TL;DR: Anthropologists describe this as re-enchantment: modernisation comes with a revival of belief rather than erasing it. The livelier religious life after Đổi Mới cannot be explained by the market alone or by the state alone, but by several processes layered on top of one another. Existing studies are mostly qualitative, place-based fieldwork, so it is not possible to state with confidence how participation in festivals has changed nationwide over time.
Why did religious life become livelier even as the economy grew and education rose?
This question used to be treated as a paradox, because the familiar secularisation hypothesis holds that economic growth and rising education bring a shrinking of religion and belief. Vietnam after Đổi Mới went the other way: temples, shrines, communal houses and festivals filled up again, and many were restored or expanded. Anthropologists call this re-enchantment, meaning modernisation does not automatically reduce belief and can come with a revival of it.
The key point is not to look for a single cause. Domestic and international studies of contemporary Vietnam see this as the layered result of several processes: policy change after Đổi Mới, the revival of village relations, the expansion of the market economy and tourism, individuals' need for spiritual security, and the way the state gradually reclassified what counts as heritage and what counts as superstition.
Philip Taylor (editor), in Modernity and Re-enchantment (2007), describes the religious revival after Đổi Mới and criticises single-cause explanations.
How did ritual reform and recovery after Đổi Mới unfold in a village near Ha Noi?
One of the most cited studies of this process is Shaun Kingsley Malarney, Culture, Ritual and Revolution in Vietnam (2002). The author surveyed a village in the Red River Delta over several decades, recording how funerals, weddings, death anniversaries and ancestor worship were strongly reformed during the revolutionary period, then restored and reorganised after Đổi Mới.
What stands out is that recovery did not mean returning to the old version exactly. Many rituals came back in simplified, more compact, less costly forms and tied to the village's new organisation. In other words, what was restored was a filtered version of tradition, not an unchanging original. This view matters because it avoids both extremes: it does not treat tradition as frozen, nor every change as decline.
Malarney (2002) records ritual reform in the revolutionary era and the recovery after Đổi Mới in one village.
How does Taylor 2007 criticise single-cause explanations?
Taylor's central argument in Modernity and Re-enchantment is that the religious revival in Vietnam cannot be reduced to one factor, whether economic need, policy loosening or crowd psychology. Each single-cause explanation misses most of the picture.
In the same direction, some Vietnamese researchers argue that market precariousness and everyday insecurity are among the drivers of contemporary religious practice, but not the only ones. This approach sees religious practice as a way people manage risk and regain a sense of security, not merely as a leftover from the past.
Taylor (editor, 2007) criticises single-cause explanations of the religious revival in Vietnam.
How does heritagisation turn superstition into honoured heritage?
One of the biggest changes of recent decades is a shift in classification. Many practices once placed in the category to be eliminated came to be seen as cultural heritage to be preserved. Oscar Salemink describes this as the sanctification of heritage, in which religious and spiritual practices become objects honoured by both state and society.
This shift has two-way consequences. On one hand, it opens space for communities to practise more publicly. On the other, it creates new disputes: what counts as authentic practice, what counts as distortion, who has the right to represent heritage. In Mother Goddess worship, after Tam phu practice was inscribed by UNESCO, researchers and practitioner communities raised concerns about using heritage status to commercialise hau dong.
Salemink (2020) analyses heritagisation and the sanctification of heritage in Vietnam.
How did the word 'tam linh' change meaning and new religious groups appear?
Đinh Hồng Hải (2021) shows that 'tam linh' and 'spiritual tourism' are recently coined terms in Vietnamese society, referring to activities tied both to religion and belief and to the economy and tourism. This is an important linguistic observation: when a new word appears and spreads quickly, it usually means a new field of practice is forming and needs a name.
The author analyses this through Marx's view of commodification and Ludwig von Mises's theory of human action, treating these activities as a religious market within a socialist-oriented market economy. This approach does not judge the activities as good or bad, but tries to describe the mechanism: people supply and consume services tied to belief, and those services operate by market logic to a certain degree.
Alongside this, Hoàng Văn Chung (2017) studies new religious groups and how the state classifies them amid contemporary religious diversification. The appearance of new groups raises questions about existing classification frameworks and shows that Vietnam's religious landscape is far more complex than the old two-pole model.
Đinh Hồng Hải (2021) analyses the etymology and context of 'tam linh' and 'spiritual tourism' from Đổi Mới to the present.
Hoàng Văn Chung (2017) studies new religious groups and state classification amid diversification.
Does Southeast Asia show the same trend?
Yes. Engaging the Spirit World, edited by Kirsten W. Endres and Andrea Lauser (2011), gathers studies of popular beliefs and practices in modern Southeast Asia and shows that modernisation in the region comes with re-enchantment rather than erasing the spirit world. This means the Vietnamese case is not an exception but part of a broader regional trend.
Placing Vietnam in the Southeast Asian context helps avoid a common mistake: treating lively religious life in Vietnam as a sign of unique cultural character, or as a sign of backwardness. Regional studies show this is a pattern observable in many countries, with variations in mechanism and pace.
Endres and Lauser (editors, 2011) record that modernisation comes with re-enchantment in Southeast Asia.
Table: some representative studies and their data scope
| Study | Site, period | Method | Main conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Malarney (2002) | One Red River Delta village, several decades | Anthropological fieldwork | Ritual reform in the revolutionary era, recovery after Đổi Mới |
| Taylor (editor, 2007) | Vietnam, post-Doi Moi period | Collected anthropological studies | Religious revival; critique of single-cause explanation |
| Endres and Lauser (editors, 2011) | Modern Southeast Asia | Collected anthropological studies | Modernisation comes with re-enchantment |
| Salemink (2020) | Contemporary Vietnam | Anthropological analysis | Heritagisation and sanctification of heritage |
| Đinh Hồng Hải (2021) | Vietnam, from Đổi Mới to present | Theoretical and etymological analysis | 'Tam linh' is a new term; religious market |
| Hoàng Văn Chung (2017) | Contemporary Vietnam | Anthropological research | New religions and state classification |
Why can this not be explained by the market alone or the state alone?
Looking only at the market shows part of the story: spiritual tourism, ritual services and goods tied to belief all grew, and that drew more people to temples and shrines. But the market cannot explain why people still go to temples on occasions not tied to tourism, or why many take part in costly rituals without clear economic benefit.
Looking only at the state shows another part: after Đổi Mới, the legal framework and classification changed, many practices were recognised as heritage, and the space for practice opened up. But the state cannot explain why, under the same policy framework, participation differs across localities and social groups.
A more reasonable explanation is to see these factors as layered and interacting: policy opens the way, the market provides infrastructure and services, and individual need for spiritual security provides a constant driver.
Taylor (editor, 2007) argues that no single cause explains the religious revival in Vietnam.
Where is the evidence still missing?
One limitation of current understanding should be stated clearly. The studies cited above are mostly qualitative, place-based research, or collections of qualitative studies, not national quantitative surveys. Among the sources used for this article, there is no national quantitative survey on festival participation rates over time.
So it cannot be asserted with confidence how many percentage points participation in festivals rose during which period. What can be said with higher confidence is the direction of change: public religious life is livelier than in the pre-Doi Moi period, and this trend is recorded in many localities and by many independent studies.
How should this phenomenon be read correctly?
One common but easily contested reading treats the bustle of temples and festivals as proof that modern people are still 'superstitious'. This reading ignores that religious practice carries many layers of meaning: seeking spiritual security, maintaining community relations, asserting local identity, and cultural consumption too.
Another reading treats all religious practice as heritage worthy of honour. This is also one-sided, because it ignores real disputes within communities and among researchers over distortion, commercialisation and the right to represent.
The reading favoured by many anthropologists is to see belief as a moving cultural field, with both positive and worrying sides, and analysing it requires both field data and caution in generalising.
This article does not judge whether the trend is good or bad. Evaluation belongs to practitioner communities, regulators and researchers, each with their own criteria.
Link to an existing article
The reading of folk belief as cultural heritage rather than as a truth claim was presented in the article No scientific basis does not mean worthless: reading folk belief as cultural heritage rather than as a truth claim. That article focuses on the epistemological aspect, while this one focuses on why religious life became livelier after Đổi Mới.
