Social Prescribing and University Students in Viet Nam: Could Campus-to-Community Navigation Support Belonging Without Replacing Counseling and Student Services?
VIET NAM CONTEXTIMPLEMENTATION & PRACTICE
Social Prescribing and University Students in Viet Nam: Could Campus-to-Community Navigation Support Belonging Without Replacing Counseling and Student Services?
A first-year university student moves to a new city and settles into a busy academic routine. She attends lectures, completes assignments and regularly talks with classmates. Yet most of her interactions revolve around coursework. Outside university, she has not found an activity or community where she feels particularly connected.
One day, she tells a student adviser that she enjoys photography and would like to meet people who share that interest. The adviser knows of a local photography group that welcomes new members and offers to explain how she can contact it.
This could be a useful connection. But does it become social prescribing simply because the introduction takes place at a university?
Not necessarily. Universities already provide student clubs, counseling, academic guidance, career services and opportunities for social participation. Helping someone discover a community activity can be valuable without turning that assistance into a new healthcare-related service.
A more useful question is whether some students would benefit from a structured, voluntary form of navigation that helps them connect with suitable opportunities beyond campus, particularly when existing information and student support arrangements do not fully meet their needs.
For Viet Nam, the idea deserves careful consideration. Universities are important places for learning, developing relationships and gaining independence. However, students also belong to families, neighborhoods, workplaces and communities outside their institutions.
A campus-to-community approach could recognize these wider connections. Its value would depend on whether it provides meaningful additional support while respecting the responsibilities of university counseling, student affairs, healthcare professionals and community organizations.
Being Enrolled Is Not the Same as Feeling Connected
University life creates opportunities to meet people, explore interests and develop a sense of belonging. However, being enrolled does not guarantee that every student feels connected to the institution or the surrounding community.
A student may perform well academically and have supportive classmates but feel little interest in the university's extracurricular activities. Another may enjoy campus life while finding it difficult to establish relationships beyond the university.
Someone who commutes from home may have different opportunities from a student living in university accommodation. Students who combine study with employment or family responsibilities may have less time for organized activities.
These differences matter because social participation cannot be understood simply by counting club memberships or attendance at campus events.
In higher education research, belonging generally concerns a person's sense of acceptance, connection and identification with an educational environment. However, feeling that one belongs at university and feeling connected to the wider community are related but distinct experiences.
A student may feel strongly connected to an academic department while having few relationships outside campus. Another may enjoy an active community life beyond university without feeling particularly attached to the institution.
Neither experience automatically indicates a problem requiring intervention.
A systematic review by Priestley and colleagues, published in Studies in Higher Education in March 2026, examined 485 studies using quantitative measures of belonging in higher education.[1]
The researchers identified 198 different measurement instruments, 76% of which had been used in only one study. They found considerable variation in how belonging was defined and measured, with important limitations in the evidence supporting the validity and reliability of many instruments. No measure fully met all the psychometric standards examined.
These findings are relevant to universities interested in understanding students' experiences. Before claiming that a program improves belonging, institutions need to clarify what kind of connection they are trying to measure, whether it concerns university life or the wider community, and whether their chosen instruments are appropriate.
For social prescribing, the starting point should not be an assumption that students lack belonging. It should be an understanding of whether an individual wants to develop particular relationships, interests or forms of community participation, and whether appropriate assistance would help them do so.
What Would Campus-to-Community Navigation Actually Involve?
The World Health Organization's 2022 social prescribing toolkit describes an approach that connects people with appropriate non-clinical community services to support health and well-being.[2]
In many international models, this involves a person-centered conversation about what matters to the individual, followed by assistance identifying and accessing suitable community resources.
Universities provide a different setting from conventional healthcare services. Students may already receive information about sports clubs, cultural activities, volunteering opportunities and other programs through orientation sessions, institutional websites, student associations and academic advisers.
These existing activities should not automatically be relabeled as social prescribing.
A university publishing a directory of clubs is providing useful information. A student association organizing a cultural event is creating an opportunity for participation. An academic adviser telling someone about a nearby photography group may simply be offering practical guidance.
All of these activities can contribute to student life without necessarily forming part of a social prescribing pathway.
A more structured campus-to-community approach would need a clearly defined purpose connected to health, well-being or relevant social needs.
It might begin when a student voluntarily expresses an interest in developing social connections, exploring meaningful activities or becoming more involved in the surrounding community.
Rather than immediately recommending a program, the person providing navigation could ask what the student enjoys, what they hope to gain from participation and what practical circumstances might influence their decision.
The conversation might explore whether the student prefers small or large groups, structured or informal activities, and opportunities that require regular attendance or allow occasional participation.
Where an appropriate community organization is available, the navigator could explain what it offers and how to make contact. Some students may prefer to approach the organization independently, while others may appreciate an introduction.
A structured social prescribing pathway would also need suitable role definitions, information-sharing arrangements, professional boundaries and follow-up where appropriate. These features help distinguish it from ordinary activity promotion, although the precise model would depend on the setting.
The student should remain free to decide whether the proposed connection is useful. Participation should not require disclosure of a medical diagnosis, counseling history or personal difficulties when those details are unnecessary.
The aim would be to support an informed and meaningful connection, not to create another compulsory student development program.
The Wider Community May Offer Something Different
Universities can provide valuable social opportunities, but they are not the only places where students develop relationships and a sense of identity.
A student interested in photography may enjoy a local group involving people of different ages and occupations. Someone learning a language may prefer an informal conversation group outside university. Another student may want to volunteer with an established community organization or participate in cultural activities unrelated to their academic discipline.
These experiences can offer opportunities to engage with people beyond a familiar peer group. They may also allow students to participate primarily as community members rather than as students.
That distinction can be meaningful.
University activities sometimes involve academic competition, leadership responsibilities, career development or expectations about student achievement. An activity outside campus may offer a different environment where people participate mainly because of a shared interest.
However, community organizations should not automatically be considered more welcoming or beneficial than university programs.
Some groups may have membership requirements, limited places or participation fees. Others may meet at inconvenient times or lack suitable accessibility arrangements.
A student may also prefer familiar campus activities rather than joining an external organization.
The purpose of navigation should be to help individuals understand genuine opportunities and make their own decisions, without suggesting that activities outside university are inherently better.
What Does the International Evidence Tell Us?
Research specifically examining social prescribing for university students remains limited. Several studies released or published in 2026 offer useful insights, but they address different questions and have important methodological limitations.
A scoping review by Muhl and colleagues, released as a preprint in April 2026, identified 18 studies involving students and social prescribing.[3]
Most examined students learning about social prescribing or participating in activities such as social-needs screening, community referrals and service delivery.
Within the studies included in the review, none examined students exclusively as recipients of social prescribing interventions.
The authors found that available evidence was concentrated on short-term educational and implementation outcomes, with limited information about longer-term effects.
The review's literature search ended in June 2025. It therefore cannot be treated as a complete account of initiatives published afterward. The manuscript was also a preprint rather than a peer-reviewed journal article at the time of this review.
Another preprint, released in July 2026 by Bone, Fancourt and Hayes, surveyed 775 university students in the United Kingdom about their awareness and perceptions of social prescribing.[4]
Only 25% reported previous awareness of the concept. After receiving an explanation, 95% believed universities should offer social prescribing, while 89% indicated that they would accept it if recommended by a healthcare professional.
These findings suggest that many respondents viewed the proposed approach positively once they understood it.
However, the study assessed perceptions rather than the effects of an actual intervention. Participants were recruited through convenience-based methods, including social media and university-related networks. The sample was also concentrated in particular institutions, which may have influenced the findings.
The results do not establish how many students would participate in practice, whether participation would improve belonging or whether similar attitudes would be found among Vietnamese students.
Positive perceptions can inform planning, but they are not evidence of effectiveness.
There is also emerging research from university-based initiatives.
A study by Makanjuola, Wallace and Lynch, published online in October 2025 and included in the 2026 volume of Wellbeing, Space and Society, evaluated a nature-based social prescribing pathway at Wrexham University in Wales.[5]
The initiative connected students with green spaces associated with the university. The evaluation used a Social Return on Investment approach to estimate the social value associated with participation.
The authors reported positive estimated social value. However, these estimates depend on the valuation methodology and assumptions used. They should not be interpreted as proof that the pathway caused improvements in health or that similar returns would occur elsewhere.
The Wrexham initiative also focused on nature-based opportunities associated with campus facilities. It was not an evaluation of a broader navigation model connecting students with independent community organizations.
These studies provide reasons to explore university-related social prescribing, but their findings should not be combined into a stronger claim than the evidence supports.
They do not establish that campus-to-community navigation reliably improves belonging, academic achievement, mental health, student retention or healthcare outcomes.
For Viet Nam, there is not yet sufficient direct evidence to recommend a particular university-based social prescribing model as an established intervention.
A more appropriate next step is to examine student preferences, local community resources, institutional responsibilities and the feasibility of carefully designed partnerships.
Viet Nam Already Has a Framework for Student Support
Any proposal involving university students needs to be considered alongside the responsibilities already assigned to educational institutions.
Viet Nam's Law on Higher Education No. 125/2025/QH15 took effect on January 1, 2026, with certain specified provisions taking effect on July 1, 2026.[6]
The law provides the legislative framework for higher education, including institutional organization, governance and relevant responsibilities.
More directly related to student support, Ministry of Education and Training Circular No. 18/2025/TT-BGDĐT took effect on October 31, 2025.[7]
The Circular provides guidance on school counseling and social-work activities across specified educational settings, including higher education institutions.
Its provisions address support relating to learning, psychological difficulties, social relationships, life skills, career development and other concerns affecting learners.
Article 4 establishes principles involving the protection of learners' lawful rights and safety, confidentiality, voluntary participation, self-determination, non-discrimination and learner-centered support.
These principles are relevant to any proposed social prescribing pathway.
Article 27 also assigns organizational responsibilities to educational institutions. For higher education institutions, this includes establishing a team or department responsible for school counseling and social-work activities and designating personnel to coordinate the relevant work.
The same Article addresses additional responsibilities relating to personnel, facilities, planning, resources and coordination with relevant organizations.
This is an important distinction. Student counseling and support are not unregulated activities that universities may simply replace with a new internationally named service.
The education system already provides a framework for these responsibilities.
Ministry of Education and Training Circular No. 40/2026/TT-BGDĐT, effective June 30, 2026, further regulates student affairs.[8]
Article 10 addresses student counseling and support, including learning, physical and mental health, social relationships, career development and access to relevant resources and services.
The Circular also addresses extracurricular activities and aspects of student development and management.
Its scope must be interpreted carefully. It applies to specified educational institutions and students in covered programs, including undergraduate education, but excludes certain groups, such as foreign students studying in Viet Nam and Vietnamese students studying abroad. It should not automatically be extended to all postgraduate or other student categories.
These exclusions concern the application of this particular Circular, not the entirety of Vietnamese educational law or every institutional responsibility toward those students.
Neither Circular establishes social prescribing as a separate mandatory university service.
They do, however, provide an existing framework for considering whether cooperation with community organizations could complement student support.
The central question is whether a proposed campus-to-community pathway offers something useful beyond what the university already provides.
Creating another program would have little value if it merely duplicated activities that could be delivered more simply through existing student services.
Counseling and Student Affairs Must Retain Their Responsibilities
A student may approach a university adviser with a concern that initially appears to involve social participation but actually requires a different type of support.
Someone experiencing academic difficulties may need guidance from their department or academic adviser. A student concerned about tuition, scholarships or accommodation may require assistance through the appropriate institutional office.
Another may need professional counseling, social-work support or medical assessment.
These situations should not automatically become social prescribing referrals.
A university's responsibilities for student affairs, counseling and other institutional services cannot be transferred to an external community organization simply because participation in a group might also be enjoyable.
For example, a student facing an unresolved academic grievance may benefit from social connections, but joining a community activity does not resolve the grievance.
Similarly, someone experiencing financial hardship may enjoy a cultural activity while still requiring appropriate financial guidance or access to relevant institutional support.
Community participation can complement these services, but it cannot replace them.
Vietnamese research reinforces the importance of maintaining suitable professional support.
A study published in February 2026 in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health examined psychological and mental health support needs among 701 respondents from economics-oriented universities across three regions of Viet Nam.[9]
The researchers identified concerns related to academic pressure, financial uncertainty, career development and personal circumstances, alongside demand for accessible, confidential and professional psychological support.
The study used a mixed-methods cross-sectional design and a non-probability sample. Its findings should therefore not be generalized to all Vietnamese university students.
Nevertheless, the research provides relevant evidence that appropriate psychological support remains an important part of the university environment.
Social prescribing should not be used to divert students away from counseling or other professional services.
A student receiving counseling may also enjoy participating in a community group. Another student may want help finding activities without needing counseling at all.
These options are not mutually exclusive, but they serve different purposes.
A community organization should not be expected to provide psychological treatment, assess clinical risk or monitor a student's mental health condition unless it is separately qualified, authorized and appropriately organized to provide such services.
A navigator should likewise avoid diagnosing symptoms or deciding that community participation is an adequate substitute for professional care.
Where someone presents with severe psychological distress, immediate safety concerns or another condition requiring urgent assistance, appropriate healthcare or emergency services must lead.
The university's established procedures and the responsibilities of competent professionals should guide the response.
A community connection may be considered alongside necessary professional support, but it should not delay assessment or treatment.
Students Need Different Opportunities, Not a Single Model
University students are not a uniform population.
A first-year student living away from home may have different interests from someone who commutes to campus every day. A student working part-time may have little availability during evenings or weekends. Someone caring for a family member may prefer occasional activities rather than programs requiring regular attendance.
Students with disabilities may need accessible venues, adapted activities or other appropriate arrangements for participation.
Some people prefer small groups, while others enjoy large social events. Certain students may find online participation convenient, whereas others want opportunities that involve direct interaction away from screens.
Mature learners and postgraduate students may already have established community relationships and little interest in typical undergraduate activities.
International students may have additional communication or administrative considerations depending on their circumstances, although they should not automatically be assumed to lack social support.
These differences matter because participation should fit people's lives rather than become another expectation placed on them.
A person-centered approach would allow students to explain what they want from an activity.
One student may hope to meet people who share an interest. Another may want to become more familiar with the neighborhood, develop a creative skill or volunteer for a cause they care about.
Someone else may already have enough social opportunities and simply want accurate information.
Accessibility, affordability, transportation, safety and scheduling should also be considered when relevant.
A community group that meets far from campus may not be practical for someone who travels a long distance to attend university. A free activity may still involve transport costs or require equipment that the student cannot easily afford.
A suitable opportunity should reflect these circumstances rather than assume that willingness alone is enough.
Importantly, students should remain free not to participate.
A person who prefers time alone, established friendships or family activities should not automatically be treated as someone who needs greater social engagement.
Social prescribing is intended to respond to individual priorities, not prescribe a preferred way of living.
Participation Must Remain Voluntary
The relationship between a university and its students creates an important concern about power and influence.
Students may feel obliged to participate in activities recommended by academic staff, particularly when those staff members also have responsibilities for assessment, supervision, scholarships or student conduct.
A social prescribing initiative should not use that authority to encourage participation.
Students need to understand that individualized community navigation is optional and that declining a suggested activity will not lead to inappropriate academic or administrative consequences.
They should also be able to stop participating without having to explain personal reasons to an academic supervisor.
This requires careful separation from ordinary curricular or extracurricular requirements.
Universities may have legitimate educational activities and student development arrangements governed by applicable rules. Those arrangements should not be confused with an individualized social prescribing recommendation made in response to a student's personal interests or well-being.
A voluntary community connection should not become a condition for academic progression or an informal measure of whether someone is cooperating with a support plan.
Neither should students feel compelled to disclose psychological concerns, family circumstances or other private information merely to take part in a community activity.
This distinction is particularly important where participation is introduced through counseling or student support services.
The student's ability to make an informed choice should remain central to the process.
Community Organizations Need to Be Genuine Partners
Universities may have substantial administrative capacity, professional staff and established facilities. A local community organization may operate with limited funding, small teams or volunteers.
A partnership should recognize those differences.
Consider a community arts organization that welcomes students to its regular activities. It may be pleased to receive occasional inquiries from interested individuals.
However, a formal university navigation pathway could create additional expectations.
The organization might be asked to confirm attendance, provide feedback about participants or accommodate students who need support beyond its usual capacity.
These responsibilities should not arise simply because a university begins recommending the activity.
Before establishing a structured pathway, the university and participating organizations should agree on its purpose and the responsibilities each party is willing and able to accept.
The university should retain responsibility for its own counseling, student affairs and other institutional functions.
Community organizations should remain responsible for delivering their activities within their actual competence, capacity and any applicable authorization.
A navigator or designated coordinator should have a clearly defined role in facilitating appropriate connections.
The arrangements should also address what happens when an activity is full, a participant needs additional assistance or a concern arises that falls outside the community organization's responsibilities.
Community organizations should not become unpaid extensions of university counseling or student affairs departments.
Their existing members and activities deserve consideration as well.
An established community program may serve people of different ages and backgrounds. Receiving students through a university partnership should not undermine its original purpose or unnecessarily displace other participants.
A responsible partnership should provide value to both the students and the community organizations involved.
Privacy Must Be Protected Beyond Campus
A campus-to-community pathway may involve information moving between people and organizations with different responsibilities.
This creates privacy risks that should be considered before any structured service begins.
Imagine a student telling an adviser that they would like to meet people who enjoy photography.
The adviser might simply provide publicly available information about a suitable group. In that situation, there may be no reason for the university to collect additional personal information or tell the organization that the student sought assistance.
If the student requests a direct introduction, sharing a preferred contact method may be appropriate where the necessary lawful conditions are met.
The community organization would not ordinarily need academic records, counseling notes, medical histories or details of the student's personal difficulties.
Viet Nam's Law on Personal Data Protection No. 91/2025/QH15 and Government Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP have been effective since January 1, 2026.[10,11]
Organizations involved in a structured navigation pathway need to determine the applicable legal basis and conditions for collecting, using, storing and sharing personal data, including relevant consent, notification and security requirements.
Health information and other sensitive personal data require particular protection.
A partnership agreement between a university and a community organization does not, by itself, authorize unrestricted access to student records.
Information sharing should be based on a clear and lawful purpose, with appropriate limits on what each party receives.
Similarly, a community activity organizer should not routinely report personal attendance information or details of participation to academic departments unless there is an appropriate and lawful reason to do so.
A student may voluntarily tell an adviser that an activity was enjoyable or helpful. That is different from establishing a system that routinely monitors individuals outside campus.
Special care is needed when information originates from counseling or other confidential support relationships.
Protecting privacy is not simply an administrative matter. It helps ensure that students can explore community opportunities without feeling that their personal lives are being monitored by the university.
Who Should Provide Navigation?
Not every university needs a dedicated social prescribing link worker.
Student affairs staff may already be able to provide information about external activities. A counseling professional may learn that a student is interested in community participation while continuing to work within their own professional responsibilities.
Student organizations may also establish ordinary relationships with suitable local groups.
These activities do not necessarily require a new professional position.
However, a more structured and individualized navigation pathway may involve additional work.
Someone may need to discuss the student's priorities, identify appropriate resources, check participation requirements, coordinate introductions and recognize situations requiring professional assistance.
The person performing these functions should have a clearly defined scope, appropriate knowledge, supervision and access to relevant escalation arrangements.
Vietnamese professional requirements must also be considered.
Government Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP establishes a framework for professional social work.[12]
The Decree has been effective since October 15, 2024. Under its transitional provisions, the requirement for social-work practitioners to hold a social-work practice registration certificate in accordance with the Decree applies from January 1, 2027.
Ministry of Health Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT, effective August 25, 2026, provides further provisions concerning social-work practice and professional knowledge updating.[13]
Not every introduction to a community activity constitutes regulated professional social work.
Nevertheless, the title care navigator or social prescribing coordinator does not exempt someone from applicable professional requirements if the activities they perform fall within a regulated scope.
Medical examination and treatment activities remain governed by the Law on Medical Examination and Treatment No. 15/2023/QH15 and relevant implementing legislation.[14]
A university considering a structured navigation pathway should therefore define the actual functions before deciding which personnel should perform them.
In some settings, improving coordination among existing student support staff may be more practical than creating a dedicated new position.
The important issue is whether students receive appropriate assistance from people who understand their responsibilities and professional limits.
What Could a Responsible Pilot in Viet Nam Look Like?
A limited pilot could help determine whether campus-to-community navigation provides useful support beyond existing university activities.
The starting point should be conversations with students and the people already responsible for student support.
Students could be asked which activities they currently enjoy, how they learn about opportunities outside campus and whether they experience difficulties finding suitable community resources.
They could also be asked whether a brief conversation or assisted introduction would be useful.
The discussion should not assume that limited extracurricular participation indicates loneliness, poor mental health or a lack of belonging.
Some students may already have strong personal networks. Others may prefer to spend their free time with family, established friends or independent interests.
A pilot should investigate genuine demand rather than create demand for a predetermined service.
If a need is identified, a university could explore cooperation with a small number of established community organizations willing to provide accurate information about their activities.
The initial pathway might focus on students who voluntarily express interest in exploring suitable opportunities beyond university.
A designated staff member could help clarify the student's goals, explain available options and facilitate initial contact where requested.
This would be different from introducing a comprehensive social-needs screening program for every student.
Before implementation, the university and participating organizations would need to establish appropriate arrangements concerning responsibility, communication, confidentiality, safeguarding, accessibility, costs and information sharing.
The pathway should also identify where students can obtain professional counseling, healthcare or formal institutional assistance when necessary.
Any research component should be designed with appropriate institutional authorization, ethical review where required and lawful data-processing arrangements.
Students should have meaningful opportunities to contribute to the pilot's design, particularly when deciding how information should be communicated and what forms of support feel comfortable.
A manageable starting scope would allow the university and its partners to learn whether the proposed approach adds value before considering wider implementation.
How Should Belonging and Participation Be Evaluated?
A campus-to-community pilot should not be evaluated only through the number of students contacted or activities attended.
These figures may describe service activity, but they do not establish whether a connection was useful or meaningful.
Evaluation should first consider whether students understood their options, found the proposed opportunities relevant and felt able to make their own decisions.
It would also be useful to understand whether the navigation experience was supportive, neutral or unnecessarily intrusive.
Students who decline an activity should not automatically be classified as unsuccessful referrals.
Someone may decide that the available opportunities do not match their interests or current circumstances. That may be an appropriate outcome of informed choice.
Where belonging is examined, the concept should be defined carefully.
Is the evaluation concerned with feeling accepted at university, developing relationships outside campus or feeling connected to the surrounding community?
These experiences may overlap, but they are not identical.
As the 2026 systematic review by Priestley and colleagues demonstrates, the available measurement instruments vary substantially in their content and psychometric properties.[1]
A pilot should therefore avoid assuming that any short belonging questionnaire provides a complete or reliable measure of a student's experience.
Measurement tools should be selected according to the evaluation's purpose, the population involved and the available evidence supporting their use.
If an established instrument is adapted for Vietnamese students, its relevance and measurement properties should be examined rather than assumed.
The experiences of participating community organizations and university staff are also important.
An activity may be appreciated by students but create substantial coordination demands for the organization providing it.
Evaluation should consider staff time, administrative costs, accessibility, confidentiality, safeguarding concerns and the sustainability of community partnerships.
It should also examine who did not participate and why.
Some students may not know that support exists. Others may find the activities unsuitable, unaffordable or difficult to access.
These findings can help identify problems in communication, service design or local community capacity.
A modest pilot may demonstrate feasibility, acceptability or improvements in particular navigation processes.
It would not automatically establish better mental health outcomes, academic performance, retention, graduation rates or cost-effectiveness.
Stronger claims would require suitable study designs, appropriate measures and comparison data.
The most important question is whether navigation offers useful support beyond what students can already obtain, for whom and under which conditions.
Meaningful Connections Do Not Have to Begin or End at University
Higher education contributes to learning, independence, relationships and personal development. However, students' lives extend beyond the institutions in which they study.
They also belong to families, neighborhoods, workplaces and communities. Some of their most meaningful relationships may develop through shared interests that have little connection with academic life.
This creates a possible opportunity for campus-to-community navigation.
For students who want assistance, a person-centered approach could make suitable community activities easier to discover and access. It could help them explore interests beyond their academic programs and develop relationships that are not defined entirely by university life.
But the value of such an approach would depend on the student's preferences, the quality of available opportunities and the capacity of participating organizations.
It should not duplicate ordinary extracurricular services, replace professional counseling, weaken institutional responsibilities or make community participation another measure of student performance.
For Viet Nam, the appropriate direction is to learn from international experience while working within the country's existing educational, professional and legal framework.
Any proposed model should begin with what students actually want, respect their choices and distinguish community participation from needs requiring formal educational, psychological, medical or social-work support.
A useful outcome may not be an increase in the number of students referred to external programs.
It may be that someone who wants to explore life beyond campus can find an appropriate opportunity, understand what participation involves and decide whether it is right for them.
Belonging cannot be guaranteed through a referral. But making meaningful community opportunities easier to discover, without unnecessary pressure or barriers, may be a worthwhile contribution to community-connected care.
References
Priestley, M. J., Naela, H., Upsher, R., Slack, H. R., Foster, J., Chen, J., Wang, X., & Byrom, N. C. (2026). How to measure belonging in higher education: A systematic review. Studies in Higher Education. Published online March 17, 2026. DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2026.2643785.
World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific. (2022). A Toolkit on How to Implement Social Prescribing. WHO. ISBN: 9789290619765.
Muhl, C., Hussein, T., Pu, H., Farah, B., Wadge, S., Ponton, S., & Hayes, D. (2026). Social prescribing and students: A scoping review. OSF Preprints. Published April 10, 2026. Preprint; not peer-reviewed at the time reviewed. DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/6f25b_v1.
Bone, J. K., Fancourt, D., & Hayes, D. (2026). Awareness and perceptions of social prescribing among university students in the UK. medRxiv. Published July 9, 2026. Preprint; not peer-reviewed at the time reviewed. DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.07.26357397.
Makanjuola, A., Wallace, C., & Lynch, M. (2026). Enhancing student wellbeing through nature-based social prescribing: A social return on investment evaluation. Wellbeing, Space and Society, 10, 100310. Published online October 27, 2025; included in the 2026 volume. DOI: 10.1016/j.wss.2025.100310.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2025). Law No. 125/2025/QH15 on Higher Education. Effective January 1, 2026, except specified provisions effective July 1, 2026.
Ministry of Education and Training of Viet Nam. (2025). Circular No. 18/2025/TT-BGDĐT Providing Guidance on School Counseling and Social-Work Activities in Educational Institutions. Effective October 31, 2025.
Ministry of Education and Training of Viet Nam. (2026). Circular No. 40/2026/TT-BGDĐT on Student Affairs. Effective June 30, 2026.
Luu, N. B., Nguyễn, H. T., Nguyen, N. B., Dang, S. H., & Nguyen, H. Q. (2026). Psychological and mental health support for Vietnamese university students in economics majors: Approaches and needs assessment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 23(2), 232. Published February 11, 2026. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph23020232.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2025). Law No. 91/2025/QH15 on Personal Data Protection. Effective January 1, 2026.
Government of Viet Nam. (2025). Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP Detailing Certain Articles and Measures for Implementation of the Law on Personal Data Protection. Effective January 1, 2026.
Government of Viet Nam. (2024). Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP on Social Work. Effective October 15, 2024, with the specified professional registration requirement applicable from January 1, 2027.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. (2026). Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT on Social-Work Practice and Professional Knowledge Updating. Effective August 25, 2026.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2023). Law No. 15/2023/QH15 on Medical Examination and Treatment, as amended where applicable. Effective January 1, 2024.
Article Information
Primary Category: Viet Nam Context
Secondary Category: Implementation & Practice
Evidence and regulatory context reviewed: November 1, 2026
Publisher: Social Prescribing Vietnam (SPVN)
Disclaimer
This article is provided for educational, research and general informational purposes only. It does not constitute individualized medical, mental health, psychological counseling, professional social-work, academic, student affairs, regulatory or legal advice.
The examples of campus-to-community navigation are illustrative. They do not indicate that any particular university or community organization in Viet Nam currently provides a formal social prescribing pathway, has agreed to participate in such a program or has authorized the activities described.
Social prescribing and community care navigation may complement existing university support arrangements and community opportunities where appropriate. They do not replace school counseling, academic advising, student affairs, professional social work, clinical assessment, mental health treatment, disability-related services, statutory educational responsibilities or emergency care.
The Vietnamese legal instruments discussed have different scopes of application and effective dates. Organizations considering university-related initiatives should assess which provisions apply to their institution, student population, proposed activities and personnel, including any relevant exclusions, professional requirements or transitional arrangements.
International research and pilot experiences are presented for comparative learning. They do not establish that campus-to-community social prescribing has been implemented or proven effective in Viet Nam, or that the models described will improve student belonging, academic outcomes, mental health or healthcare utilization.
Organizations considering structured navigation arrangements should independently assess the applicable Vietnamese legal, professional and organizational requirements, including institutional authorization, voluntary participation, confidentiality, personal data protection, safeguarding, professional scope of practice, community partner responsibilities, financing, research ethics where applicable and accountability before implementation.
Social Prescribing Vietnam (SPVN) is a Viet Nam-based education, research, development, implementation-support and collaboration platform supporting responsible, evidence-informed social prescribing and community-connected care. Publication of this article does not indicate that SPVN operates university counseling or student affairs services, directly provides individual care navigation, clinical services, professional social-work services or referrals, or has established formal partnerships with any institutions or organizations mentioned.
References to universities, government agencies, international organizations, research publications and community initiatives are provided for educational and comparative purposes. They do not imply endorsement, accreditation, authorization, formal affiliation or an established service partnership.