首页> 外文学位 >The global diffusion and variations of creative industries for urban development: The Chinese experience in Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangzhou.
【24h】

The global diffusion and variations of creative industries for urban development: The Chinese experience in Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangzhou.

机译:创意产业在城市发展中的全球传播和变化:中国人在上海,北京和广州的经历。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The emergence of creative industries is accompanied by globalization and the knowledge economy as well as the growing importance of cultural industries (Flew, 2002). The concept of creative industries was formally established in the United Kingdom in 1997 as a national economic development and image changing strategy (DCMS, 1998). Since the concept was born, it has attracted much attention from academics and policy makers and has been largely promoted in countries and cities in the West. The trend still continues. Today, creative industries have been among the fastest growing sectors of the global economy (Cunningham, 2004). During the global diffusion, the concept "creative industries" has varied without a clear definition. It varies across locations and scales with regard to the term, definition, and sectoral combination. Indeed, it varies according to different understandings, preferences, research goals, local conditions and resources, and policy implications. The flexibility for defining creative industries is functional in policy implications, but difficult to undertake in cross-place comparative studies. A universal definition, such as that defined by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2008), which measures creative industries in terms of export, is needed simultaneously. Meanwhile, no matter how creative industries vary, policies supporting their development are similar among countries and regions, with the goals of building a mature market for them.;With much academic attention given to Western countries and regions, the situations of the creative industries in Asia remain less known. It is worth exploring creative industries in China, because it is a country of rapid growth and has a leading global economy. With the global framework noted above, the patterns, performances, and problems of using creative industries for urban and economic development in China are examined and evaluated at three urban centers: Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangzhou.;Through intensive literature review and policy scanning at the national level, the following have been explored: (1) the complex diffusion pattern throughout China, (2) the wide variations of creative industries across scales and locations, (3) the ways for defining creative industries, and (4) policies supporting creative industries. Also, government efforts, including cross-department governmental participation, locally determined definitions, and detailed policies and strategies, have been described for the three aforementioned urban centers: Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou. Further, the various creative industries, including one defined by the Chinese Association of Social Sciences (CASS) as well as those locally defined, have been evaluated. This was done by comparing the CASS definition to that defined by the United Kingdom in addition to comparing the CASS definition to those locally defined in the urban centers of Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangzhou. The diffusion pattern of the creative industries has been assessed, also.;From most aspects, the study reveals that the current situation of the creative industries in China reinforces those occurring in the world. Throughout China and the world, the strategy for developing creative industries has been widely diffused. These types of industries make positive contributions to economic and urban development. As previously stated, creative industries vary across locations and scales, based on different understandings, preferences, study intentions, local resources, and policy implications. Flexibly defining creative industries is practical in policy-making, but hard for cross-place comparison with regard to economic estimates. In contrast, the UNCTAD definition makes worldwide comparison possible, and the CASS definition makes the nationwide comparison in China possible. At the same time, the one-model-fits-all strategy (i.e., developing the same sector(s) without considering local backgrounds) exists in a large number of places in China and in the world. Policies for developing creative industries are similar. Aiming to establish the mature market for the industries, governments foster enterprises, incubate clusters, attract and retain workforce, brand products, build partnerships, and so on. At the same time, China has its specialties. Policies in Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangzhou tend to focus on the supply side of the market and neglect the demand side, which is different from the global trend of fostering both sides of the market. Also, policies in Guangzhou governments emphasize the support for the large-sized enterprises in creative industries, which is contrary to the global trend of supporting the small and medium-sized enterprises.;The study supports the viewpoint that coexistence of a locally defined and standard definition is needed. This is necessary in order to keep the functionality of the notion of creative industries to incorporate location conditions as well as its comparability in different places.
机译:创意产业的兴起伴随着全球化,知识经济以及文化产业重要性的提高(Flew,2002)。创意产业的概念于1997年在英国正式确立,作为国家的经济发展和形象改变战略(DCMS,1998年)。自从这个概念诞生以来,它已经引起了学术界和政策制定者的广泛关注,并且在西方国家和城市中得到了很大的推广。趋势仍在继续。如今,创意产业已成为全球经济增长最快的领域之一(Cunningham,2004年)。在全球传播过程中,“创意产业”的概念变化不定。在术语,定义和部门组合方面,它随位置和规模的不同而不同。实际上,它根据不同的理解,偏好,研究目标,当地条件和资源以及政策含义而有所不同。定义创意产业的灵活性具有政策意义,但在跨地方比较研究中很难进行。同时需要一个通用定义,例如联合国贸易和发展会议(UNCTAD)(2008年)定义的定义,该定义按出口衡量创意产业。同时,无论创意产业如何变化,国家和地区支持创意产业发展的政策都是相似的,其目标是建立成熟的市场。西方国家和地区对学术创意的关注度很高,亚洲仍然鲜为人知。在中国,创意产业值得探索,因为它是一个快速发展的国家,并且拥有领先的全球经济。通过上述全球框架,在上海,北京和广州这三个城市中心研究和评估了将创意产业用于中国城市和经济发展的模式,绩效和问题。通过深入的文献回顾和政策扫描在国家一级,探讨了以下内容:(1)遍布中国的复杂扩散模式;(2)创意产业在规模和位置上的广泛差异;(3)定义创意产业的方式;(4)支持政策创意产业。此外,已经描述了上述三个城市中心(北京,上海和广州)的政府工作,包括跨部门的政府参与,本地确定的定义以及详细的政策和策略。此外,还对各种创意产业进行了评估,包括中国社会科学院协会(CASS)定义的产业和本地定义的产业。通过将CASS定义与英国定义进行比较,以及将CASS定义与上海,北京和广州等城市中心的本地定义进行比较,从而实现了这一目标。研究还评估了创意产业的扩散模式。从大多数方面来看,研究表明,中国创意产业的现状加强了世界范围内创意产业的发展。在整个中国乃至世界范围内,发展创意产业的战略已经广泛传播。这些类型的产业为经济和城市发展做出了积极贡献。如前所述,创意产业基于不同的理解,偏好,学习意图,本地资源和政策影响,在不同的位置和规模上有所不同。灵活定义创意产业在决策过程中是可行的,但很难与经济估算进行跨地区比较。相反,贸发会议的定义使全球比较成为可能,而社科院的定义使在中国进行全国比较成为可能。同时,“一刀切”的战略(即在不考虑当地背景的情况下发展同一个行业)在中国和世界各地都存在。发展创意产业的政策是相似的。为了建立行业成熟的市场,政府培育企业,孵化集群,吸引和保留劳动力,品牌产品,建立合作伙伴关系等。同时,中国有其特色。上海,北京和广州的政策倾向于集中在市场的供给侧而忽略了需求侧,这与培育市场两边的全球趋势不同。此外,广州市政府的政策强调对创意产业中的大型企业的支持;这与支持中小企业的全球趋势相反。;该研究支持这样的观点,即本地定义和标准定义必须并存。为了保持创意产业概念的功能以纳入位置条件及其在不同地方的可比性,这是必要的。

著录项

  • 作者

    Jiang, Xuan.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Delaware.;

  • 授予单位 University of Delaware.;
  • 学科 Sociology Public and Social Welfare.;Urban and Regional Planning.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2011
  • 页码 397 p.
  • 总页数 397
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号