Symbolic Capital and Institutional Escort: A Governance Path Study on Breaking the 'Culture-Industry' Synergy Dilemma in Qiaoxiang
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/ty7p5s47Keywords:
Qiaoxiang, Culture-Industry Synergy, Symbolic Capital, Institutional Escort, Governance Path, Teochew (Chaozhou)Abstract
Qiaoxiang (hometowns of overseas Chinese) in China, represented by Teochew (Chaozhou), possess rich cultural resources such as intangible cultural heritage, architectural complexes, and humanistic spirits. However, in the process of modernization, they universally face a structural dilemma of poor "culture-industry" synergy. Cultural resources habitually stagnate in "static display" and "superficial embellishment," failing to be transformed into modern industrial advantages with "hematopoietic" functions. Based on cultural economics and new institutional economics, this paper proposes that the core to breaking this dilemma lies in achieving a dual governance transformation. First is to promote the dynamic transformation of cultural resources into "symbolic capital," i.e., activating dormant cultural elements into tradable, operable, and value-adding cultural IPs through "curatorial" incubation, digital reconfiguration, and "asset-light" operation. Second is to build a modern governance paradigm that replaces "relational governance" with "institutional escort," i.e., providing a cornerstone of trust and security for the market-oriented operation of "symbolic capital" through rigid intellectual property protection, a predictable business environment, and precise cross-border services. This paper argues that only by building a new dual-driven ecosystem of "symbolic capital" activation and "institutional escort" protection can the "culture-industry" synergy dilemma in Qiaoxiang be truly broken, achieving a level leap from a "homeland of memory" to a "highland of innovation."
Downloads
References
[1] Zhuang, G. T. (2005). On "Nostalgia Economy": A Cultural Interpretation of the Transnational Economic Phenomenon of Overseas Chinese. Overseas Chinese History Studies, (3), 1-10. [in Chinese]
[2] Zhou, Y. E., & Guo, J. (2021). Research on the New Generation of Overseas Chinese: Theory, Status Quo, and Trends. Overseas Chinese History Studies, (1), 1-13. [in Chinese]
[3] Qi, S. Y., & Zhang, T. (2020). The Connotation, Characteristics and Development Path of Cultural IP in China. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Social Sciences Edition), (1), 120-128. [in Chinese]
[4] Bourdieu, P. (2010). The Forms of Capital. (Qu, J. D., Trans.). Cultural Studies, (1), 123-143. [Chinese translation of 1986 article]
[5] North, D. C. (2014). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. (Hang, X., Trans.). Shanghai: Gezhi Publishing House. [Chinese translation]
[6] Li, X. M., & Han, X. Y. (2022). On the Industrialization Dilemma and Market-oriented Path of Intangible Cultural Heritage. Economist, (7), 94-102. [in Chinese]
[7] Guo, J., & Zhou, Y. E. (2022). Construction and Practice of Identity of the New Generation of Overseas Chinese in the Context of Globalization. Southeast Asian Studies, (4), 112-132. [in Chinese]
[8] Fan, R. L., & Li, M. H. (2022). On the Construction of "Digital Qiaoxiang": A New Mode of Interaction between the New Generation of Overseas Chinese and Their Hometowns. International Journal of Chinese Diaspora Studies, 14(1), 65-88. [in Chinese]
[9] Xiong, C. Y., & Feng, M. T. (2021). On the Application and Innovation of Asset-Light Operation Mode in Cultural Industry. Modern Communication (Journal of Communication University of China), 43(5), 128-133. [in Chinese]
[10] Zhang, Z. J. (2023). Business Environment, Institutional Trust, and Overseas Chinese Investment Decisions. World Economics and Politics, (5), 80-103. [in Chinese]
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
