图书馆杂志

图书馆杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (398): 27-39.

• 理论探索 • 上一篇    下一篇

我国公共数字文化服务政策的脉络演进及文本量化分析

彭丽徽 顾般若 洪闯(湘潭大学公共管理学院)   

  • 出版日期:2024-06-15 发布日期:2024-06-24
  • 作者简介:彭丽徽 湘潭大学公共管理学院,副教授,硕士研究生导师。研究方向:公共文化服务。作者贡献: 研究主题确定与论文修改。E-mail:plh_222@126. com 湖南湘潭 411105 顾般若 湘潭大学公共管理学院,硕士研究生。研究方向:公共文化服务。作者贡献: 数据收集、分析与论文撰写。 湖南湘潭 411105 洪 闯 湘潭大学公共管理学院,讲师,硕士研究生导师。研究方向:公共文化服务。作者贡献: 论文修改。 湖南湘潭 411105

Evolution of Public Digital Cultural Service Policy in China and Quantitative Analysis of Text

Peng Lihui, Gu Banruo, Hong Chuang (School of Public Administration, Xiangtan University)   

  • Online:2024-06-15 Published:2024-06-24
  • About author:Peng Lihui, Gu Banruo, Hong Chuang (School of Public Administration, Xiangtan University)

摘要:

剖析当前我国公共数字文化服务政策,系统回顾与总结相关政策的演进历程和特征,以期为进一步优化公共文化服务政策体系提供参考。以我国近20 年来113 项公共数字文化服务政策文本为研究对象,采用文献计量和政策工具等方法,梳理公共数字文化服务政策脉络演进,从“政策工具—政策目标—参与主体—外部特征”四维视角,利用NVivo 工具进行政策文本量化分析,结合多个维度视角进行组合评估。研究表明:我国公共数字文化服务政策演进历史主要分为萌芽、起步、发展和深化4 个阶段,过程中存在政策工具结构失衡、服务区域发展不均等问题, 应加强政策工具结构优化,聚焦服务的均等化与拓展性,形成“多元联合”的参与模式,打造“一核多翼”协同共进的新格局。

Abstract:

This paper analyzes the current public digital cultural service policies in China, systematically reviewing and summarizing the evolution process and characteristics of relevant policies, in order to provide reference for further optimizing the public cultural service policy system. Taking 113 public digital cultural service policy texts in China in the past two decades as the research object, and using bibliometrics and policy tools, the paper sorts out the evolution of public digital cultural service policies, and quantitatively analyzes policy texts via NVivo from the four-dimensional perspective of “policy tools-policy objectives-participants-external characteristics”. It also carries out combined evaluation from multiple dimensional perspectives. The results show that the evolution history of China’s public digital cultural service policy is mainly divided into four stages: germination, start-up, development and deepening, and there are problems such as imbalance in the structure of policy tools and uneven development of service regions in the process. It proposes to further optimize policy tool structure, focus on the equalization and expansion of services, form a “diversified and joint” participation model, and create a new pattern of “one core and multiple wings” synergy