Facing the rapid evolution of global digital technology and artificial intelligence (AI), Culture: Policy, Management and Entrepreneurship (CPME) announced its AI Usage Policy during the editorial board meeting on November 4, 2025 (published on the journal’s official website). Given that Generative AI tools cannot fulfill the essential requirements for authorship—such as taking responsibility for submitted work, declaring the presence or absence of conflicts of interest, or managing copyright and licensing agreements—they cannot act as an author or co-author. Moreover, as emerging generative AI technologies pose potential risks, such as inaccuracy and bias, insufficient confidentiality and intellectual property protection, and unintended secondary uses, CPME has established the Policy for the use of generative AI tools in the writing, review, and editing of academic papers. We will continue to monitor updates to AI-related policies in the publishing and academic fields. Volume 4 Number 2 of CPME includes four Chinese and one English research articles, one case report and one book review. The authors present in-depth research findings and analyses of cross-sectoral cultural governance from the aspects of cultural regulations and administration, cultural heritage operation and its political imagination, international cultural diplomacy, intermediary talents in cultural and creative policy, as well as the application of technology in creative urbanity.
In the first research paper, CHIOU Tzu-Yu analyzes the connotation of Taiwan’s Cultural Fundamental Act (CFA) and its administrative flexibility through the lens of Adrian Vermeule’s jurisprudence of administrative state. It particularly explores whether the legal remedies stipulated in Article 28 constitute subjective public rights under administrative law. The author argues that although the current CFA establishes a comprehensive cultural administration system, it is difficult to derive explicit claims for concrete rights directly from the law, due to its predominantly guideline-oriented nature of the provisions.CHIOUpoints out that provisions of the CFA such as “cultural access rights” and “cultural impact assessment” do not provide a clear basis for requesting administrative remedies as a legal subject, posing dual challenges of concretization and litigability in administrative remedies. Nevertheless, the author contends that the core spirit of the rule of law and cultural governance in modern states no longer rests solely on traditional formalistic constitutional authorization or legal provisions. Instead, it further emphasizes professional judgment, substantive rationality, and active pursuit of common good by administrative agencies. Looking ahead, Taiwan’s CFA should progressively clarify the foundation for the subject of public rights, and protect the right to claim, while ensuring the professional discretion and policy flexibility of administrative agencies and strengthen the mechanism for public rights remedy.
HUANG Hsiao-Wen‘s research article, “Limitations and Reflections on Citizen Participation in the Outsourcing Management of Cultural Heritage,” investigates the rupture between “preservation” and ” revitalization” of Taiwan’s cultural heritage management. She observes that in recent years, the increasing number of Taiwan’s heritage sites has exceeded the fiscal capacity of local governments, compelling them to adopt a commercial outsourcing management model. In addition, due to the constraints of the outsourcing selection mechanism, public-private partnerships are often dominated by enterprises with abundant resources, while stakeholders with less capital, such as non-profit organizations, local self-governing organizations, cultural preservation groups find it difficult to intervene in the planning and decision-making of the heritage sites. The author uses the Sanchong Air Force Military Kindred Village No.1 as a case study to critically reflect on the implementation of Taiwan’s “Act for Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects” and the “Government Procurement Act” from the perspective of participatory cultural governance. HUANG argues that future outsourcing selection mechanisms should prioritize local connections as the core of revitalization. She calls for a participatory governance model that fosters multiple-stakeholder partnership among citizens, civil society groups, enterprises, and public sectors. Moreover, she suggests non-profit-orientated approaches in spatial planning to expand the possibilities for sustainable cultural heritage reuse.
The third research paper, LIU Tu-Chung‘s “Taiwan is the Taiwan of the World: Politics of Scale and Place Imagination of ‘The Regeneration of Historic Sites [RHS]'” explores the RHS project as a key field shaping local cultural governance and the formation of national ideology in contemporary Taiwan. Employing discourse analysis, the author looks into the cultural engineering project, which seeks to reconstruct national history and collective memory through local governance practices. The study investigates how local governments articulate narratives, use heritage resources and scalar strategies to reconstruct historical sites, thereby analyzing the scale politics and spatial imagination behind such heritage preservation efforts. The findings indicate that most local proposals in Taiwan construct relational frameworks of “big history” and “large scale”, strategically shifting between multiple levels of “local, regional, national, and global”, to enact political practices of power operation and identity construction. The RHS Project thus not only reflects the logic of national ideology and the construction of local cultural subjectivity in Taiwan since the 1990s, but also situates Taiwan within a broader world context, presenting Taiwan as a place of global significance.
KUO Tang-Ling and WU Jia-Chi‘s research paper uses the 2021 “Taiwan NOW”, a Taiwan-Japan Cultural Exchange Arts Project, to examine the potential and challenges of Taiwan’s cultural diplomacy. Drawing on the “flagship mechanism” theory as its analytical framework, the study analyzes the design of “Taiwan NOW” across contextual influences, multiple purposes, multilevel governance, and tool selection. Commissioned by the Ministry of Culture, “Taiwan NOW” was entrusted to cultural intermediary organizations, the then-President of the National Culture and Arts Foundation served as the chief curator, while the Cultural Taiwan Foundation, setting up a project office, acted as the executive agency responsible for project implementation. Through multi-level governance, cross-departmental and cross-national collaboration, the project demonstrates the diplomatic and curatorial spirit of “co-production and co-creation”. The study finds that “Taiwan NOW” uses innovative digital communication tools in the post-pandemic era to expand Taiwan’s international visibility and diplomatic space through art and cultural performances, despite challenges posed by sovereignty issues and pandemic restrictions. The authors argue that this “quasi-flagship” operational model enables cultural diplomacy projects to evolve from one-time, project-based, and externally mobilized initiatives into continuous, policy-oriented, and institutionally embedded practices. Looking forward, they propose that long-term, institutionalized flagship mechanisms and effective impact assessment frameworks be established to achieve sustainable cultural diplomacy through governance innovation.
CHUNG Hsiao-Ling‘s “Intermediary Talent under Taiwan’s Cultural Creative Industries Policy Transformation” explores the role and institutional challenges of local cultural administrators within Taiwan’s cultural and creative industries (CCIs), which are increasingly shifting toward ecosystem-oriented and technology-integrated governance. Through discourse analysis of CCIs policies of Tainan Municipal City, designated as the “cultural capital”, and interviews with cultural administrators and experts, the study reveals the core contradictions of Taiwan’s CCIs policies. Although the policy vocabulary emphasizes cross-domain innovation and collaborative ecosystem governance, the actual institutional environment remains constrained by departmental segmentation and ad-hoc collaboration. Cultural and creative intermediary talents are still bound by an industry- and market-oriented development paradigm and are unable to fully reflect the needs of governance. The author identifies three major challenges: (1) misalignment between national policy design and local implementation; (2) individualized professional development lacking institutional support; and (3) evaluation metrics that privileges industrial outputs over governance capacity. The study concludes that only by institutionalizing cross-departmental platforms, training programs, revising the CCIs policy evaluation framework, and strengthening cultural managers’ administrative coordination, strategic intermediaries, and mediating capabilities can cultural governance move from project-based momentum to structural resilience, thereby reinforcing the adaptive and coordinating relationships within the cultural ecosystem.
HONG Chia Ling‘s case report on “Industrial Applications of Webtoons in the Web 3.0 Era: A Korean Legal Policy Approach” highlights the remarkable global success of South Korea’s content industry over the past decade. Supported by advanced data-driven platforms, the industry enables precise feedback loops across editing, operations, marketing, and design. HONG emphasizes the creation of intellectual properties (IPs) and the cross-domain interoperability of content, which transcend traditional media boundaries. The South Korean government has formulated a system led by the private sector and supported by public policy, fostering an innovation-oriented creative economy. The industrial application model of Korean Webtoon offers valuable insights for Taiwan’s future development of content industry. KAO Yu-Ting’s book review on Creative Urbanity: An Italian Middle Class in the Shade of Revitalization identifies three major contributions of the reviewed book. First, it focuses on the creative initiatives of the middle class, particularly their production of cultural goods and services amid the plight of poverty of urban life. Second, it reveals that during the urban transformation of small and medium-sized cities worldwide, culture, creativity, and history generate practical implications that are distinct from the blueprint of North America “global cities”. Third, the book highlights women’s practice urban creativity. Returning to the context of Taiwan, the reviewer reminds readers to consider the local implications of creative city practices and the importance of detailed, context-sensitive analysis. The seven articles on cultural laws, cultural resources, diplomacy, technology, and creative cities promote the journal’s in-depth dialogue on cross-sectoral cultural governance.