Institutionalization of Creative Industries: Experience of Russia and China

Today, theoretical understanding of practical activities related to the development of the creative economy, creative and cultural industries is becoming increasingly relevant. The work examines the conceptualization of approaches to understanding the creative economy, cultural industries, and creative industries. Attention is paid to the scientific approaches of leading experts: J. Hawkins, D. Throsby, D. Hezmondhalgh, C. Landry, R. Florida. Practical activities related to creative, cultural industries are considered through the process of its institutionalization. The first practice-oriented definition of the concept of "creative industries" was given in Great Britain. In Russia and China, the process of institutionalization is associated with the assimilation of the experience of Great Britain. In Russia, the process is associated with the activities of the non-profit sector, which promoted the work of leading experts. In China, the process was connected with the implementation of creative and cultural activities in regions connected with Great Britain. In any case, the conceptualization of creative and cultural practices is a function of the state. The practices themselves determine the transformation of the economy, which, in turn, is regulated by the state. The practices themselves determine the transformation of the economy, which, in turn, is regulated by the state. The fundamental difference in the institutionalization of creative activity between Russia and China is that in Russia creative and cultural industries are identified, in China creative and cultural activities are not identified. If in Russia the emphasis is on creativity, then in China it is on R&D.