文化創意產業乃近年來政府所大力推動的重點產業，儘管文化究係一種「服務」或「產業」，爭議頗多，然而睽諸世界先進國家，如英國設有事權統一之文化媒體體育部(The Department of Culture, Media and Sport)職司全英文化政策之擬訂，並以發行彩券部份收入，鼓勵新穎多元之創作；再如丹麥政府早就發現企業界和文化界的語言渾然不同，發現國家需要教育課程來訓練學生如何經營文化事業，這包括建立對整個產業的知識，能夠斡旋協調、解決衝突，並擁有處理預算、智慧財產權、合約及版稅的能力，於是當務之急，是希望商學院可以把注意力多放在文化界的發展潛力上，增加相關主題、課程和所謂「第三級教育」的訓練；澳洲則就文化產業核心，從精英藝術與社區藝術之論述，進一步發展到休閒與娛樂；其文化態度，亦跳脫文化公民權之爭論，邁入文化消費期。凡此種種，皆從發展文化創意「產業」之角度，作為施政方針。 　　反觀台灣文化創意產業之經營環境日益艱困，至今未有事權統一之「文化部」，文化創意政府分工上，教育部獨置身事外以及至今未能建立諸如好萊塢的「完工保證」制度以吸引投資者等，因此本研究所欲探討之主題計有四項： 1.文化創意產特質為何？與過去台灣所擅長的製造業的價值鏈、商業模式等，有何不同？ 2.政府政策之制訂與產業界之需求，其緊密度為何？是否尚有政策調整之空間與方向？ 3.文化創意產業之經營者係一「守門人」之角色，此守門人之角色如何整合「線上成本」與「線下成本」中之各個成員角色，在「彈性專業化」的合作關係中，形成一種商業模式？ 4.文化創意人普遍缺乏避險觀念，因此如何「以銷定產」，透過「創業財務」理論，經由「高概念」與「國際分工」募集資金，迴避風險，是為本研究所要深入探討的主題。 / The idea of developing cultural and creative industries has been putting forward by the government in recent years even though the arguments of culture being as a service or an industry remains disputable. However, policymakers in more advanced countries have moved beyond the debate and recognized the importance of the industries at different level: The United Kingdom sets up the Department of Culture, Media and Sport as the solo division in charge of policy formulation. Part of the income from National Lottery is devoted to encourage creation; Being aware of the differences between business professionals and creative talents, Denmark educates students with the know-how of cultural industry management, including the skills of negotiation and conflict solving and the abilities to deal with budget, copyright, contract and royalties. It also urges business schools to enhance entrepreneurial potential by adding more topics, classes and so-called “tertiary education” to their curriculums. Australia, on the other hand, has extended the core value of culture and creative industries from elite and community arts to recreation and entertainment. It has moved from the phrase of debating cultural citizenship into cultural consumption. With reference to the experience of other countries, we can conclude that culture and creativity sectors should be considered as “industries” rather than “services” for policy measures. On contrary, the business environment has become difficult for the cultural and creative sectors in Taiwan. There’s no one single government entity to take account of cul-tural factors and attach greater importance to promoting the development of cultural indus-tries in the course of policy formulation and implementation; Ministry of Education has not partake in studying the vision for development and direction for the industries; Lacking of completion guarantees leaves investors with big doubts and consequently hider the estab-lishment of finance resources. To solve the above-mentioned issues, this research will fo-cus on: 1.The characteristics of cultural/creative industries. How are they different from the value chains and business models of manufacturing that has dominated Taiwan's industrial sector? 2.The gaps between current policies and the real needs of the industries. What can be done to favor the development of the sectors? Any adjustment to make or ap-proach to establish? 3.The role of decision makers in cultural/creative industries as “gatekeepers.” How do they control the above and below the line costs and utilizing the concept of flexible specialization to manage their businesses? 4.The sales and marketing of creative products. Traditionally, creative talents have little knowledge on risk control. How to develop new products or services in the context of existing provision in the market? How to avoid risk and raise money by bringing in the notion of “high concept” and “co-production” in filmmaking?