First there was the "new economy," then there was the "knowledge
economy," and now we have the "creative economy."
Call it what you will, but the nation is arguably attaching more
importance to "chuangyi" (creativity) to restructure its
economy.
In big cities like Beijing and Shanghai, massive material and
political resources have been devoted to what leaders term
"Chuangyi jingji" (creative economy) as a key strategic element for
advancing the cities' development.
As a name, the "Chuangyi" economy is hardly as clear as
knowledge economy, but "Chuangyi" does points to one important
dimension that the nation needs to pay particular attention to.
Look at China's trade disputes with some developed nations.
China is often accused of not doing enough to protect intellectual
property rights (IPR).
However, Western and Chinese companies interpret the notion of
IPR very differently. The former consider IPR to be legally
binding, while the latter may not. The authorities now strive hard
to crack down on IPR violations, but in the eyes of many Chinese,
intellectual property has yet to be recognized as such.
For this reason, laws and regulations have been enacted to help
create an environment that respects and protects intellectual
property rights.
We can be positive that they do help ban fake goods. However,
laws and regulations can hardly create China's creative economy
unless we can first produce a generation of creative minds. In
addition, we need an environment promoting and welcoming creativity
and a system that guarantees creativity and entrepreneurship.
After all, creative industry is not simply about figures,
copyrights or patents. It has everything to do with minds.
Ultimately, of course, what's important is not trade disputes
but people's rights -- their right to create, the right to what
they have created, and the right to protect their creations.
These are rights that should be taught early on.
In this sense, it is essential we learn to respect and cultivate
free minds and nurture people's creativity.
Just think: We teach our children to "tinghua," to heed what an
elder or superior says or be obedient. As a matter of fact, we
often praise our children as "tinghua de hao haizi" good, obedient
children.
We never expect schools, institutions or companies to judge
people's creative ability as one of the top traits for talents.
In real life, creative people are often discouraged, and
sometimes demoted.
These people may be seen as underperformers because they do not
follow established rules and practices. Despite the fact they get
their jobs done, they do not fit in with our traditional mode of
possessing good qualities.
Besides, Chinese society and culture do not easily tolerate
mistakes. Nobody knows how many innovations have come to a
premature end because of mistakes occurring during the development
process.
As a result, we reap what we sow: Chinese children can be
exemplarily disciplined and obedient compared with children
elsewhere. But as a nation we contribute too little to contemporary
creations in the modern world.
Therefore, it is also essential to understand which elements of
culture or values support people's creativity and which may harm
them.
I have seen too many examples that damage creative minds.
For example, we train our students to follow "biaozhun da'an"
(standardized answers), and our school education is still somewhat
oriented towards examinations, although there is much talk about
quality or character development.
When I discussed this issue with a county director in charge of
education in Gansu Province, he gave me the simple answer:
"Examination is the most fair tool we now have to cope with the
limited educational resources we are facing."
I could not argue with him on this ground since there is an
equity issue when it comes to educational resources. Beijingers,
for example, obviously enjoy better educational opportunities than
people in Gansu.
But I am convinced that our current educational system does
little to encourage creativity.
I am not calling for the abolition of examinations, especially
college entrance examination.
But I do want to stress that many creative minds are eliminated
in the examination process -- first from elementary school to high
school, and then from high school to university.
Those tough ones may survive rounds of examinations, and when
they finally reach college they are often scarred and bruised.
Of course it is not only education that concerns us. We need to
examine other areas also.
For instance, innovation and creation is not stressed as being
for the common good and socially desirable, but rather it is
individual’s hobbies or the institutions'/governments'
responsibility.
Too often you are on your own when you are engaged in
innovation, or the government will sponsor an innovative project
with money from State coffers.
You do not have to be a corporate titan or a government official
to agree that innovation and creativity should be encouraged.
One piece of online news caught my attention and might help us
understand why we have to take up the challenge and build a more
creativity-friendly society.
China will need 250,000 to 300,000 shoe designers over the next
10 years to boost its shoe industry, according to the Ministry of
Labour and Social Security.
We all know the shoemaking industry is a leading light industry
in China, and a driving force in export. Last year, China exported
6.9 billion pairs of shoes to over 200 countries and regions,
reaping total revenue of US$19 billion.
But "Made in China" shoes do not have high value and are often
regarded as cheap products. To make matters worse, shoe exports
have met overseas "dumping" charges.
We have skilled workers in the shoemaking industry but we do not
have good designers that can compete with countries such as Italy,
Spain and France.
What would the scenario be like if China had 300,000 shoe
designers who had brilliant ideas in terms of aesthetics, fashion
and material?
Just imagine.
(China Daily November 27, 2006)
|