have only a small number of formal opportunities. A participation fee that seems modest to one person may be impossible for someone without stable income. Digital registration may exclude people who are uncomfortable with technology, while physical accessibility, hearing loss, vision loss or limited transport can determine whether an apparently suitable activity is actually usable.

A directory containing many community resources therefore says little by itself about equity. The more meaningful question is whether an appropriate, affordable and accessible option exists for the individual concerned.

The 2026 evidence and gap map reinforces this concern. Although the majority of included studies involved populations experiencing some form of health inequity, relatively few examined whether effects differed across population groups.[5] Evidence from lower-resource settings also remained limited.

Equity should therefore be part of pathway design from the beginning, not an evaluation question added only after a program has expanded.

Agency matters just as much. Older people should not simply be recipients of referrals decided by professionals. A pathway designed only within healthcare may assume that older people want health education, disease-management activities or exercise, while older people themselves may identify priorities such as transport, companionship, lifelong learning, volunteering, cultural or spiritual activities, income-related support, caregiving assistance, technology or somewhere they feel useful and welcome.

Older people should therefore be involved as co-designers, community leaders, volunteers and sources of knowledge, not simply as service users.

Healthy ageing should expand agency, not create another system in which professionals decide what older people ought to do.

What could an early Vietnamese model test?

At this stage, there is no evidence-based reason to turn social prescribing into a national healthy ageing program in Viet Nam. The evidence specific to Viet Nam is too limited, and local community resources vary too much between settings.

A more useful next step would be carefully designed local learning.

An early model could test whether a structured linking process helps older adults reach community opportunities that matter to them. These might include physical activity, social participation, arts and cultural activities, volunteering, lifelong learning, practical support, caregiver support or an existing Intergenerational Self-Help Club.

The pathway should start with the person's goals rather than a predetermined menu of “activities for older people.” It should also distinguish people who may benefit from a community connection from those whose immediate needs belong in healthcare, rehabilitation, mental health care, social work, social assistance or long-term care.

Evaluation should go well beyond counting referrals. Did the person actually make contact? Could they reach and afford the activity? Did they continue participating? Did the opportunity reflect what mattered to them? Did they feel welcome, respected and able to contribute? Were there changes in social connection, physical activity, confidence, quality of life or functional ability? Did the community organization have capacity to receive additional participants?

Evaluation should also ask whether some people were systematically less able to participate and whether referral demand placed unintended pressure on community organizations. International research has often paid less attention to equity, community-level effects and unintended consequences, so these questions are particularly valuable in a Vietnamese pilot.[5]

Not every older person needs social prescribing. Some already have strong social networks, meaningful activities and adequate support. Others need treatment, rehabilitation, social assistance or long-term care instead.

A mature pathway should therefore know both when a community connection might add value and when something else is needed.

Key Takeaway

Healthy ageing is not simply about preventing disease or extending life expectancy. It is about helping people maintain the ability to live lives they have reason to value.

That makes community connection relevant, but it does not make social prescribing a complete healthy ageing strategy.

Social prescribing could potentially help some older people remain active, socially connected, engaged in meaningful roles and better able to access community opportunities. Recent evidence provides encouraging findings around psychosocial well-being, quality of life and some forms of structured community activity, but the evidence remains heterogeneous and much of it comes from health and social systems different from Viet Nam.

Viet Nam already has a strong foundation on which to build. The Law on Older Persons, the National Strategy for Older Persons, the national Older Persons Health Care Programme, Intergenerational Self-Help Clubs, older people's organizations, family networks and emerging community-based and long-term care models all form part of a much larger healthy ageing ecosystem.

Social prescribing should not replace these systems or rename them. Its potential value is more specific: helping someone identify, reach and meaningfully engage with the right non-clinical community resource when that connection could support something they value.

It should also remain distinct from WHO ICOPE, medical care, rehabilitation and long-term care. These approaches can complement one another, but they solve different problems.

The most useful question for Viet Nam is therefore not “Can social prescribing deliver healthy ageing?” A better question is:

“Where could a better connection between older people, health and social services, and community life help people continue doing the things that matter to them?”

That is a more modest role for social prescribing, but it may also be where it adds the greatest value.

References

1. World Health Organization. Healthy ageing. Geneva: World Health Organization. Accessed 25 September 2026.

2. United Nations Population Fund Viet Nam. Population Ageing in Viet Nam: From Demographic Transition to Development Opportunity. 10 February 2026.

3. World Health Organization. UN Decade of Healthy Ageing 2021–2030. Geneva: World Health Organization.

4. World Health Organization. Integrated care for older people (ICOPE): guidance for person-centred assessment and pathways in primary care. 2nd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2025. ISBN 978-92-4-010372-6.

5. Tanjong Ghogomu E, Welch V, Yaqubi M, et al. Effects of Social Prescribing for Older Adults: An Evidence and Gap Map. Campbell Systematic Reviews. 2026;22(2):18911803261435893. doi:10.1177/18911803261435893.

6. Wang Y, Xu Y, Gao L, Bai X. Impact of social prescribing on quality of life and loneliness in geriatric populations: a comprehensive meta-analysis of RCTs with implications for nursing practice. Geriatric Nursing. 2026;71:104098.

7. Kisa A, Kisa S. Models, implementation, and reported outcomes of social prescribing interventions: a scoping review. Frontiers in Public Health. 2026;14:1871347. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1871347.

8. Prime Minister of Viet Nam. Decision No. 383/QD-TTg approving the National Strategy for Older Persons to 2035, with a vision to 2045. 21 February 2025.

9. Office of the National Assembly of Viet Nam. Consolidated Document No. 23/VBHN-VPQH: Law on Older Persons. 26 February 2026.

10. Prime Minister of Viet Nam. Decision No. 1116/QD-TTg amending and supplementing Decision No. 1579/QD-TTg approving the Older Persons Health Care Programme to 2030. 22 June 2026.

11. Prime Minister of Viet Nam. Decision No. 1648/QD-TTg approving the project to expand Intergenerational Self-Help Clubs through 2035. 1 August 2025.

12. United Nations Population Fund Viet Nam. Applying Foresight to Curate a Care Economy for Older Persons in Viet Nam. Hanoi: UNFPA Viet Nam; 2025.

Article Information

Published: 25 September 2026
Last reviewed: 25 September 2026
Publisher: Social Prescribing Vietnam

Disclaimer

This article is provided for educational and informational purposes. It does not constitute medical advice, clinical guidance, legal advice or official policy. Healthy ageing is a broad and multidimensional concept, and social prescribing represents only one possible approach to connecting individuals with non-clinical community resources. Evidence on social prescribing for older adults continues to evolve, and evidence specific to Viet Nam remains limited. Social prescribing should not be used as a substitute for medical assessment and treatment, WHO ICOPE or other integrated-care pathways, rehabilitation, mental health care, social work, social assistance, long-term care or other professional services when these are required. Organizations developing social prescribing pathways should determine the applicable Vietnamese legal, professional, accessibility, safety and personal data protection requirements for their specific activities.