要立个好榜样，首先，要以"公心"推进收储大计，这个"公 心"就是行业的长期健康发展。行业头部企业既是硅料收储的 参与者，也是直接受益者，通过市场化的"收储"，头部企业能 够获得市场份额和利润提升,这本无可厚非，但不能让收储"异 化"为头部企业的盛宴，而忽视中小企业和整个产业链的利 益。 作者：宋笛 封图：图虫创意 近日，北京光和谦成科技有限责任公司完成注册，标志着光伏行业酝酿已久的"多晶硅产能整合收 购平台"正式落地。这一由相关主管部门联合指导、多家龙头骨干企业共同发起的产业治理创新， 被视为破解光伏"内卷式"恶性竞争的关键之一。 这无疑是一次冒险的尝试。从构想到落地,收储方案忽隐忽现，各种"小作文"反复出现,让市场起起 伏伏。这种起伏本身就说明，方案潜藏着对市场的巨大影响力，需要格外谨慎对待。 更重要的是，硅料收储不仅是光伏行业自身的探索，它还承担着为其他深陷"内卷式"恶性竞争行 业提供可复制范本的使命。中国不少产业都面临类似困境，如何在市场化、法治化的框架内化解这 些矛盾,多晶硅行业正在先行先试。 硅料收储是一次"有效市场+有为政府"结合的探索，是一次难得的民营企业自发协调的尝试。如果 成功，可为其他行业 ...

近日，北京光和谦成科技有限责任公司完成注册,标志着光伏行业酝酿已久的"多晶硅产能整合收购平 台"正式落地。这一由相关主管部门联合指导、多家龙头骨干企业共同发起的产业治理创新,被视为破解 光伏"内卷式"恶性竞争的关键之一。 这无疑是一次冒险的尝试。从构想到落地,收储方案忽隐忽现，各种"小作文"反复出现,让市场起起伏 伏。这种起伏本身就说明,方案潜藏着对市场的巨大影响力,需要格外谨慎对待。 第二，要严守法治化底线。反垄断相关法规对具有竞争关系的经营者达成垄断协议有明确禁止性规定, 涉及产能的垄断行为更是"核心卡特尔",是反垄断法重点关注的行为。收储方案如何适用反垄断豁免条 款,如何规避反垄断风险,都需要审慎论证。 如果不注意其可能触发的垄断风险，不仅会为中国未来新能源出海之路增加风险，更会破坏行业的长期 活力。 第三,要坚持市场化原则。收储不是行政命令,而应该是市场主体的自主选择。头部企业的产能不等于先 进产能,中小企业的产能也不等于落后产能。这种对产能"人为选择"的结果需要经受市场检验。同时,收 储应该建立合理的退出成本机制,让那些盲目扩张、错误决策的企业为自己的行为"买单",而不是通过收 储让所有人都成为赢家 ...

Core Insights - The "15th Five-Year Plan" is positioned as a critical period for achieving socialist modernization, emphasizing the importance of foundational work and comprehensive efforts [2][3] - The plan acknowledges complex changes in the development environment, highlighting both strategic opportunities and risks, while showcasing the advantages of the socialist system and large-scale market [3] Group 1: Focus on Technological Innovation and Modernization of the Industrial System - The inclusion of "new quality productivity" in the planning framework reflects an upgrade in value orientation, emphasizing the role of technological innovation in fostering new industrial forms and dynamics [5] - The plan prioritizes the construction of a modern industrial system, reinforcing the foundation of the real economy, and calls for the acceleration of the transformation and upgrading of traditional industries [5][9] Group 2: Emphasis on Market and Government Complementarity - The plan highlights the combination of "effective market + proactive government," marking a shift towards a complementary division of labor between market and government in macro governance [6] - This change will influence future policy directions, including initiatives to boost consumption and support enterprises [6] Group 3: Evolution of Policy Concepts in Five-Year Plans - The evolution of the five-year planning approach reflects a shift in policy concepts, moving from quantity expansion to a balanced focus on quality and reasonable growth [7][8] - The "15th Five-Year Plan" emphasizes qualitative improvements and the integration of innovation, ecology, and security as key themes for future development [7][8] Group 4: Key Transformations in Economic Growth and Supply-Demand Relations - The plan emphasizes the construction of a modern industrial system and the solidification of the real economy as primary objectives, with a focus on upgrading traditional industries and expanding modern services [9][10] - It also stresses the importance of expanding domestic demand and integrating investments in both physical and human capital [10] Group 5: Risk Prevention and Bottom-Line Thinking - The plan aims to promote high-quality development in the real estate sector while addressing local debt risks through systematic and forward-looking management [11] - It emphasizes enhancing resilience against external shocks and internal transformation pains, with a focus on public safety and social governance [11][12] Group 6: Macro Policy Approach - The macro policy strategy will continue to balance "precise support and risk control," with a focus on maintaining growth while ensuring quality and safety in economic operations [12] - The plan aims to effectively address existing risks in real estate and local debt while releasing long-term growth potential [12]

Group 1 - The recent news about the Beijing Civil Affairs Bureau's decision to legally dissolve the "China Low Altitude Economy Alliance" highlights the growing concern over "involution" competition within the low-altitude economy sector, which is seen as a strategic emerging industry with significant potential [1] - The dissolution is viewed as a critical first step in addressing the chaotic competition in the low-altitude industry, signaling the authorities' commitment to optimizing the industry ecosystem and curbing unhealthy competition practices [1] - Various industries, including both emerging sectors like photovoltaics and traditional sectors like coking and landscaping, have faced similar issues of "involution," characterized by excessive price competition and low-level repetitive construction, leading to overcapacity and thin profit margins [1] Group 2 - The persistent issue of "involution" competition is closely linked to resource misallocation and distorted market mechanisms, where companies focusing on short-term gains through price wars neglect quality and service improvements, resulting in inefficiency [2] - Governments that create "policy depressions" without considering local industry foundations and resource endowments contribute to homogenized industry layouts and resource waste, further exacerbating the problem [2] - Effective governance of "involution" competition requires a multi-faceted approach, emphasizing the need for a collaborative market environment that combines effective markets with proactive government intervention [2] Group 3 - To combat "involution" competition, it is essential to optimize the business environment, which involves reducing costs while increasing value, encouraging businesses to move away from zero-sum price wars and reliance on subsidies [3] - The focus should shift from resource-driven competition to innovation-driven growth, allowing businesses to unlock innovation, quality, and brand advantages [3] - The governance approach has evolved from merely preventing "involution" competition to actively regulating low-price disorderly competition, reflecting a systematic and legal framework for long-term management of the issue [3]

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need for a multi-faceted approach to address "involutionary" competition, advocating for a collaborative market environment that combines an effective market with proactive government intervention [1][2][3]. Group 1: Issues in the Low Altitude Economy - The recent action by the Beijing Civil Affairs Bureau to dismantle the "China Low Altitude Economy Alliance" is seen as a significant step towards regulating the low altitude industry and addressing "involutionary" competition [1]. - The low altitude economy is identified as a strategic emerging industry that has attracted considerable capital interest, but has also been subject to exploitation by organizations misrepresenting themselves as industry associations [1]. - The article highlights that many industries, including both emerging sectors like photovoltaics and traditional sectors like coking and landscaping, have faced similar issues of excessive competition and resource waste [1]. Group 2: Root Causes of Involutionary Competition - The persistence of "involutionary" competition is linked to resource misallocation and distorted market mechanisms, where companies focus on short-term gains through price wars rather than improving product quality [2]. - Local governments that create "policy depressions" without considering local industry foundations contribute to homogenized industry layouts and resource wastage [2]. - The inadequacy of market mechanisms fosters an environment conducive to "involutionary" competition, which can stifle innovation and sustainable development in industries [2]. Group 3: Strategies for Governance - To effectively govern "involutionary" competition, a combination of strategies is necessary, focusing on creating a synergistic market environment through unified national market construction and regulatory recognition [2][3]. - Improving the business environment requires reducing costs while increasing value, encouraging businesses to shift from price wars to innovation-driven growth [3]. - The governance approach has evolved from merely preventing "involutionary" competition to implementing systematic and legal measures to regulate low-price disorderly competition [3].

Group 1 - The article emphasizes the importance of non-governmental forces, particularly venture capital, in driving technological innovation and industrial upgrades, rather than solely relying on government funding [1][2] - It discusses the role of government in establishing industrial guidance funds and providing tax incentives to encourage private investment in technology [2][3] - The article highlights the need for a high-quality, law-based business environment to foster the emergence of leading enterprises and industry clusters, including unicorns and specialized small and medium enterprises [3][4] Group 2 - It mentions the concept of "effective market + proactive government," suggesting that while the market should play a decisive role in resource allocation, the government should also play a supportive and limited role [3][4] - The article points out that the government should not directly select support targets but rather create conditions for potential leading enterprises to emerge organically [3] - It stresses the necessity of a rational approach to government support, ensuring that it complements market dynamics rather than distorts them [3][4]

Core Viewpoint - The discussion led by Professor Lin Yifu emphasizes the resilience and potential of the Chinese economy, countering the "China collapse theory" with data and insights on growth prospects and structural reforms [2][3]. Economic Growth and Development - From 1978 to 2024, China's average annual GDP growth rate is 8.3%, making it the only major economy without a systemic financial crisis during this period [2]. - By 2024, China's per capita GDP is projected to exceed $13,000, nearing the World Bank's high-income threshold [2]. - Lin Yifu categorizes China's development into two phases: the first focused on heavy industry, which laid the foundation but caused efficiency losses, and the second, post-1978, which shifted to labor-intensive industries, enabling rapid industrialization [2]. Reform and Innovation - The dual-track system is presented as a rational choice during the transition period, balancing economic stability with market development [2]. - China's gradual reform approach has created a 40-year growth miracle, contrasting with the "shock therapy" faced by many transitioning economies [2]. Future Growth Potential - Using a model based on the 2019 Sino-U.S. technology gap, China is expected to maintain an 8% growth potential until 2035, with actual growth rates projected between 5% and 6% [3]. - By 2049, even with a reduced potential of 6%, actual growth rates of 3% to 4% are still anticipated [3]. - Key supporting factors for this growth include an annual influx of 11 million university graduates, a large domestic market of 1.4 billion people, and a comprehensive industrial system [3]. Strategic Outlook - Lin Yifu envisions a future where China's GDP reaches half of the U.S. level, fundamentally altering the technology dependency dynamics between the two nations [3]. - He advises maintaining strategic focus amidst current trade tensions, asserting that China's innovation capabilities will ultimately strengthen its economic position [3]. Structural Challenges and Solutions - To address consumption challenges, Lin Yifu suggests increasing the share of resident income, enhancing social security, and promoting common prosperity [4]. - The integration of new urbanization and rural revitalization strategies is expected to unleash significant domestic demand potential [4]. Academic Perspective - Lin Yifu's balanced approach combines rational analysis of achievements with acknowledgment of structural issues, reflecting an objective academic stance [5]. - The ongoing dialogue and updates to his work illustrate the commitment to understanding and navigating the complexities of the Chinese economy [5].