情报科学 ›› 2023, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (11): 151-161.

• 业务研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于PMC指数模型的非物质文化遗产政策评价研究

  

  • 出版日期:2024-02-29 发布日期:2024-03-01

  • Online:2024-02-29 Published:2024-03-01

摘要:

【目的/意义】非物质文化遗产政策对于有效推进非物质文化遗产保护工作起着重要的作用,因此量化评价
非物质文化遗产政策能够为新一轮政策制定提供决策支持。【方法/过程】文章利用ROSTCM6工具和PMC指数模
型,综合已有学者相关政策评价指标确立非物质文化遗产政策评价体系,其中包含9个一级变量和44个二级变量,
进而通过构建多投入产出表计算各项政策PMC指数得分并绘制PMC曲面图,量化评价与分析非物质文化遗产政
策。【结果/结论】研究表明,政策总体水平处于可接受范围内,能够较好满足当下非物质文化遗产保护工作需求,但
仍有一定的提升空间。基于此,本文着重从政策性质、政策时效、发布机构、政策内容四个方面提出改进建议。【创
新/局限】本文创新性地确立了非物质文化遗产政策评价指标,从变量赋值方法和非物质文化遗产政策多投入产出
表两方面对PMC指数量化计算,多维度检验政策评估结果的准确性,未来研究需针对政策执行效果进一步探讨相
关优化路径。

Abstract:

【Purpose/significance】Intangible cultural heritage policies play an important role in effectively promoting the protection of
intangible cultural heritage, so quantitative evaluation of intangible cultural heritage policies can provide decision support for a new
round of policy making.【Method/process】In this paper, ROSTCM6 tool and PMC index model were used to establish an intangible cul⁃tural heritage policy evaluation system by integrating relevant policy evaluation indicators of existing scholars, which included 9 firstlevel variables and 44 second-level variables. Then, the PMC index scores of various policies were calculated by constructing a multiinput-output table and PMC surface graph was drawn. To quantitatively evaluate and analyze intangible cultural heritage policies.【Result/conclusion】The research shows that the overall level of the policy is within the acceptable range, which can better meet the needs of the current intangible cultural heritage protection work, but there is still some room for improvement. Based on this, this paper puts forward improvement suggestions from four aspects: policy nature, policy timeliness, issuing agency and policy content.【Innova⁃tion/limitation】This paper innovatively established the intangible cultural heritage policy evaluation index, quantitatively calculated the PMC index from the variable assignment method and the multi-input-output table of the intangible cultural heritage policy, and tested the accuracy of the policy evaluation results in multiple dimensions. Future studies need to further explore related optimization paths for the effect of policy implementation.