促进质量认证行业公信力建设

Core Viewpoint - The State Administration for Market Regulation has released the "Quality Certification Professional Capacity Improvement Action Plan (2025-2030)", which outlines the overall requirements and main goals for the professional development of certification institutions over the next five years, aiming to enhance the credibility of the certification industry and promote its development [1][2]. Group 1 - The action plan sets three phased goals: by the end of 2026, to address the issues of inadequate responsibility among certification institutions and personnel, establishing a traceability system where "certification rules are traceable, processes are trackable, and results are verifiable" [1] - By the end of 2028, the plan aims to resolve issues of homogenized competition and insufficient effective supply in certification, making the certification system more aligned with demand and ensuring that certification results are more authoritative and reliable [1] - By 2030, the plan seeks to effectively address the lack of credibility in China's certification industry, insufficient support for high-quality development, and inadequate international market influence, achieving high-quality development in the certification industry [1] Group 2 - To achieve these goals, the action plan focuses on "strengthening the baseline" and "raising the high line," deploying a series of key tasks [2] - In terms of compliance, the plan emphasizes strengthening the responsibilities of certification institutions and technical foundations, improving accountability mechanisms for certification personnel, and leveraging the self-discipline of industry organizations [2] - For enhancing efficiency, the plan aims to utilize certification in market credit, quality management, and trade facilitation, while also strengthening the construction of regulatory teams and technical support for recognition [2] - The State Administration for Market Regulation will coordinate efforts to form a collaborative regulatory framework involving departmental oversight, institutional constraints, and industry self-discipline [2]