Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need to address "involutionary" competition, which is characterized by low prices, low quality, and low standards, disrupting market signals and hindering long-term competitiveness and high-quality development [1] Group 1: Key Areas of Governance - The emergence of "involutionary" competition often stems from unclear competition rules in specific sectors and a lack of unified technical guidance for industry development [2] - The revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law, implemented in June last year, targets issues like fake reviews and forced lowest prices, establishing a solid legal foundation for comprehensive governance against "involutionary" competition [2] - The introduction of 167 national standard projects for emerging advantageous industries aims to set clear quality benchmarks and guide technological direction, compelling companies to upgrade their technology and improve product quality [2] Group 2: Market Exit Mechanism - A significant issue contributing to persistent "involutionary" competition is the lack of a smooth market exit mechanism, with many "zombie companies" distorting market signals and disrupting competition [3] - The implementation of the "Mandatory Company Deregistration System" since October last year has effectively streamlined the market exit process, with 294,900 companies undergoing forced deregistration by the end of December [3] - This system ensures that the cleanup process is both rigorous and considerate, preventing dishonest entities from evading responsibilities while promoting a healthy competitive environment [4] Group 3: Collaborative Governance - Addressing "involutionary" competition requires a comprehensive and long-term approach, with various regulations being introduced to create a full-chain governance system [5] - The governance strategy includes preventive measures, regulatory actions during operations, and post-incident cleanups, aiming to shift the focus from quantity to quality in market competition [6] - Different sectors require tailored governance strategies, with a focus on rigid constraints in safety-critical areas and compliance guidance in innovative sectors, allowing for a balance between regulatory order and business vitality [6] Group 4: Future Directions - The market regulatory authority plans to intensify efforts to ensure the effective implementation of newly introduced regulations, aiming to transform these "good laws" into effective governance for high-quality development [7]

Core Viewpoint - The "involution" competition is characterized by low price, low quality, and low-level competition, disrupting market signals and reducing resource allocation efficiency, which erodes long-term competitiveness of enterprises and affects the optimization and upgrading of industrial structure and high-quality development [1] Group 1: Regulatory Measures - The market regulatory authority has announced ten key regulatory measures to address "involution" competition, including a new Anti-Unfair Competition Law that targets malicious competitive behaviors such as forced low-cost sales and false transactions [2] - The implementation of a compulsory company deregistration system aims to orderly clean up dishonest entities [3] - The Fair Competition Review Regulation will ensure that policies related to industrial development and investment do not interfere with fair market competition [3] Group 2: Industry Standards and Compliance - The Internet Platform Antitrust Compliance Guidelines will support platform enterprises in managing antitrust compliance and identifying new monopoly risks [3] - Guidelines to enhance product and service quality on online trading platforms will focus on product innovation and standardization, promoting a shift from "involution competition" to "quality improvement" [3][4] - The action plan for enhancing standards in the new energy vehicle, lithium battery, and photovoltaic industries includes the development of 167 national standards to combat "involution" competition [4] Group 3: Implementation and Impact - The ten regulatory measures are designed as a comprehensive governance system, addressing market competition at various stages: preventing improper interventions, regulating enterprise behavior, and cleaning up dishonest entities [5] - Initial effects of these measures show a positive trend, with more rational market competition and a reduction in phenomena such as "subsidy wars" and "lowest price" strategies [6] - The measures are expected to drive enterprises to shift focus from price competition to quality and innovation [7]

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need to address "involutionary" competition, which is characterized by low prices, low quality, and low standards, disrupting market signals and hindering long-term competitiveness and high-quality development [1] Group 1: Key Areas of Governance - The emergence of "involutionary" competition often stems from unclear competition rules in specific sectors and a lack of unified technical guidance for industry development [2] - The revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law, implemented in June last year, targets issues like fake reviews and forced lowest prices, establishing a solid legal foundation for comprehensive governance against "involutionary" competition [2] - The introduction of 167 national standard projects for emerging advantageous industries aims to set clear quality benchmarks and guide technological direction, compelling companies to upgrade their technology and improve product quality [2] Group 2: Market Exit Mechanism - A significant issue contributing to persistent "involutionary" competition is the lack of a smooth market exit mechanism, with many "zombie companies" distorting market signals and disrupting competition [3] - The implementation of the "Mandatory Company Deregistration System" since October last year has effectively streamlined the market exit process, leading to the forced deregistration of 294,900 companies by the end of December [3] - This deregistration process not only activates market resources but also supports the transition from quantity-based competition to quality-based competition [3] Group 3: Collaborative Governance - Addressing "involutionary" competition requires a comprehensive and long-term approach, with various regulations being introduced to create a full-chain governance system [5] - The governance strategy includes preventive measures through the Fair Competition Review Regulations, regulatory actions via the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, and post-event clean-up through the deregistration system [6] - Different sectors require tailored governance strategies, with a focus on rigid constraints in safety-critical areas and compliance guidance in innovative sectors, allowing for a balance between regulatory order and business vitality [6] Group 4: Future Directions - The market regulatory authority plans to intensify efforts to ensure the effective implementation of newly introduced regulations, transforming these "good laws" into effective governance to support the construction of a unified national market and achieve high-quality development [7]

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need to shift from "involutionary" competition, characterized by low efficiency and internal strife, to a focus on quality innovation and fair competition to promote high-quality economic development [5][6][7]. Group 1: Development Perspective - The correct development perspective significantly influences outcomes, with a focus on leveraging local advantages for differentiated development being essential for harmonious regional growth [3][8]. - The current economic environment necessitates breaking away from "involutionary" competition to facilitate the construction of a unified national market and foster technological innovation [5][6]. Group 2: Competition Policy - Establishing and implementing a foundational competition policy is crucial to overcoming local governments' reliance on selective industrial policies, with adherence to competition law serving as a regulatory anchor [4][10]. - The recent amendments to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law aim to regulate "involutionary" competition and promote a fair market environment, indicating a shift towards legal and normative governance [10][11]. Group 3: Government and Market Dynamics - The article highlights the importance of aligning government policies with national objectives to avoid detrimental "race-to-the-bottom" strategies that compromise fair competition and sustainable development [7][8]. - A systematic and differentiated evaluation framework for local governments is proposed to shift focus from GDP-centric assessments to more holistic measures that consider ecological and social factors [9][12]. Group 4: Legal Framework and Governance - The legal framework, including the Anti-Monopoly Law and fair competition review systems, is essential for preventing local government overreach and ensuring a competitive market environment [11][14]. - The establishment of a unified market foundation and cross-regional competition coordination mechanisms is necessary to correct resource allocation distortions and transition competition from price wars to quality innovation [12][13].

Core Viewpoint - The State Administration for Market Regulation has announced ten major achievements in the comprehensive rectification of "involution" competition by 2025, which includes the enhancement of laws and regulations, detailed departmental rules, and a governance loop covering all stages of market operations, providing a solid institutional guarantee for innovation and development of various business entities [1][2][3][4]. Group 1: Legal and Regulatory Framework - The revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law strengthens regulations against practices such as fake reviews, exploiting platform rules, and maliciously harming competitors, expanding the definition of commercial defamation to include "other operators" [1]. - The implementation of the Mandatory Company Deregistration System aims to streamline the deregistration process for untrustworthy entities, enhancing market exit quality and efficiency, with 294,900 companies initiated for mandatory deregistration by the end of December 2025 [1]. Group 2: Fair Competition and Market Standards - The Fair Competition Review Regulations require local governments and departments to ensure fair competition in policies related to industrial development, investment attraction, and government procurement [2]. - The Internet Platform Antitrust Compliance Guidelines encourage platform companies to enhance antitrust compliance management and identify new monopoly risks [2]. - The Guidelines for Improving Product and Service Quality on Online Trading Platforms focus on product innovation and service standardization, enhancing the responsibilities of platforms and operators [2]. Group 3: Quality and Safety Standards - The Regulations on Quality and Safety Supervision of Key Industrial Products sold online clarify the responsibilities of e-commerce operators regarding product quality and safety, institutionalizing quality control measures [3]. - The Action Plan for Enhancing Standards in New Energy Vehicles, Lithium Batteries, and Photovoltaic Industries outlines the development of 167 national standards to combat "involution" competition, with 57 standards already published [3]. Group 4: International Standards and Market Integration - Measures to Gradually Expand Standard System Opening aim to improve the consistency of standards in key service areas and promote international standard-setting in the digital economy [4]. - The announcement on advancing "same line, same standard, same quality" for domestic and foreign trade products encourages the integration of domestic and international certification processes to reduce low-quality "involution" competition [4]. - The initial effects of these regulations have shown a positive trend in curbing phenomena like "subsidy wars" and "lowest prices," facilitating smoother market exits and accelerating the construction of the "new three samples" standard system [4].

三湘都市报1月13日讯 近日，中国民航局召开2026年全国民航工作会议，明确全年旅客运输量8.1亿人次 目标，将整治民航"内卷式"竞争、遏制航司低于成本价恶性竞争列为年度重点。 值得关注的是，民航局相关负责人在上述工作会议上明确表示，2026年，民航定下了完成旅客运输量 8.1亿人次的目标，并将深入整治"内卷式"竞争、防止航司以低于成本价开展恶性竞争列为重点工作之 一。 刚刚过去的2025年，据航班管家数据，民航似乎陷入了"旺丁不旺财"的困局：2023年国内旅客运输量已 超2019年水平，客座率持续走高，但2024年经济舱平均票价同比下滑12.7%，2025年再降3.1%至738 元…… 低价机票是否会逐渐消失？ 1月12日，长沙市民李女士正筹划春节假期出游。看了几天机票后，她吐槽道："根本买不到便宜机票， 就算是假期前错峰都要300元以上，这还不含附加费用。" 记者查看多个旅行OTA平台售票界面发现，以长沙为出发地，以距离长沙飞行距离800公里左右的城市 为目的地来看，1月12日至31日内，飞往厦门、贵阳、广州、上海等地的单程机票最低价格均在300元以 上（不含税）。 其实，刚刚过去的2025年，由于各大在 ...

Core Viewpoint - The State Council's Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Committee has initiated an investigation into the competitive landscape of the food delivery platform service industry, highlighting issues of excessive subsidies, price wars, and traffic control that have led to "involution" in competition [1][2]. Group 1: Industry Competition - The food delivery industry has seen intense competition, initially sparked by JD.com, followed by fierce battles between Alibaba's Taobao and Meituan, escalating further amid multi-format e-commerce conflicts [1]. - Regulatory scrutiny has been ongoing, with the government previously engaging with major platforms like JD.com, Meituan, and Alibaba to ensure fair competition [1]. - The ongoing price wars have resulted in significant financial burdens for platforms, which have not translated into sustainable business improvements [1]. Group 2: Impact on Stakeholders - Many small and medium-sized businesses are experiencing a situation where increased order volume does not equate to increased revenue, reflecting a broader issue of financial strain across the industry [2]. - Delivery riders are also facing challenges, as the influx of orders does not lead to proportional income, indicating a disconnect between consumer subsidies and worker compensation [2]. - Consumers may benefit from low prices in the short term, but this comes with hidden risks, such as the potential for lower quality and service standards [2]. Group 3: Regulatory and Market Implications - The government has emphasized the need to address "involution" in competition, particularly in e-commerce, where low prices and low quality dominate, leading to inefficiencies and resource wastage [2][3]. - Healthy competition is essential for industry growth, and the current state of "involution" hinders innovation and value creation, necessitating a shift towards differentiated, high-quality competition [3]. - The regulatory intervention signals a commitment to fostering fair competition and improving overall market health, moving from mere market share battles to enhancing supply chain efficiency and innovation [3].

Core Viewpoint - The State Council's Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Committee has initiated an investigation into the competitive landscape of the food delivery platform industry, highlighting issues of excessive subsidies, price wars, and traffic control that have led to "involution" and negatively impacted the real economy [1][2]. Group 1: Industry Competition - The food delivery industry has seen intense competition, initially sparked by JD.com, followed by fierce battles between Alibaba's Taobao and Meituan, escalating amidst a multi-format e-commerce environment [1]. - Regulatory scrutiny has been ongoing, with the government previously engaging with major platforms like JD, Meituan, and Alibaba to ensure fair competition [1]. - The current competition is characterized by a focus on market share acquisition through heavy spending, which has not translated into sustainable business improvements, resulting in significant financial burdens for the platforms [1]. Group 2: Impact on Stakeholders - Many small and medium-sized businesses are experiencing a situation where increased order volume does not equate to increased revenue, leading to a cycle of burdens without corresponding financial benefits [2]. - Delivery riders are also facing challenges, as the influx of orders does not lead to proportional earnings, and consumer subsidies are not effectively reaching the labor force [2]. - Consumers may benefit from low prices in the short term, but this comes with hidden risks, such as the potential for lower quality products and services due to aggressive pricing strategies [2]. Group 3: Regulatory Response and Future Directions - The government has emphasized the need to address "involution" in competition, particularly in the e-commerce sector, which is marked by low prices and low quality, lacking innovation [2]. - A healthy industry requires new entrants and should focus on creating value rather than engaging in destructive competition that leads to resource waste and declining profits [3]. - The regulatory intervention signals a push towards fostering fair and orderly competition, aiming to shift from mere market share battles to enhancing supply chain efficiency and promoting high-quality, differentiated competition [3].

Group 1 - The central economic work conference has identified the "in-depth rectification of 'involutionary' competition" as a key task for economic work in 2026, continuing the "anti-involution" actions into the new year [1] - The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, along with three other departments, held a meeting targeting irrational behaviors such as blind construction and low-price competition in the power and energy battery industry, aiming to regulate industry competition order [1] - "Involutionary" competition is characterized by low price, low quality, and low-level competition, which disrupts market signals, reduces resource allocation efficiency, and erodes long-term competitiveness of enterprises, ultimately hindering high-quality development [1] Group 2 - Since the 2024 central economic work conference proposed "comprehensive rectification of 'involutionary' competition," China has implemented a series of institutional constructions to guide key industries like steel, photovoltaics, and electric vehicles from low-quality involution to innovation and efficiency [2] - The National Development and Reform Commission plans to research and formulate regulations for the construction of a unified national market, while the State Administration for Market Regulation aims to promote amendments to foundational laws such as the pricing law to enhance the legal and policy tools against "involutionary" competition [2] - To effectively address "involutionary" competition, industries and enterprises must accelerate reforms, eliminate outdated momentum, and shift towards efficiency and innovation, thereby creating a true "moat" for their development through technology, branding, and service upgrades [2]

Core Viewpoint - The State Administration for Market Regulation has initiated an investigation into the competitive landscape of the food delivery platform service industry, highlighting concerns over excessive competition and its negative impact on the real economy [2][37]. Group 1: Government Actions - The State Council's Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Committee has decided to conduct a comprehensive investigation and assessment of the market competition status in the food delivery sector [4][41]. - The investigation aims to gather opinions from various stakeholders, analyze the market conditions, and propose regulatory measures to ensure fair competition [40][41]. - This is not the first intervention by the government; previous actions include meetings with major platforms like JD.com, Meituan, and Ele.me to address competition issues [43][45]. Group 2: Industry Concerns - The food delivery industry has been criticized for engaging in "involutionary" competition, characterized by aggressive subsidies and price wars that pressure the real economy [4][52]. - A study indicated that while the total order volume increased by 7% during heightened competition, the actual revenue for merchants decreased by approximately 4% [53][56]. - The "explosion" effect of low prices may lead to irrational consumption and reduced service quality, ultimately harming the industry's profitability [55][56]. Group 3: Future Directions - The government emphasizes the need for platforms to focus on innovation and service quality rather than merely competing on price [59][68]. - Industry leaders are encouraged to pursue higher goals and contribute to societal progress through better services and innovative solutions [68][69]. - The overarching message is to discourage "involution" and promote a healthier competitive environment that benefits all stakeholders [68][69].