A 1–2 per cent annual movement in Bangladesh’s RMG exports is not, by itself, the real story. The more important question is whether Bangladesh is improving its competitiveness faster or slower than Vietnam, India and other emerging sourcing destinations.
Vietnam is a particularly important benchmark. Its textile and garment exports were estimated at around $46 billion in 2025, up about 5.6 per cent, while the industry reported a trade surplus of around $21 billion. More importantly, its domestic value-added or localisation ratio has reached roughly 51–52 per cent.
This does not mean Vietnam has eliminated imported raw materials. It still imports substantial quantities of textile inputs. The difference is that it has progressively built a stronger industrial ecosystem around manufacturing, sourcing, technology, foreign direct investment, logistics and higher-value production.
The competitive equation is particularly different in technical and outdoor garments, especially high-SMV and high-CM products. Buyers assess engineering capability, operator skills, multi-skilling, line balancing, automation, quality consistency, seam-sealing and bonding capabilities, compliance, development speed, lead times and management execution — not merely hourly wages. Bangladesh needs to become far more ambitious in these areas.
India is another serious competitive pressure. Its RMG exports increased by about 2.9 per cent in FY2025–26, according to India’s Ministry of Textiles, while the broader textile and apparel sector also grew. India’s advantage is not simply labour costs.
It has a vast domestic textile ecosystem, raw-material base, engineering capabilities and domestic market, alongside increasingly aggressive government support for textile investment, technical textiles, skills and export competitiveness.
Bangladesh’s challenge therefore comes down to five structural questions.
Are we increasing output per worker and machine faster than our competitors? How much of every $100 of apparel exports is retained domestically through fabric, yarn, trims, chemicals, machinery, logistics, engineering, finance, wages, management and profit?
Are we moving quickly enough from basic products into technical garments, outerwear, functional apparel, sportswear, performance wear, bonded and seam-sealed products and other high-value categories?
Do we have enough technically trained operators, industrial engineers, production managers, merchandisers, product developers and factory leaders to compete with Vietnam, China and increasingly India? And can government, industry associations, educational institutions, banks, customs, ports and regulators work around a 10–20-year industrial strategy rather than primarily through short-term crisis management?
The World Bank has repeatedly highlighted skills development, productivity, technology adoption and stronger industrial capabilities as important to Bangladesh’s next stage of growth. IFC/World Bank work in Bangladesh’s garment sector has also shown that management and workforce development can produce measurable productivity gains.
There is also a misconception about imported inputs. An export dollar is not automatically ‘lost’ because some fabric, yarn or accessories are imported. What matters economically is domestic value-added content.
Bangladesh’s RMG success was itself built partly through integration into global value chains and imported inputs. The strategic objective should now be to increase the value captured domestically from each exported dollar, not necessarily eliminate imports.
In other words, Bangladesh should not ask only how much it exported. It should also ask how much value, capability, technology, knowledge and future competitiveness it created through those exports.
That requires a shift in national industrial strategy. Bangladesh needs higher productivity and stronger industrial engineering, expanded technical and vocational education and a more multi-skilled workforce.
Automation and Industry 4.0 technologies need to be adopted faster, alongside stronger backward linkages in textiles and accessories, particularly for technical and high-value apparel.
Firms also need stronger product development, design and innovation capabilities to move towards higher-value products and more diversified markets.
Faster customs procedures and port logistics, stable energy supplies and reliable industrial infrastructure are essential to lowering costs and improving efficiency.
Export-oriented financing and trade facilitation should be strengthened, while greater R&D investment and stronger university-industry collaboration can support innovation and technology development.
Bangladesh should also pursue market and product diversification and attract FDI that delivers genuine technology and knowledge transfer, enabling domestic industries to build lasting capabilities and compete more effectively in global markets.
One fundamental principle should guide this effort: national interest must come before individual or institutional rent-seeking. But patriotism alone does not create international competitiveness. Competitiveness comes when patriotism is translated into institutions, discipline, skills, productivity, innovation, integrity and execution.
Bangladesh does not need to become Vietnam or India. It needs to become a more productive, technologically capable and strategically sophisticated Bangladesh.
The real danger is not that Vietnam or India are progressing. It is that they may progress faster than Bangladesh reforms itself. The answer is not pessimism but a national awakening in education, skills, industrial productivity, institutional reform and strategic economic diplomacy.
Bangladesh’s RMG industry has already proved that the country can compete globally. The next challenge is to move from being primarily a cost-competitive manufacturing base to becoming a globally competitive, high-value, technology-enabled apparel manufacturing and product-development hub.
That transition — not merely next year’s export figure — should be the national target for 2040.
Vietnam’s industrial performance demonstrates the importance of policy consistency, institutional discipline, workforce capability and alignment between national industrial objectives and enterprise-level execution.
Bangladesh needs stronger governance, transparency, regulatory predictability and accountability to ensure that industrial policy is implemented in the long-term national interest.
Vietnam itself, however, is not a perfect model. Its textile industry still imports substantial fabric and other inputs. Current estimates put domestic supply or localisation at only about 51–52 per cent, with fabric imports estimated at around $17 billion in 2025.
Bangladesh should therefore not copy Vietnam blindly. It should study why Vietnam is moving faster in productivity, industrial organisation, FDI integration, trade agreements, infrastructure and higher-value manufacturing, while developing a Bangladesh-specific model.
The writer is the marketing director of Tsubasa Group and founder of SNS Professional Research Academy. Views expressed are solely those of the author.
