Rather than applying a single “common template” to all communes, this grouping allows management agencies to accurately recognize the starting points, standards achieved, and development potential of each area. Consequently, this leads to the construction of tailored roadmaps, solutions, and support mechanisms that are both appropriate and effective.

The practical implementation of the national target program for building new-style rural areas in previous phases revealed significant disparities in socio-economic conditions, infrastructure, public intellectual levels, and resource mobilization capabilities between communes. This is particularly evident in mountainous and border regions like Điện Biên. While some communes achieved new-style rural standards early and are now aiming for advanced or “model” criteria, many remote and border communes continue to struggle with completing even the most basic requirements.

The reality of the 2021-2025 period clearly highlighted the imbalance between different localities. Communes and wards with favorable conditions, such as Thanh Hưng, Thanh Chăn, Noong Hẹt, and the former Him Lam ward, reached the new-style rural finish line quite early. In contrast, remote communes like Pa Ham, Nậm Nèn, Huổi Lếch, and the former Xa Dung have faced an arduous journey characterized by unsynchronized infrastructure, fragmented terrain, and difficult livelihoods. A major cause of this was the previous set of criteria, which operated on a “single baseline” for all communes and failed to reflect the natural and socio-economic differences between regions. Under that system, favorable communes could finish quickly while disadvantaged ones were forced to strain themselves to keep up with standard requirements.

According to the provincial New-style rural Coordination Office, the national criteria for the 2026-2030 phase include 10 criteria with 47 indicators covering key sectors such as planning, socio-economic infrastructure, rural economic development, and human resource training. The most notable innovation is that each criterion is designed according to three commune groups, Group 1, Group 2, and Group 3, to match the reorganization of commune-level administrative units and the development level of each site. This breakthrough approach is expected to end the “one size fits all” mentality, increasing flexibility and making goals much more attainable.

Communes are categorized based on their specific economic and geographical characteristics. Group 1 consists of urban-adjacent communes, those oriented toward urban development, or those where agriculture accounts for less than 10% of the economic structure. Group 2 includes communes that do not fall into the other two categories, typically encompassing plain and midland communes with stable economic growth. Group 3 is designated for communes in Areas II and III within ethnic minority and mountainous regions as defined by the authorities. In Điện Biên, for the 2026-2030 period, all 42 communes are classified into Group 3, representing the group with a lower starting point that requires prioritized resource support.

The fact that Điện Biên has no communes in Group 1 or Group 2 highlights the challenges in its rural development landscape and demands a “bottom-up” strategy. For Group 3 communes, priority is shifting from just infrastructure to sustainable livelihoods, production restructuring, and supporting household economies to gradually raise income and reduce poverty. Mường Nhà, a border commune with high poverty rates, previously struggled when forced to meet the same criteria as more developed areas. By identifying as a Group 3 commune, its leadership can now define a clear path and build plans that focus on essential tasks tied directly to people’s lives, such as roads, housing, and production, rather than spreading resources too thin. Phạm Thị Ngọc Hà, Secretary of the Mường Nhà commune Party Committee, noted that the commune has currently achieved 8 out of 19 criteria and aims to complete one or two more in 2026 by focusing on high-feasibility tasks.

Similarly, Mường Chà commune was established by merging the former communes of Chà Nưa, Chà Cang, Nậm Tin, and Pa Tần. Following the merger, the commune has met 10 out of 19 criteria. The local government expects that applying the new grouping system will provide more favorable conditions to accelerate progress on the remaining targets. By identifying as a specific group, Mường Chà can build a more feasible roadmap and prioritize resources for urgent needs like transport infrastructure and clean water instead of pursuing a broad, unfocused agenda.

Ultimately, classifying commune groups is not just a ranking exercise but a foundation for reorganizing the entire implementation process of building new-style rural areas. For Điện Biên, having 100% of its communes in Group 3 is not a disadvantage; rather, it allows the province to see its reality clearly and avoid complacency. This categorization enables a focused strategy for mountainous and border conditions, prioritizing urgent criteria like electricity, schools, health centers, and livelihoods. This shift in thinking ensures that the development of new-style rural areas is substantive and based on internal strength and local potential, rather than a mere chase after superficial achievements.