文化產(chǎn)業(yè)外文翻譯(存儲(chǔ)版)
【正文】 nd consequence of the choice of the term “creative” and the inclusion of puter software in the definition of the “creative industries” was that it enabled the cultural sector to use arguments for the public support of the training of “creative workers” originally developed for the ICT industry. The original argument derived from socalled “endogenous growth” theory which attributed the relative international petitiveness of nations and industries to the institutional structures supporting innovation, part of which was the provision of suitably trained human capital. This was then translated into the claim that skill shortages in the ICT industries were a major drag on economic growth and relative petitiveness. Against this general policy background, the choice of the term “creative” enabled the cultural sector to claim that without public support there would be an inadequate supply of creative workers to ensure the United Kingdom’s international petitiveness in the supposedly highgrowth market for cultural products and services. This whole argument has very wide policy implications because it increasingly drives education policy. While there may be something in the general human capital argument, the skill shortage argument, and still less the response of attempts at micro manpower planning through the public education and training system, has never made much sense even within the ICT field. That the American dominance in global media is the result of superior education or training or that the United Kingdom is short of “creative” workers bears no serious examination. Indeed the Gorham Report (Gorham and partners 1996) argues for an export push in part to mop up aboveaverage levels of unemployment in the sector. At the general level of education policy there is an argument that the shift to the service sector – and this is supported by detailed labour market analyses of which types of jobs requiring which skills are growing – has meant not the growth in the requirement for hightech skills, but for inter human munication and relational skills and analyses of information of the type a humanistic, rather than technical scientific, education provides. However, this is not an argument, as the arts college lobby is now trying to construct it, for an expansion of or for special support for arts education and training on the grounds that its products alone are “creative” (for an expansion of this argument, see Garnham 2020). Access, Excellence and Accountability Current creative industries policy is presented as a break with the past in two renaming of the Department of National Heritage as the Department for Culture, Media and Sport is intended, on the one hand, to signal a shift of focus away from support for the “traditional” high arts, with their association with the protection of the values of some golden age, towards the creatively new (often associated with young, trendy and “cool”). On the other hand, the idea is to signify a shift of focus from the marginality of the Ministry of Fun to a serious concern with the central business of economic policy – a shift from circuses to bread. Within this broad shift, the
畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號(hào)-1