Social Prescribing Beyond Major Cities in Viet Nam: What Would It Take to Work in Rural, Remote and Resource-Constrained Communities?

Social Prescribing Beyond Major Cities in Viet Nam: What Would It Take to Work in Rural, Remote and Resource-Constrained Communities?

Category: Implementation & Practice

An older adult living in a rural commune has become increasingly isolated after a period of illness. During a visit to the local health station, a healthcare professional learns that the person would like to spend more time with others. A suitable community activity is available, but it takes place some distance away, transportation is limited, and the individual depends on a family member to get there. The activity may be appropriate, but attending it regularly is another matter.

In a major city, the same person might have several activities or support services within a relatively short distance. In a rural or remote community, those opportunities may be fewer, farther apart or organized differently. There may also be strong informal networks that healthcare providers do not immediately recognize or that are absent from conventional service directories.

This raises an important question for social prescribing in Viet Nam: what would it take to make community-connected support genuinely accessible and useful outside major cities, rather than simply extending an urban referral model to communities with very different circumstances?

Social prescribing aims to connect people with appropriate non-clinical support based on their needs, interests and circumstances. While its underlying principles can apply across different settings, implementation depends on where people live, how they travel, which local organizations and relationships are available, and whether support can continue over time.

For Viet Nam, the challenge is not merely to introduce social prescribing in rural areas. It is to understand how geography, local institutions, community relationships and resource constraints influence what a responsible social-prescribing pathway can realistically deliver.

Place matters more than we often recognize

Recent research has drawn greater attention to the role of place in social prescribing. A 2025 state-of-the-art literature review by McSwiggan and colleagues examined 97 social-prescribing literature reviews and found that none engaged comprehensively with the concept of place. Thirty-one reviews addressed it partially.

This highlights an important gap. Although social prescribing depends on local community resources, research has often concentrated on individuals, interventions and referral processes rather than on the characteristics of the places where those connections occur.

Two communities may have similar health needs but very different opportunities to respond. One may have accessible gathering places, established organizations and convenient transportation. Another may have strong personal relationships but limited formal services, difficult travel conditions or few people with the time and resources to coordinate support.

Place also influences how people experience participation. An activity may feel familiar and welcoming in one setting but uncomfortable or culturally inappropriate in another. Local history, language, relationships, expectations and opportunities can all influence whether someone wants to participate.

For social prescribing, a community resource is not genuinely accessible simply because it exists within an administrative boundary. It must also be reachable, appropriate, acceptable and sufficiently reliable for the person who may use it.

What does the international evidence tell us?

Research specifically examining social prescribing in rural and remote settings remains relatively limited. A 2025 mapping review by Saddiq and colleagues explored evidence relevant to rural Australia and identified recurring challenges involving funding, service availability, transportation, workforce preparation and coordination with community organizations. The review also considered face-to-face, online and hybrid delivery approaches, emphasizing the importance of adapting models to rural circumstances.

A broader scoping review published by Kisa and Kisa in July 2026 identified 115 peer-reviewed empirical studies of social-prescribing interventions across 16 countries, including one cross-national study. Approximately 64% originated from the United Kingdom. Reported benefits were more consistent for psychosocial outcomes, including well-being and social connectedness, while clinical and healthcare-system outcomes were more variable. Implementation barriers included unstable funding, workforce pressures, limited community-sector capacity and socioeconomic disadvantage.

A study published in the 2026 volume of the Journal of Integrated Care offers a more specific rural example. McGarity-Shipley and colleagues examined a 10-month social-prescribing pilot in rural Ottawa, Canada, where a link worker from a community resource center was embedded within a family health organization. The initiative explored how healthcare and community-service providers could collaborate to support people with mental-health and social needs. Although some findings were encouraging, the subset of participants providing repeated well-being and loneliness measurements at the first and third visits included only three people. The study illustrates a possible collaboration model, but it cannot establish effectiveness that can be generalized to other rural settings.

Evidence from the Western Pacific Region provides additional context. A scoping review published in The Lancet Regional Health – Western Pacific in 2026 identified 55 sources, including 42 peer-reviewed studies and 13 grey-literature sources. The review found substantial variation in how social prescribing and related community-based interventions were organized and delivered. Only one of the 42 peer-reviewed studies came from Viet Nam, although the literature search ended in November 2024. This finding should not be interpreted as a complete account of subsequent Vietnamese research or community-connected care activities.

These studies provide useful lessons, but their findings cannot simply be transferred to Viet Nam. Rural Australia and Canada offer relevant insights into distance, workforce arrangements and service availability, but their health systems, financing arrangements and community infrastructure differ from those in Vietnamese rural communities.

There is also an important distinction between evidence that a community activity may benefit participants and evidence that a complete social-prescribing pathway can operate safely, sustainably and effectively.

International research therefore offers useful approaches and implementation questions. It does not establish that any particular model has already been proven effective in rural Viet Nam.

Viet Nam has extensive local infrastructure, but infrastructure is not the same as service readiness

Viet Nam has a substantial network of grassroots healthcare facilities and community institutions. The official results of the 2025 Rural and Agricultural Census, released in April 2026, provide useful information about this infrastructure.

As of 1 July 2025, following the reorganization of commune-level administrative units, the National Statistics Office reported that 99.92% of communes covered by the rural census statistics had a health station. The corresponding figures were 93.47% for commune cultural houses, 92.63% for sports grounds and 56.55% for commune libraries.

These figures demonstrate the widespread presence of important facilities, but they do not establish that suitable social-prescribing services are available. A cultural house may operate regularly or only occasionally. A sports ground may be accessible to some residents but unsuitable for others. A library may have limited opening hours or activities. A health station may provide essential healthcare services without having sufficient staff or resources to coordinate individualized community referrals.

Infrastructure statistics also reveal little about the distance between people's homes and these facilities, the availability of affordable transportation, the quality of activities or whether someone with a disability can participate.

This distinction has become particularly relevant following Viet Nam's 2025 administrative reorganization and transition to a two-tier local government structure. Larger commune-level administrative areas may include villages and hamlets with very different travel conditions, community relationships and access to services.

A facility located near the commune center should not automatically be considered equally accessible to every resident. Administrative boundaries may have changed, but the practical distance between someone's home and the support they need remains.

The World Health Organization's December 2025 report, Primary Health Care in Viet Nam: A Review of the Commune Health System, provides additional context. Developed in collaboration with the Ministry of Health, the report examines the strengths, challenges and opportunities of the commune health system, particularly in service delivery, financing and governance.

Together, these sources suggest a realistic starting point: Viet Nam has existing institutions that may support community-connected care, but their suitability for social prescribing needs to be assessed locally rather than assumed from their presence.

Primary healthcare reforms create opportunities, not an automatic social-prescribing system

The Ministry of Health's Circular No. 43/2025/TT-BYT, effective from 1 January 2026 and amended by Circular No. 53/2025/TT-BYT, provides guidance on the functions, responsibilities, authority and organizational structure of commune, ward and special-zone health stations.

The framework addresses a broad range of functions, including preventive care, medical examination and treatment, community health promotion, care for older people and people with disabilities, and relevant social-protection activities within the applicable legal scope.

Notably, the amended framework allows commune-level authorities to determine certain organizational arrangements and the number of health service points according to population size, geographical area and local circumstances, subject to applicable legal requirements. This recognition of geographical and population differences is relevant when considering how services might reach communities dispersed across larger areas.

These provisions may create opportunities to explore better connections between healthcare and community support. A commune health station could potentially become one place where relevant social needs are recognized and people are directed toward appropriate assistance, depending on its actual capacity, staffing, responsibilities and local arrangements.

However, these Circulars do not establish a national social-prescribing program or automatically assign a dedicated social-prescribing navigator to every health station. They should not be interpreted as evidence that existing healthcare workers have sufficient time, training or resources to undertake additional navigation responsibilities.

Social prescribing must also remain distinct from regulated professional healthcare and social-work services. Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP on Social Work and Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT, effective from 25 August 2026, are relevant where proposed activities fall within professional social-work practice. Under Decree 110, the applicable social-work practice registration certificate becomes mandatory from 1 January 2027 for practitioners covered by its provisions.

A community navigation function should therefore be designed around the actual work performed, the competencies required and the applicable professional requirements, rather than simply introduced through a new job title.

The opportunity created by healthcare reform is to explore how existing services can cooperate more effectively. It is not to assume that social prescribing can be added to the workload of local professionals without appropriate organizational support.

Distance changes what an accessible referral means

Distance is often the first barrier associated with rural social prescribing, but its effects are more complicated than the number of kilometers between a person's home and a service.

The real burden may involve travel time, road conditions, transportation costs, weather, physical limitations and dependence on another person. Someone who can travel independently by motorbike has different options from an older adult who no longer drives or a person who requires wheelchair-accessible transportation.

A community activity that takes place once a week may be difficult to attend if the journey is expensive or requires an accompanying family member who works during the day. In mountainous areas, seasonal weather and road conditions may affect accessibility. In riverine, coastal or island communities, travel may depend on boats, ferry schedules or other local arrangements.

These barriers can affect participation even when the activity itself is free.

A referral pathway that records only whether a service exists may therefore give a misleading impression of accessibility. A more useful assessment considers the complete journey: how someone would get there, how much it would cost, how long it would take and whether they could repeat the journey regularly.

For rural Viet Nam, this may mean exploring activities closer to people's homes, using accessible local gathering places or coordinating opportunities around existing community events rather than expecting everyone to travel to a central facility.

In some settings, the geographical area served by a navigation pathway may need to be defined according to actual transportation and service-use patterns rather than administrative boundaries alone.

Access should be assessed from the participant's perspective, not simply from the provider's address.

Rural communities have strengths that urban models may overlook

It would be a mistake to describe rural communities only in terms of what they lack. Some have longstanding relationships, informal support networks, familiar gathering places and traditions of collective activity that may offer meaningful opportunities for connection.

Depending on the locality, these may include older people's associations, women's organizations, cultural activities, sports groups, volunteer initiatives, cooperatives and other lawful community-based arrangements. Some residents may already participate in activities that support social connection without those activities being described as social prescribing.

These relationships can be valuable because familiarity and trust may make participation easier. An unfamiliar program introduced from outside the community may be less attractive than an existing activity supported by people residents already know.

However, informal support should not be romanticized. Close community relationships can provide practical help and a sense of belonging, but they do not automatically guarantee confidentiality, inclusion or consistent support. People experiencing family conflict, stigma, disability or other sensitive circumstances may find it difficult to discuss their needs within a closely connected community.

Someone may appreciate living among familiar neighbors while still feeling socially isolated. Another person may prefer to seek assistance outside their immediate community because they do not want others to know about their circumstances.

Local organizations should not automatically be described as social-prescribing services simply because they offer community activities. Their role in a referral or navigation pathway needs to be appropriate, clearly understood and consistent with the individual's preferences.

The objective is not to relabel every existing community activity. It is to understand which local relationships and resources could genuinely help people whose needs extend beyond clinical care.

Trust, language and cultural fit can shape participation

In rural and remote communities, people may be more comfortable discussing practical difficulties with someone they know than with an unfamiliar professional or service provider. This familiarity can support communication and participation, particularly when language, literacy or confidence creates barriers.

But familiarity does not automatically establish professional competence or authority. Someone who is respected locally may be well placed to explain a community activity or help arrange transportation, without being qualified to assess depression, manage complex safeguarding concerns or make clinical decisions.

Confidentiality may require particular attention in smaller communities, where relationships overlap and personal information can circulate informally. Someone should not have to disclose sensitive health or family circumstances to several local representatives simply to participate in a suitable activity.

Language and cultural differences introduce further considerations. Viet Nam's rural and remote communities are not culturally uniform. In some ethnic minority communities, people may be more comfortable communicating in a local language. Written materials in Vietnamese alone may not be equally accessible to everyone, and appropriate oral communication or language support may be needed.

Cultural adaptation should also avoid assumptions about what people enjoy or value. Residents of the same village may have very different interests, preferences and social circumstances. Some may value traditional activities, while others may prefer learning opportunities, sports, volunteering or different forms of social participation.

The starting point should remain the individual: what matters to them, what they would like to change and which activities they consider meaningful.

A locally appropriate model should be shaped with the people it intends to support, rather than assuming that the same activities and communication methods will work everywhere.

Seasonal livelihoods and environmental conditions affect participation

Daily life in rural communities may be shaped by seasonal work and environmental conditions in ways that are less visible in conventional service planning.

For households dependent on agriculture, fishing or other seasonal livelihoods, the timing of community activities may influence whether people can attend. A program scheduled during a busy farming period may attract limited participation, even if residents are interested.

Weather conditions, flooding, storms or transportation interruptions may also affect whether services can operate reliably. An activity that is accessible for much of the year may become difficult to reach during particular seasons.

These circumstances should not automatically be interpreted as a lack of interest or motivation. Someone who cannot attend because of work, transportation or caregiving responsibilities may still want support, but need it organized differently.

This means that scheduling, frequency and flexibility should be considered part of service design. Some localities may benefit from activities arranged around existing community gatherings. Others may require different schedules at different times of the year or alternative ways of maintaining contact when travel becomes difficult.

A rural social-prescribing pathway should recognize when the practical availability of a service changes, rather than assuming that an activity remains accessible throughout the year simply because it continues to exist.

Rural navigation may need a different organizational model

A common implementation assumption is that social prescribing requires a dedicated office, a full-time link worker and a large directory of community services. These arrangements may be appropriate in some health systems, but they should not automatically become the starting template for rural Viet Nam.

In a geographically dispersed area, concentrating navigation and activities at one central location may create unnecessary travel barriers. Conversely, establishing a separate navigation service in every small community may be unrealistic when staffing and resources are limited.

Different configurations may therefore be worth testing. One locality might use an existing health or social-service contact point to identify people needing assistance, with navigation provided by an appropriately trained professional serving several communities. Another might organize periodic face-to-face sessions at accessible local venues, supported by telephone contact between visits. In some circumstances, activities could be arranged closer to individual villages rather than requiring participants to travel to the commune center.

These are possible approaches, not established or validated models for rural Viet Nam. Their suitability would depend on staffing, organizational responsibilities, professional competence, transportation, continuity and the needs of the people being served.

Digital tools may help, particularly when they reduce unnecessary travel or allow navigators to maintain contact across larger distances. However, access to a smartphone does not necessarily mean someone can complete online forms, understand written instructions or use digital services independently.

For some individuals, a telephone conversation may be more practical than a website. Others may prefer face-to-face support, especially when discussing sensitive circumstances or unfamiliar services. A combination of in-person and remote communication may offer greater flexibility, provided that appropriate human support remains available.

Technology should also fit the capacity of local organizations. A sophisticated referral platform may create additional administrative work if community partners cannot maintain accurate information or respond to referrals consistently.

The practical question is not whether a digital system can be introduced, but whether the proposed arrangement makes community support easier to reach and use.

What happens when suitable support does not exist locally?

One of the most difficult situations in rural social prescribing arises when a person's needs are identified but no appropriate local resource is available.

A navigator may learn that someone wants social connection, practical assistance or a meaningful activity, yet find that the available options are too distant, unaffordable, unsuitable or already at capacity.

In such circumstances, making a referral simply because a service appears in a directory is not a meaningful solution. Nor should the absence of community support be treated as a problem the individual must resolve independently.

The next step may involve identifying another accessible option, exploring whether an existing organization can reasonably adapt its activities or helping the person reach another appropriate service. In some cases, the unmet need may need to be documented and considered through local service planning.

Importantly, some needs cannot be resolved through social prescribing. Severe financial hardship, unsafe housing, inadequate transportation or lack of essential healthcare may require formal social protection, public services or other structural responses. Community participation may complement those systems, but it cannot replace their responsibilities.

The capacity of receiving organizations also matters. Some rural community groups operate with limited staff, volunteer support or intermittent funding. A referral pathway may create additional responsibilities for coordination, transportation assistance and follow-up that these organizations cannot reasonably absorb.

This does not mean every community activity needs to become a formally funded professional service. It means that referrals should reflect what the organization can actually provide, and that additional responsibilities should be recognized rather than taken for granted.

A resource-constrained setting should not create pressure to label an unsuitable or unavailable service as successful support. Responsible implementation includes recognizing when an appropriate connection cannot be made.

Safety and professional care still matter when resources are limited

Limited local resources do not justify weakening professional boundaries. Someone with significant clinical symptoms, serious psychological distress or complex social-care needs may require assessment and intervention that a community activity cannot provide.

In rural or remote settings, professional services may be farther away, making appropriate escalation more difficult. This makes it particularly important to understand what local community partners can safely do and when assistance from qualified healthcare or social-work professionals is needed.

A trusted volunteer may be able to help someone attend an activity or understand available services. They should not be expected to provide clinical assessments, specialist psychological treatment or regulated professional services beyond their competence and authority.

Where appropriate expertise is not available locally, the pathway may need to involve a regional healthcare provider or another authorized service. Such arrangements should be established and feasible, rather than simply assumed to exist.

Social prescribing is intended to complement healthcare and other professional services. It should not become an informal substitute for essential services that are unavailable or difficult to reach.

What should an early rural pilot actually test?

For Viet Nam, a rural social-prescribing pilot would be more credible if it began with a clearly defined locality and an implementation problem that residents and local organizations recognize as important.

The area selected might be a commune, a group of villages or a practical service catchment that reflects how residents travel and use local services. The most appropriate geographical unit should be determined by local circumstances rather than administrative convenience alone.

Before implementation, the participating organizations would need to understand how people currently seek assistance, which support options they use and what prevents participation. People with lived experience should contribute to these decisions, alongside appropriate healthcare, social-work and community partners.

The distinctive question for a rural pilot is whether the proposed connection can work under the actual conditions of that place.

For example, if someone is referred to an activity but cannot reach it, the pathway has not addressed the access barrier. If participation depends entirely on one unpaid volunteer, continuity may be uncertain. If services are accessible mainly to people living near the commune center, the model may need adjustment before expansion.

Evaluation should therefore pay attention to geographical reach, travel time, transportation costs, accessibility, continued participation and the workload associated with providing support across dispersed communities.

These factors are also important when comparing costs between settings. A program serving fewer people across a large geographical area may require more resources per participant than one operating in a densely populated urban neighborhood. That difference does not automatically mean the rural model is less valuable or poorly managed.

A small pilot may establish whether the pathway is feasible, acceptable and capable of connecting people with appropriate support. It cannot automatically demonstrate long-term health benefits, reduced healthcare utilization or cost-effectiveness.

The purpose of early evaluation should be to understand which local conditions help or hinder implementation and what needs to change before the model expands.

One rural model will not fit every community

Rural Viet Nam is not a single, uniform setting. A peri-urban commune near a major city may have relatively convenient access to healthcare and community services, while a mountainous village may face difficult roads, longer journeys and language barriers. Coastal, riverine and island communities may have different transportation arrangements and seasonal challenges.

Even neighboring communities can differ in their local organizations, informal relationships, available facilities and opportunities for participation.

These differences matter because the usefulness of a referral depends partly on what happens afterward. A suitable activity may be easy to reach in one location and practically inaccessible in another. A locally trusted organization may be well placed to support some residents but inappropriate for others who need greater privacy.

It would therefore be premature to define one standard configuration for rural social prescribing in Viet Nam before learning from different settings.

That does not mean every locality must develop a completely separate model. Core principles can remain consistent, including person-centered support, voluntary participation, appropriate professional boundaries, protection of personal information and meaningful connection with community resources.

What should remain adaptable is the way those principles are implemented: where navigation takes place, how people are contacted, which organizations participate, how transportation barriers are addressed and how continuity is maintained.

A responsible approach should distinguish between the elements that need to remain consistent and those that must respond to local conditions.

Rural social prescribing should be shaped by the places and people it serves

Viet Nam's extensive grassroots healthcare network, community institutions and ongoing primary healthcare reforms create opportunities to explore more connected forms of care. Rural and remote communities may benefit from approaches that recognize existing local strengths, make suitable support easier to reach and help people overcome practical barriers to participation.

But these opportunities should not be confused with evidence that a comprehensive social-prescribing infrastructure is already in place or that any particular model has been proven effective in rural Viet Nam.

The more credible approach is to begin with local circumstances, develop a proportionate pathway and learn from implementation. Some communities may be able to build on existing organizations and familiar gathering places. Others may need outreach arrangements, shared navigation capacity, better transportation options or additional community investment before a reliable pathway becomes feasible.

There is no reason to expect the same service configuration to work equally well in a densely populated peri-urban commune, a mountainous village, a coastal community or an island setting.

For Viet Nam, the central question should therefore not be how to reproduce an urban social-prescribing model in rural areas. It should be what form of community-connected support could genuinely work in a particular locality, given how people live, travel, communicate and access services, and what would be needed to make that support safe, accessible and sustainable.

Social prescribing beyond major cities should not be about extending a model across a larger geographical area. It should be about developing connections between healthcare and community resources that reflect the realities of the people and places they are intended to serve.

If those realities guide implementation from the beginning, rural social prescribing may become a useful area for responsible innovation and evaluation in Viet Nam. Its value, however, will need to be demonstrated through local experience and evidence rather than assumed from international models or the presence of community facilities alone.

References

1. McSwiggan E, Donaghy E, Gulland J, O'Donnell A, Mercer SW. The Role of Place in Social Prescribing: A State-of-the-Art Literature Review. Health & Social Care in the Community. 2025;2025:9920046. doi:10.1155/hsc/9920046.

2. Saddiq I, Simmons P, Osuagwu UL. Social prescribing in rural settings: A mapping review of benefits, challenges, and implementation strategies for rural Australia. Social Sciences & Humanities Open. 2025;11:101497. doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101497.

3. 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.

4. McGarity-Shipley E, Timmins E, Lorusso A, et al. Implementing social prescribing in a rural Ottawa community: collaboration between a community resource centre and a family health organization. Journal of Integrated Care. 2026;34(1):44–57. doi:10.1108/JICA-04-2025-0039.

5. Lwin KS, Wong MSJ, Tan MH, et al. Organization and implementation of social prescribing in the Western Pacific Region: a scoping review. The Lancet Regional Health – Western Pacific. 2026;67:101714. doi:10.1016/j.lanwpc.2025.101714.

6. World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific. A toolkit on how to implement social prescribing. Manila: World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific; 2022.

7. World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific. Primary health care in Viet Nam: a review of the commune health system. Manila: World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific; 2025.

8. National Statistics Office of Viet Nam. Official Results of the 2025 Rural and Agricultural Census: Press Release. April 2026.

9. Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. Circular No. 43/2025/TT-BYT on the functions, duties, authority and organizational structure of commune, ward and special-zone health stations. Issued 15 November 2025. Effective 1 January 2026.

10. Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. Circular No. 53/2025/TT-BYT amending and supplementing Circular No. 43/2025/TT-BYT. Issued 31 December 2025. Effective 1 January 2026.

11. Government of Viet Nam. Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP on Social Work. Effective 15 October 2024.

12. Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT on social-work practice and updating professional social-work knowledge. Issued 6 July 2026. Effective 25 August 2026.

This article provides an educational and implementation-focused discussion of social prescribing in rural, remote and resource-constrained communities. It does not establish that a particular social-prescribing model has been validated or implemented nationally in Viet Nam. Specific service arrangements should be assessed against local conditions, applicable professional requirements and current Vietnamese law.