What does

Understanding the key exhibition terms in the Two Sessions and grasping the exhibition economics of the Two Sessions is of great significance for exhibition enterprises in grasping the future direction of development. Many local government work reports, which play a role of "command baton" in the local economy, have made many comments on exhibitions. These descriptions of exhibitions represent the local government's recognition and affirmation of the value of exhibitions and their expectations for the exhibition industry, and also guide the exhibition industry to seize opportunities for development.

The information on the exhibition industry described in the government work reports issued by Guangdong and Zhejiang provinces in 2024 is almost identical: Guangdong Emphasizes that Party and government organs should get used to living frugally, and insist on running all undertakings frugally, Exhibition and forum fiscal expenditures are reduced by more than half. ； Zhejiang Also emphasizes that while the government is living frugally, it should strictly enforce financial discipline, strictly control general expenditures, Substantially reduce forums, exhibitions, and festivals and use more financial resources to help enterprises, promote development, and benefit the people.

"Substantial," "reduction," "serious," "strict control" to some extent mean the government's "attitude" towards the development of the exhibition industry. However, the "reduction" mentioned in the report should refer to Reduction of government-led forums, exhibitions, and festivals rather than commercial forums, exhibitions, and festivals. This is not the first time the government has made such a statement, so there is no need to worry too much about it. This policy will not have a significant impact on the market order of the exhibition industry.

Some insiders believe that Guangdong and Zhejiang, two major economic provinces, have mainly realized that government-led exhibitions in the past were too extravagant and wasteful, and did not achieve the expected goals. The "face-saving projects" and "formalism" were too serious. The statement of the two provinces is of positive significance for purifying the exhibition environment . Government exhibition projects account for a considerable proportion in the market. Among the projects in various places, there are some projects with poor social and economic benefits, which have occupied a large amount of fiscal funds and government resources. Cleaning up a batch of ineffective government exhibitions and some redundant meetings with more form than content, redirecting limited fiscal resources to major high-quality projects, is also conducive to cultivating local brand projects.

Although most of the exhibitions that have been reduced are government-sponsored exhibitions and various meetings within the system, this will still have a negative impact on some exhibition enterprises, especially MICE service enterprises that mainly receive government meetings and exhibitions including hotels, professional meeting PCOs, and exhibition construction enterprises. These service agencies with the government as the client may face problems such as declining order volume and declining client budgets. This will further accelerate the adjustment of the business structure of exhibition enterprises. Within the industry, many enterprises rely on government projects for survival, and their business types and customer types are relatively single, which is not conducive to the development of enterprises. When the market changes, enterprises need to make timely adjustments, otherwise they will be submerged by the market tide.

Of course, the reduction of some government-type exhibition projects will also free up some market space, allowing market forces to enter, which will bring certain benefits to commercial exhibition organizations.

Guangdong and Zhejiang's approach of "using the right tool for the right job" is worth learning from other provinces and cities. However, everything should be done in moderation. "Substantial reduction" is not a "one-size-fits-all" approach, but a major cleanup of government exhibitions of varying quality, strictly controlling quality, eliminating low-end and low-quality exhibitions, and leaving truly high-quality, valuable government-led exhibitions. However, based on past experience, this type of cleanup campaign is easily prone to a one-size-fits-all approach during its implementation. In particular, some departments have a certain lazy-government mentality. In order to report to their superiors, they do not investigate and analyze the specific situation but instead shut down everything in a campaign-style manner. This will have an adverse impact on the market, and localities need to guard against this situation.

Perhaps, Guangdong and Zhejiang deeply realize that government agencies that act as both referees and players are not reasonable and should return the exhibition market to professional exhibition agencies, allowing them to compete independently and develop in an orderly manner; government agencies only need to act as teachers and administrators, leaving the rest to the market.

Overall, in recent years, the number of government-led exhibitions in China has been gradually increasing. It is hoped that Zhejiang and Guangdong can lead a streamlining of government exhibitions new trend, and that government exhibitions can also embark on a path of high-quality development after the reduction.