Development and Urbanization
China’s national policy of cultural industry development has been undertaken through an urban scope to advance the expansion of its cultural economy driven to transform its political economic model to one driven by creativity and innovation (Keane 2007; 2013; Xiang & Walker 2013). Driven by the interests of local Party-State, private developers and cultural producers (Currier 2008; Mangurian & Ray 2009; Zhang & Gou 2008), regional development has often resulted in problems of mismanagement, bad planning and incoherent policy formation (Currier 2008; Keane 2011; White & Xu 2012). Further miss-understandings by regional urban planners surrounding social mechanisms in the formation of cultural industry urban spaces (Sasaki 2010; Markusen & Schrock 2006), low product value and overt duplication, have often led to such spaces becoming districts of consumption rather then stimulating the growth of regional cultural industry development. Yet are such findings on policy strategies prevalent throughout China’s municipalities and provinces? What alternative strategies are policy makers adopting in their development? This papers aims to examine such aspects under context of official elements of policy construction and governance form Chengdu’s Municipal Government and Sichuan’s Provincial Government. It looks towards illustrating an alternative approach to policy formation, underscoring more experimentation shi yan 实验 and pilot project shijian xiangmu 试点项目 approaches, in which more urban to rural multi polar networked driven strategies duo ji zhanlue wangluo 多极战略网络 have emerged within Chengdu’s municipality into provincial Sichuan.