Author: Adam McCarty and Carl Kalapesi, Mekong Economics Ltd 
 
A casual observer might think that determining whether an economy is “market” or “non-market” was an interesting question for economists. Actually, economic literature does not consider it an issue.Particular markets may fail or be missing, but for whole economies it requires the concerted effort of central planning. In all economies, some goods and service markets may be subject to monopoly, monopsony, or oligopoly control. But there seems little purpose in trying to measure some point at where a whole economy is “market” or “non-market”. The concern for economists is whether and to what extent any given market should be regulated, taxed or subsidized.
 
So who does consider this an “issue”, and why should it be for economists? The Governments of an increasing number of countries profess concern that whole economies with which they trade are not “market based”, and therefore initiate research into the question. The professed criteria for coming to a conclusion are economic, although as the above quote suggests, the determining factor is primarily political. Decisions come before analysis. Given that it is a political process, the economic logic is invariably something of a facade. This should concern economists as it makes a sham of their science.
 
In this paper we consider the concept of a non-market economy from a broad economic perspective as well as from the more narrow definition related to antidumping. We also analyse the US Department of Commerce investigation of Vietnam as a case study to the economic methodology applies in “non-market” investigations. We take some indicators and compare them across a selection of countries. We then discuss how Vietnam can move towards satisfying the criteria as specified by such investigations, and more generally, how markets can be strengthened in Vietnam.