11月19日，省政府新闻办举行"决胜'十四五'续写新篇章"系列主题新闻发布会第十三场，介绍四 川"十四五"时期社会治理主要成就。 探索出契合四川的社会治理新模式 "我们始终把党的全面领导贯穿社会治理全过程各方面，把党的组织延伸到社会各领域各阶层，把 党的工作覆盖到广大群体、社区和乡村，切实将党的政治优势、组织优势、密切联系群众优势转化为社 会治理效能。"发布会上，省委社会工作部部长王乾道出过去5年四川做好社会工作的关键。"这也是'十 四五'时期我省社会治理最鲜明的特征。" 加强党对社会治理的全面领导，"十四五"时期，省委高规格多次召开社会工作方面会议，全局谋划 和系统部署重点任务，构建起党委领导、政府负责、社会协同、公众参与、法治保障运行机制。2024年 四川与全国同步，组建起省市县三级党委社会工作部门，进一步集成社会治理工作职能。同时，还设立 省市县党建引领基层治理协调机制，健全各级信访联席会议机制，把信访工作整体融入社会工作体系。 推动社会治理体系和治理能力现代化，提升社会治理效能，需要多方参与、共同发力。 法治是重要治理手段。为推动解决好群众急难愁盼问题，四川创建703个民主法治示范村（社 区），培养2 ...

Core Viewpoint - The conference focused on the competitive landscape of the local life service market under the digital economy, discussing issues such as platform subsidy games, data governance, and merchant rights protection, aiming to explore legal pathways for the normative development of the platform economy [1][3]. Group 1: Conference Overview - The conference was hosted by the China University of Political Science and Law, gathering experts from academia, practice, and industry to discuss the new competitive dynamics in the local life service market [1]. - The opening remarks highlighted the importance of the local life service market for livelihood security and economic vitality, emphasizing the dual nature of technological innovation and potential exclusionary risks [3]. Group 2: Key Discussions - Professor Shi Jianzhong pointed out that the local life market relies on digital technology to compress consumption time and space, warning that subsidy competition is essentially a game of exclusive data access [8]. - Zhang Qiong emphasized that the legality of subsidy practices should focus on whether platforms abuse their relative advantages to force merchants to bear costs, potentially violating the Anti-Unfair Competition Law [8]. - Li Qing suggested that the government should implement a mechanism linking consumer vouchers with platform concessions to mitigate the profit squeeze on small merchants [8]. Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Insights - Professor Yuan Xiaoshuang noted that while in-store and home delivery services are complementary, subsidies can distort consumer decision-making, advocating for the protection of merchants' pricing autonomy under the E-commerce Law [13]. - Professor Li Yongjian highlighted that evaluation and search data are critical inputs in the takeaway market, warning that preferential treatment of self-operated businesses by platforms could violate the Anti-Monopoly Law [13]. - Professor Jiao Haitao pointed out that platforms forcing merchants to participate in promotions and setting minimum discounts could trigger violations of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law and Pricing Law [13]. Group 4: Regulatory Framework and Policy Recommendations - Professor Yang Dong proposed a three-dimensional regulatory framework focusing on "platform-data-algorithm," suggesting dual-track review standards for efficiency defenses and market blocking [18]. - Professor Wang Yong emphasized that while subsidies promote instant retail development, practices like "lowest price across the network" should undergo dynamic efficiency testing [18]. - Professor Chen Bing stressed the need to prevent algorithmic discrimination and regulate data blocking through key facility theory [18]. Group 5: Conclusion and Future Directions - Professor Fan Xiaobo concluded the conference by thanking participants and highlighting that the discussions deepened theoretical understanding of platform competition issues, providing important references for policy-making and law enforcement [22].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need for a robust legal framework to combat counterfeit food products, highlighting the importance of establishing a system where the cost of illegal activities exceeds the benefits derived from them [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Framework and Enforcement - The current legal system in China includes laws such as the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, Trademark Law, and Food Safety Law, which collectively provide a comprehensive regulatory framework against counterfeit food [1]. - There is a call for clearer operational standards regarding legal concepts like "similar infringement" and "substantial similarity," which should include elements like packaging and color schemes [2]. - The article suggests increasing penalties for intentional and repeated infringement of food products to enhance deterrence [2]. Group 2: Technological Integration - The application of new technologies, such as blockchain, can create a traceability system from raw material procurement to end sales, improving oversight of counterfeit products [2]. - Smart algorithms can assist in monitoring e-commerce platforms for counterfeit food information, while satellite technology can help identify hidden processing locations [2]. Group 3: Collaborative Governance - Effective governance against counterfeit food requires collaboration among multiple stakeholders, including government agencies, businesses, platforms, and the public [3]. - Initiatives like internal whistleblower rewards, "red and black lists" for businesses selling counterfeit products, and industry associations promoting "genuine product commitments" are being implemented to enhance accountability [3]. Group 4: Market Dynamics and Innovation - The article highlights the importance of balancing the destruction of counterfeit products with the establishment of protective measures for genuine products, using the example of Heilongjiang Wuchang rice, which has implemented a traceability platform and increased R&D investment [3]. - The integration of legal protection and innovation is seen as a way to drive out counterfeit products from the market, demonstrating the principle of "good money drives out bad money" [3].