President U Min Aung Hlaing has repeatedly emphasized the importance of youth development among the country’s priorities. That priority is commonly discussed through education, skills, health, employment and participation in nation-building. It should also include the conditions under which young people can enter business, introduce new ideas and compete.
In conversations with young people, I have encountered a particular assumption more than once. They do not see entrepreneurship as something they can attempt now. They imagine that they must first go abroad, work for several years, accumulate sufficient savings and only then return with enough capital to start a business.
Working abroad can bring valuable experience, discipline and capital. There is nothing wrong with that pathway. The problem arises when it appears to be the only believable route into enterprise. A young person may then spend some of the most energetic and creative years of life merely accumulating the admission price for an opportunity to try.
The cost is not borne by the individual alone. The economy loses years of experimentation, innovation and learning. A business that might have been tested at 24 may be postponed until 34, or never attempted at all. Talent and time are wasted together.
Opportunity should not be exclusive
Why does business entry appear so distant? Usually there is no single answer. Young people may need capital for equipment, premises and working expenses. They must survive until customers begin to pay. They need information, permissions, distribution, marketing and credibility. They may also believe that the right connections are indispensable.
Competition policy cannot remove every one of these difficulties. The Myanmar Competition Commission is not a youth financing agency, nor can it guarantee that every good idea will become a successful business. Its role is narrower, but still important: helping to protect the conditions under which a capable newcomer can receive a fair chance.
Connections themselves are not wrong. Business depends upon trust, reputation and relationships. Experienced people can introduce a young entrepreneur to customers, advisers and investors. The problem begins when connections become a private licence to enter the market – when belonging to the right circle matters more than offering a better product or service.
This is one reason cartels and other agreements that restrain competition matter. A cartel does more than increase prices. Its members may divide markets, coordinate tenders, restrict supply or collectively preserve an arrangement that benefits those already inside. A young entrant can then be excluded before customers have an opportunity to decide whether the new product is better.
Fighting cartels is therefore also about keeping opportunity from becoming exclusive. A fair market is not one in which every young business survives. It is one in which established businesses cannot privately decide that a newcomer will never receive a genuine test. The Commission is not on the side of one competitor against another. It is on the side of fair opportunity and the competitive process. Where young people possess competence and innovative ideas but encounter artificial barriers, protecting that process also protects their opportunity
Youth possess real market advantages
Young people should not be discussed only as inexperienced people who require assistance.
They can possess genuine advantages in the marketplace. Many are more conversant with technology, quicker to understand new digital platforms and closer to the preferences of their own demographic. They may notice a change in consumer behaviour before an established business does. They may also understand how their peers communicate, purchase, learn and entertain themselves. These are commercially valuable forms of knowledge. Innovation does not always mean inventing advanced technology. It may mean applying available technology better, finding a more convenient way to deliver a familiar service or recognising an unmet need among a new group of customers.
However, technological fluency and enthusiasm are not enough. Noise is not innovation. An attractive social-media launch cannot compensate for a weak product, uncontrolled costs or unreliable delivery. Fair competition gives an entrant an opportunity to be tested; it does not protect an unprepared business from the consequences of poor performance. Young people must therefore convert their natural advantages into genuine competence. They must understand customers, manage cash carefully, improve their product, honour commitments and keep learning when the original idea does not work. Confidence is valuable, but confidence supported by capability is much more powerful.
Mentorship without patronage
Maturity also includes knowing when to seek advice. Young people may understand technologies and emerging consumers that older generations do not fully see. Experienced businesspeople understand institutions, cash flow, risk and consequences that enthusiasm may overlook. Innovation becomes stronger when these two forms of knowledge meet.
This is intergenerational complementarity, not a contest between youth and experience. A good mentor transfers knowledge and strengthens a young person’s ability to act independently. Patronage is different: it makes continuing access dependent upon remaining inside someone’s circle. A fair competition ecosystem should encourage mentorship while ensuring that patronage does not become the only route to commercial opportunity.
Senior businesspeople, professionals, universities and chambers can all contribute. Their most useful role is not to applaud every youthful idea, but to ask difficult questions early enough for the young entrepreneur to improve. What problem does the business solve? Who will pay? What does it cost to deliver? Can quality be maintained? What happens when the first plan fails?
Serious advice may occasionally reduce enthusiasm. It can also prevent a much more expensive failure.
A forward-looking regulator must listen
The markets of the future are already being experienced by young people. They are among the earliest users of new platforms, digital payment methods, online services and changing forms of work. They can also be among the first to encounter new forms of dependency, misleading practices or exclusion. A regulator cannot claim to understand the future of markets without engaging the generation already living in that future. MMCC must therefore make competition principles more accessible to young people and listen to their experiences of entering and participating in markets. Young people can also help explain fair competition to their peers through the language and media that their generation actually uses.
This is why Competition Matters: Youth and Fair Markets should be more than the title of a television discussion. It can become a continuing theme for competition advocacy. Universities can help develop economic and legal literacy. Young content creators can translate technical principles into understandable examples. Entrepreneurs can describe the barriers they actually encounter. Experienced professionals can help distinguish a genuine competition concern from an ordinary commercial difficulty. The objective is not to make promises that a regulator cannot fulfil. It is to ensure that young people know their frustration is seen, that competition law is relevant to their economic future and that public institutions want capable new entrants to have a fair chance.
Start anyway – but start with competence
My message to young people is therefore neither “wait” nor “success is guaranteed”. It is: start anyway, but start with competence.
Begin at a scale you can manage. Understand the customer before spending heavily. Use your technological knowledge and your closeness to emerging markets. Seek experienced advisers without surrendering your independence. Learn the rules. Keep your promises. Test whether the idea creates real value rather than merely attracting attention. Not every young business will succeed, and business failure is not automatically evidence of unfairness. Some enterprises will close. Others will change direction. A smaller number will become employers, innovators and established firms of the future. What matters is that their fate should be determined as far as possible by competence, effort and value – not by a closed agreement among those who arrived earlier.
Youth development and fair competition therefore belong in the same conversation. Regulators must help keep the route into enterprise open. Young people must be ready to walk through it with capability, innovation and disciplined courage. A country’s future cannot depend only upon young people postponing enterprise until they have spent years elsewhere. It must also be built by young people who believe they can begin here – and by institutions determined to ensure that economic opportunity does not become exclusive.
(The author is Vice-Chairman of the Myanmar Competition Commission. The views expressed are his own).
#GlobalNewLightOfMyanmar