Thesis (Selection of subject)Thesis (Selection of subject)(version: 362)
Assignment details
   Login via CAS
The development of National Institutes for Culture: The Case Study of the French (Institut Français) and Russian (Russian Centre of Science and Culture) Cultural Centres
Thesis title in Czech: Národní kulturní instituty: Případová studie Francouzského institutu a Ruského centra pro vědu a kulturu
Thesis title in English: The development of National Institutes for Culture: The Case Study of the French (Institut Français) and Russian (Russian Centre of Science and Culture) Cultural Centres
Key words: soft power|kulturní globalizace|ruské kulturní centrum pro vědu a kulturu|Francouzský Institut|kulturní instituce|branding národa
English key words: soft power|cultural globalisation|Russian Cultural Centre of Science and Culture (RCSC)|Institut Français|cultural institution|national brand
Academic year of topic announcement: 2015/2016
Type of assignment: diploma thesis
Thesis language: angličtina
Department: Institute of General History (21-USD)
Supervisor: Mgr. Jiří Janáč, Ph.D.
Author: hidden - assigned and confirmed by the Study Dept.
Date of registration: 25.04.2016
Date of assignment: 14.05.2016
Administrator approval: zatím neschvalováno
Confirmed by Study dept. on: 24.06.2016
Date and time of defence: 19.06.2017 00:00
Date of electronic submission:15.05.2017
Date of proceeded defence: 19.06.2017
Submitted/finalized: committed by worker on behalf on and finalized
Reviewers: prof. Nathalie Heinich
  prof. Jean - Marie Schaeffer
This research focuses on the development of cultural centres, especially on the French (Institut Français) and the Russian (Russian Centre of Science and Culture) cultural centres. The study of Institut Français and RCSC is significant because it reveals a different model of functioning for a cultural centre in an international context. The goal is to see the differences of two cultural centres and analyse in which way these differences influence the cultural centres’ development. This goal includes the identification of directors’ characteristics, differences between two national cultural centres of France and Russia and the influence of location on the cultural centre. To conduct this study, the basic theoretical context includes: the cultural diplomacy and globalization, national culture and national branding, intercultural mediation and cultural development. This research looks at the role and strategies assumed by French and Russian centres abroad in preserving national culture by asking the question: what are the strategies in the promotion of national image abroad? The study is not about national identity but it focuses on the national image (brand) that countries construct through their cultural centres abroad. By identifying the differences and common characteristics between these two centres. It will progresses diverse research methods: 1) document analysis, 2) semi-structured interviews with directors of culture centres, 3) participant observation (internship) in Russian and French cultural centres, 4) online survey. Using the four methods, this paper aims to answer the question: how do strategies for the development of cultural centres change abroad?
This study is structured in three main chapters. The first chapter of my Mater thesis provides the reasons of creation of the national cultural centres abroad and open the historical comparative perspective on Russian and French cultural institutions abroad during the Twentieth century. The second chapter answers how the Institut Français and the Russian cultural centre adapt their cultural policies in the globalized world. The proposed research will indicate the process of branding in third chapter by examining the social characteristics of the centres’ directors and the differences between Russian and French centres in the construction of their cultural and art programs abroad.
1. Anholt S., From nation branding to competitive identity – The role of brand management as a component of national policy, In K. Dinnie (Ed.), Nation branding: concepts, issues, practice, Oxford 2008, pp. 22-23.
2. Baeker G., Beyonds Garrets and Silos: Concepts, Trends and Developments in Cultural Planning, Ottawa 2002.
3. Bradford G., Gary M., Wallach G., The politics of culture: Policy perspectives for individuals, institutions, and communities, Washington 2000.
4. Becker H., Les ficelles du métier. Comment conduire sa recherche en sciences sociales, Paris 2002.
5. Bernier I., La convention sur la diversité des expressions culturelles de l'UNESCO : un instrument culturel au carrefour du droit et de la politique, Diversité culturelle 2008,, consulted on 08 December 2015.
6. Brault S., The Arts and Culture as New Engines of Economic and Social Development, in “Policy Options”, 2005, 26 (3), pp. 55-60.
7. Country Brand Index 2011-12 report, available online at:, consulted on 16 November 2015.
8. Country Brand Index 2012-13 report, available online at:, consulted on 16 November 2015.
9. Country Brand Index 2014-15 report, available online at:, consulted on 17 November 2015.
10. Daviet S., Économie et culture: regards croisés de la géographie, in “Géographie Économie Société”, 2007, 9 (1), pp. 1-18.
11. Dinnie K., Nation Branding: Concepts, Issues, Practice, Oxford 2009.
12. Evrard Y., Democratizing Culture or Cultural Democracy?, in “Journal of Arts Management”, 1997, 27 (3), pp. 167-176.
13. Fan Y., Soft power: Power of attraction or confusion? Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 2008, 4 (2), pp. 147-158.
14. Fukuyama F., Economic Globalization and Culture: A Discussion with Dr. Francis Fukuyama, in “Merrill Lynch Forum: Globalization”, 1998,, consulted on 06 November 2015.
15. Greffe X., Le rôle de la culture dans le développement local, in Saez G., Institutions et vie culturelles, Paris 2004, pp. 60-64.
16. Kaneva N., Nation branding: Toward an agenda for critical research, in “International Journal of Communication”, 2011, 5, pp. 117- 141.
17. Kozhevnikov V., Model russkoy kulturyi: kurs lektsiy, Moscow 1996.
18. Kramsch C., Culture in Language Learning: A View from the United States, in K. Bot, R.B. Gingsberg, C. Kramsch (eds.), Foreign Language Research in Cross-Cultural Perspective, Benjamins, Amsterdam 1991.
19. Kumar A., Welz F., Interview with Prof. Immanuel Wallerstein, Paris, Maison de Sciences de l’Homme, June 25, 1999.
20. Lofgren O., The Nationalization of Culture, in “Ethnologia Europaea”, 1989, 19, p. 5-23.
21. Maevskiy G., Kulturnaya politika v sovremennoy Rossii: institutyi i tendentsii, Moscow 2002, 2, pp.77-87.
22. Noya J., The symbolic power of nations, in “Place Branding”, 2006, 2 (1), pp. 53-67.
23. Paschalidis G., Exporting national culture: histories of Cultural Institutes abroad, in “International Journal of Cultural Policy”, 2009, 15 (3), pp. 275-289.
24. Razlogov K., Orlova E., Kuzmin E., Rossiyskaya kulturnaya politika v kontekste globalizatsii, in “Otechestvennyie zapiski”, 2005, 4, available online at:, consulted on 26 October 2015.
25. Schneider C., The unrealized potential of cultural diplomacy: “Best practices‖ and what could be, if only..., inJournal of Arts Management”, 2009, 39(4), pp. 260-279.
26. Williams R., The Long Revolution, London 1961.
27. Zhuravleva N., Rossiyskiy kulturnyiy brend: model dlya sborki. K voprosu o politike prodvizheniya rossiyskoy kulturyi vo Frantsii, in “Massmedia XXI vek”, Saint Petersburg 2007, pp. 61-66.
Charles University | Information system of Charles University |