With the global economic recovery, the demand for the service trade market is gradually increasing, and cultural service trade plays an increasingly important role in the development of trade in various countries, becoming a new driving force for economic growth, an important means for countries around the world to enhance international competitiveness, and a key focus area for developing foreign trade. In addition, the globalization of economy and culture has driven significant changes in the mode of trade production, posing challenges to the current classification system of service trade. Therefore, improving the classification system and statistical system of cultural service trade is of great significance for studying its development trends.

There is no unified understanding of the concept of cultural trade internationally. UNESCO believes that the content of cultural trade can be expressed through products or services. Therefore, the scope of cultural trade generally includes cultural product trade and cultural service trade. Cultural services are used to meet people's cultural interests or various cultural needs, and are a non-material form that includes artistic performances and other cultural activities, as well as cultural activities carried out for the purpose of storing information (such as activities in libraries, museums, archives, and other institutions). Regarding the concept of cultural service trade, scholars from various countries have different opinions, and there are also differences in the classification and statistical standards of cultural service trade among countries.

Due to differences in statistical caliber, data sources, and statistical standards, the cultural service trade data obtained between countries lacks completeness and comparability. Moreover, different classification systems for cultural service trade can pose certain obstacles to economic globalization and the development of cultural service trade. A more internationally comparable cultural service trade statistical data and classification system is a common goal pursued by countries around the world. On the basis of analyzing and comparing the classification systems of cultural service trade between China and Canada, this report proposes a compatible and suitable classification system for cultural service trade between China and Canada, referring to the international statistical classification system. This lays the foundation for exploring a more universal classification system and makes the statistical data of cultural service trade in various countries comparable.

Reasons for studying and comparing the classification system of cultural service trade between China and Canada

Canada is founded on trade, and in recent years, China's foreign cultural service trade has developed rapidly and has always been at the forefront of service trade. China and Canada have maintained a good foreign trade partnership, and Canada is also one of the top 15 export markets for China's core cultural products. Among the top 20 countries in terms of global trade in services imports and exports in 2017, two countries from the Americas were included, namely the United States and Canada. In addition, Canada has a high degree of market freedom and transparency, and has accumulated experience in promoting service trade in new technology fields and building a sound service trade management system. China still needs to strengthen in this regard. In terms of statistical data, in order to promote the export of cultural trade, Statistics Canada's cultural trade data is also used to support policy analysis by the Canadian Department of Cultural Heritage, and UNESCO uses it for international research on its cultural sector.

In addition, Canada's cultural service trade classification is very detailed, basically including all categories of cultural service trade. Comparing the cultural service trade classification systems of China and Canada can not only explore the shortcomings of China's cultural service trade classification system, but also compare the advantages and disadvantages of other classification systems and statistical systems, and seek a more complete cultural service trade classification system. Moreover, from the perspective of statistical caliber, it can promote the standardized development of the cultural industry statistical work system, improve statistical standards, perfect statistical systems, enhance the statistical monitoring and analysis level of relevant departments, eliminate the behavior of individual regions expanding their statistical caliber on their own, and facilitate the understanding of data sources and statistical methods in various countries, which is helpful for exploring and optimizing statistical systems.

The implementation of the "the Belt and Road" initiative has strengthened the cooperation in cultural service trade between China and relevant countries, and has also made China an important export market for cultural service trade in the "the Belt and Road" countries. Moreover, cultural service trade has the characteristics of high environmental protection, low energy consumption, and high added value, playing an irreplaceable role in driving China's economic growth. In early 2015, the State Council issued the "Several Opinions on Accelerating the Development of Service Trade", which provided guidance and explanations on the relevant work of service trade, emphasized the need to establish and improve the indicator system of international service trade, strengthen the statistical work of foreign service trade, innovate the statistical methods of foreign service trade, and regularly release statistical data. However, there are still many imperfections in the data statistics and classification of cultural service trade in China, which may lead to conflicts in cultural exchanges with other countries due to differences in statistical standards, thereby affecting deep cultural cooperation with other countries to a certain extent. Therefore, it is necessary to explore and improve the classification system of cultural service trade from a statistical perspective. Moreover, analyzing and comparing the classification systems of cultural service trade between China and Canada can achieve complementary advantages and disadvantages, which is of great significance for improving the classification systems of cultural service trade between China and Canada. It lays a foundation for exploring and comparing the cultural service trade situation of other countries and regions in the world.

Comparison of the Development Status of Cultural Service Trade between China and Canada

（1） Comparison between the Status of Service Trade and the Growth Rate of Cultural Services

1. Comparison of Service Trade Status

In recent years, China has achieved remarkable results in the development of foreign trade, with its global ranking of service import and export trade continuously improving. In 2017, China surpassed Germany and the United Kingdom to become the second largest trading country after the United States. Canada's service industry is well-developed, with its output accounting for about 70% of GDP, attracting a large number of employed people. Compared to goods trade, Canada's service trade scale is relatively small, and it has consistently ranked around 15th in the global rankings. From Figure 1, it can be seen that in 2014, China's total service trade accounted for a relatively large proportion of 30.6% among the major service trading countries in Asia; In North America, Canada's total service trade is second only to the United States, accounting for a smaller proportion of 14.4%. Although Canada still has some development potential in service trade, there is still a certain gap in its service industry level compared to developed countries such as the United States, which to some extent weakens Canada's comparative advantage in service trade.

Figure 1: Proportion of Total Service Trade of Major Asian Countries in 2014

In addition, the service trade situation between China and Canada on their respective continents is relatively optimistic. China holds an important trading position among Asian countries, with Japan and South Korea always being important trading partners of China, and China has become an important source of customers for Asian countries. The developed service industry in Canada is an important driving force for its economic growth and overall national strength, and holds a significant position in the service industry in North America. As the United States is Canada's main exporter and importer, Canada should actively explore service trade markets outside of North America and expand and deepen cooperation in service trade with other countries.

2. Comparison of Growth Rates of Total Cultural Service Trade

Although foreign cultural trade accounts for a relatively small proportion in China's foreign trade, its development momentum is strong, and the development of the cultural industry continues to usher in new dividends. From Figure 2, it can be seen that the growth rate of China's total cultural service trade fluctuated greatly from 2006 to 2016, with a significant decline in growth rate in 2008 due to the impact of the financial crisis, and a rebound in growth rate in 2009. However, since 2015, the country has revised the statistical standards for cultural service trade, resulting in a significant decline in the growth rate of the total cultural service trade in 2015. Nevertheless, overall, the total cultural service trade in China has steadily increased.

Figure 2 Growth rate of total cultural service trade in China from 2006 to 2016

In 2017, the total trade volume of cultural products and services in China was 126.51 billion US dollars, a year-on-year increase of 11.1%. Among them, the total amount of cultural service trade was 29.39 billion US dollars, a year-on-year increase of 14.4%, the import value was 23.22 billion US dollars, a growth rate of 20.5%, and the export value was 6.17 billion US dollars, a growth rate of -3.9%. From this, it can be seen that the import of cultural service trade has shown a significant increase, while the export has shown a downward trend, and the trade deficit still exists.

Service trade has become an important engine for global trade growth, and Canada is a major country that developed service trade liberalization earlier in the world, accumulating certain experience in developing service trade. From Figure 3, it can be seen that the growth rate of Canada's total cultural service trade fluctuated greatly from 2008 to 2016, with the most significant increase in growth rate in 2014, reaching 28.1%. In most years, the growth rate of Canada's total cultural services trade has been declining, but in recent years it has begun to rebound. Moreover, there is a trade deficit in cultural services in Canada, mainly due to the high demand for services in its domestic market and various constraints in international trade.

Figure 3 Growth rate of total cultural services trade in Canada from 2008 to 2016

Comparing the growth rates of the total cultural service trade between China and Canada, it can be seen that in the early stages, China's growth rate was greater than zero and the growth rate was relatively large, indicating that the scale of its cultural service trade grew rapidly. However, in the past decade, the growth rate of the total import and export volume of cultural service trade between China and Canada has been relatively low, and even negative growth has occurred. This shows that both countries need to attach importance to the development of cultural service trade, especially foreign cultural service trade, expand exports, enhance the international competitiveness of cultural service trade, and reduce trade deficits.

（2） Comparison of Import and Export Structures in Cultural Service Trade

1. Import and export structure of Chinese cultural service trade

According to statistics from the Service Trade Department of the Ministry of Commerce of China, it can be seen that the main cultural service trade volume in China in the past 11 years mainly includes three categories: exclusive rights usage fees and franchise fees, advertising and promotion fees, and film and audiovisual fees. In terms of import value, exclusive rights usage fees and licensing fees account for the largest proportion, far exceeding advertising and promotion fees, film and audiovisual fees; In terms of export value, advertising and promotional expenses account for a large proportion, while film and audiovisual expenses have the lowest export value (see Figure 4). In some cultural core areas, China still needs to rely on imports, which has obvious shortcomings.

Figure 4 Classification and Statistics of China's Core Cultural Service Trade Volume from 2004 to 2014

2. Import and export structure of cultural services trade in Canada

From Figure 5, it can be seen that Canada's cultural service trade is classified in detail and has a wide variety of types. In the total trade volume, movies account for the largest proportion, while information services account for the smallest proportion. In terms of imports, there are significant differences in various cultural services, with broadcasting ranking second, surpassing advertising and performing arts; In terms of exports, except for movies, the export value of other cultural services is relatively low, and the proportion of performing arts, advertising, and related services is similar. Therefore, Canada also needs to promote the export of other cultural services, increase the openness of related fields, and reduce trade deficits.

Figure 5 Classification and Statistics of Canadian Cultural Services Trade Volume from 2007 to 2015

3. Comparison of Import and Export Structure of Cultural Service Trade between China and Canada

By analyzing the import and export structure of cultural service trade between China and Canada in Figures 6 and 7, it is found that China's cultural service trade mainly consists of exclusive rights usage fees and licensing fees, advertising and promotion fees, and film and audiovisual fees; Canada has a wide variety of cultural services with detailed classifications. Moreover, the largest proportion of cultural service trade between the two countries differs, with exclusive rights usage fees and licensing fees accounting for the largest proportion in China, while Canadian films account for the largest proportion, indicating that each country has its own strengths.

Figure 6 Import and Export Structure of China's Cultural Service Trade in 2015

Figure 7 Import and Export Structure of Canadian Cultural Services Trade in 2015

In summary, China has a larger scale and higher growth rate of cultural service trade than Canada, but both countries have trade deficits and need to expand exports and reduce the deficit. Their structure still needs to be further rationalized to promote diversified market development. In addition, there are significant differences in the classification of cultural service trade between China and Canada, which have a significant impact on the statistics of cultural service trade volume between the two countries. Therefore, exploring the classification system of cultural service trade between China and Canada from a statistical perspective can greatly facilitate the comparison of the cultural service trade situation between the two countries.

Analysis of the Classification System of Cultural Service Trade between China, Russia, and Canada

Overall, the classification and statistics of cultural service trade are more complex than those of cultural product trade. On the one hand, the import and export of cultural products are subject to regulation by governments of various countries, while service trade is usually not restricted by customs and is difficult to regulate. On the other hand, countries often use different data sources and statistical classification methods when evaluating cultural service trade, resulting in inconsistent statistical standards and asymmetric data on service trade between the two sides. Therefore, this report first compares the classification systems of cultural service trade between China and Canada, and then conducts a comparative analysis based on statistical criteria.

（1） Classification System of Chinese Cultural Service Trade

In 2005, UNESCO innovatively improved the classification method of cultural trade, dividing cultural products and services into core areas and related areas based on the differences in cultural content reflected by trade partners, and cultural services can be provided in a paid or free manner.

The National Bureau of Statistics of China drew on the classification method of the UNESCO Framework for Cultural Statistics (2009), which conforms to international classification standards and connects with it in terms of coverage. In 2018, the National Bureau of Statistics based on the "2017 Classification of National Economic Industries" (GB/T 4754-2017), combined with the characteristics of cultural industries and cultural production activities, fully considered the operability and feasibility of China's cultural trade classification, and conducted classified statistics on culture and related industries. This not only conforms to the reality of China's cultural system reform, but also facilitates the collection and calculation of cultural service trade data.

From Table 1, it can be seen that core cultural services can directly meet people's cultural interests and spiritual needs, which is conducive to the dissemination, utilization, and popularization of cultural products, mainly including content creation and production, news and information services, creative design services, and cultural entertainment and leisure services. And related cultural services can play an auxiliary and intermediary role in the production activities of cultural products, involving printing and copying services, copyright services, conference and exhibition services, cultural brokerage and agency services, cultural equipment (supplies) rental services, and cultural research and training services. Among them, cultural entertainment and leisure services, cultural brokerage and agency services, cultural equipment (supplies) rental services, and cultural research and training services are relatively easy to overlook. However, China's statistics in this area are more detailed, which can adapt to the constantly emerging new forms of cultural industries in China and better meet the needs of cultural system reform and cultural development planning.

The advantage of this classification system is that it can focus on the main parts of cultural service trade, analyze their basic development trends, and facilitate understanding of the overall situation of cultural service trade. Moreover, considering the integration of culture and tourism, scenic spot sightseeing services and leisure sightseeing services are included. In addition, new cultural formats based on "Internet plus" have developed rapidly, so it is reasonable to include "Internet information services" into the classification system of cultural service trade. However, the disadvantage of this classification system is that it is difficult to collect data on cultural auxiliary production and intermediary services in related fields.

（2） Classification System for Cultural Services Trade in Canada

In Canada, cultural service trade is classified based on the concepts and definitions in its cultural statistical framework. In this framework, cultural services mainly include creative services, intellectual property services for cultural products, artistic expression services, content services, and preservation services, and the framework also recognizes two forms of intellectual property rights - trademark rights and copyrights.

In 2007, Canada classified cultural services based on the Central Product Classification (CPC) system developed by the United Nations. CPC encompasses products (including goods and services) into a detailed and mutually exclusive category system, grouping them together based on their physical and intrinsic properties (such as raw materials, production stages, prices, and expected markets or users) as well as the principle of origin. On the other hand, Statistics Canada is responsible for compiling data on cultural services trade and compiling it based on the CPC system.

From Table 1, it can be seen that Canada's classification of cultural service trade is different from that of China. It divides cultural service trade into seven branches, which are in parallel. Each branch is further subdivided into several smaller branches, with more detailed categories. The statistics related to culture in architecture and heritage are relatively detailed. The advantage of this classification system is that it can achieve comprehensive statistics without any overlapping parts, and will not miss any unimportant classification. The disadvantage is that some branches only count the parts related to culture, which may cause difficulties in data collection due to unclear concepts. Overall, data statistics work is quite complex.

表1 加拿大和中国的文化服务贸易分类对比

|Excel下载

Table 1 Comparison of Cultural Service Trade Classification between Canada and China

（3） Comparison of Classification Systems for Cultural Service Trade between China and Canada

Through the above analysis of the classification of cultural service trade between China and Canada, it can be found that their respective classification systems are relatively clear. However, for research purposes, once the relevant data of the two countries need to be compared, the problem of weak comparability becomes very prominent.

In terms of the classification of cultural service trade, compared to the United Nations' statistical caliber of cultural services, China has a wider statistical caliber for cultural service trade, and mainly classifies it based on "related fields and core fields".

Canada has launched the Cultural Statistics Program since 1972, and its cultural sector has a more detailed statistical classification than UNESCO, with detailed classifications for cultural product trade and cultural service trade. In terms of cultural service classification, Canada mainly classifies cultural service trade based on the international standards for product classification developed by the United Nations Statistics Office. Canada's classification of cultural services trade is very detailed, divided into seven categories, including writing and publishing works, film, video and broadcasting, recording and music publishing, advertising and design services, architecture and heritage, libraries and archives, and photography. Under these seven categories, there are many smaller categories, but they all emphasize parts related to culture to avoid ambiguity.

Comparing the cultural service trade systems of China and Canada from the perspective of classification, it can be seen that there are overlapping parts in the classification systems of cultural service trade between the two countries, and some projects have a lot of overlap. When comparing relevant data, contradictions may arise, and comparability is low. Therefore, in order to analyze and compare the cultural service trade classification systems of China and Canada from a statistical perspective, it is necessary to propose a new compatible classification system based on the classification systems of the two countries, so that the relevant data can be comparable.

On the other hand, it can be seen that neither China nor Canada has formed a comprehensive and systematic special statistical system for cultural service trade. There are still few studies on cultural service trade starting from data statistics, and there is a lack of comprehensiveness in the collection of statistical data. In addition, there are many departments involved in international cultural service trade, and there are still many problems in statistical practice.

A tentative classification system for cultural service trade compatible with China and Canada

Based on the comparison of the classification systems of cultural service trade between China and Canada in the previous text, it is found that the classification systems of cultural service trade in both countries have their own advantages and disadvantages. However, in order to improve the structure of cultural service trade between the two countries and conduct relevant data comparisons, it is necessary to propose a new classification system that is compatible with China and Canada on the basis of the classification systems of cultural service trade in both countries. When imagining, the following principles should be followed and the overall goal should be achieved.

（1） The overall goal and conceptual principles of compatible classification systems

1. Overall objective

Based on the practices of China and Canada in cultural service trade, and in response to the needs of global cultural service trade development, this report proposes a standardized classification and statistical system for cultural service trade. The overall goal of this compatible classification system is to meet the needs of comparing and statistically analyzing the structure of cultural service trade between China and Canada, and to serve as a demonstration for proposing a classification system for cultural service trade that is suitable for more countries. At the same time, building a statistical system that is compatible, internationally aligned, and convenient for comparing service trade statistics between countries, unifying statistical standards, standardizing statistical systems, and ensuring data accuracy can further expand research on social and economic theories, reduce trade barriers and policy conflicts in cultural service trade, promote diversified cultural service trade cooperation among countries, and further promote deep cooperation in cultural industries among countries around the world, and promote the growth of international cultural service trade.

2. Imagine the principles followed by compatible classification systems

When constructing a classification system for cultural service trade compatible with China and Canada based on statistical criteria, the following four principles should be followed.

Firstly, the principle of comprehensiveness. The compatible cultural service trade classification system not only includes all categories of cultural service trade between China and Canada, but also refers to the content of service trade classification in the International Service Trade Statistics Monitoring System and the International Service Trade Statistics Manual. The statistical scope is comprehensive and extensive, and it lays the foundation for analyzing the classification systems of other countries.

Secondly, the principle of scientificity. By comparing the classification systems of cultural service trade between China and Canada, analyzing the individuality and characteristics of cultural service trade between the two countries, objectively reflecting the nature, characteristics, and degree of correlation of cultural service trade objects, and thus classifying them into one category to avoid ambiguity. For example, writing and publishing works in Canada's cultural services trade can be classified and merged into the same category as content creation and production in China's core cultural services, as well as printing and copying services in related cultural services.

Thirdly, the principle of standardization. The proposal of a classification system for cultural service trade that is compatible with China and Canada is aimed at facilitating the collection of relevant data on cultural service trade between the two countries, improving the classification of cultural service trade, and ensuring that data is available, accurate, clearly defined, and standardized based on statistical standards for comparison, in order to ensure the comparability of results.

Fourth, the principle of practicality. In addition, a compatible classification system should also serve as the basis for comparing and analyzing statistical data, be practical, and provide a demonstration effect for proposing a more universal classification system. At the same time, it should conform to the development trend of world service trade and promote the development of cultural economy.

（2） Compatible with the cultural service trade classification system of China and Canada

Based on the analysis of the classification system of cultural service trade between China and Canada in the previous text, it is found that there are significant differences in the classification of cultural service trade between China and Canada, which makes it difficult to analyze the trade structure and compare data between the two countries, and the comparability is poor. Therefore, in order to construct a compatible cultural service trade classification system suitable for China and Canada, this report proposes a cultural service trade classification system that is compatible with China and Canada based on the classification systems of both countries and with reference to the International Service Trade Statistics Monitoring System and the International Service Trade Statistics Manual. The system is presented in Table 2.

表2 兼容中加的文化服务贸易分类体系

|Excel下载

Table 2: Classification System for Cultural Service Trade Compatible with China and Canada

The classification system of cultural service trade in Table 2 integrates the classifications of cultural service trade in the "International Service Trade Statistics Monitoring System" and the "International Service Trade Statistics Manual", and is compatible with the classification systems of China and Canada, highlighting key points and providing appropriate details. The first type of news and publishing services includes news services, newspaper information services, publishing services, writing services, and printing services, combining the news and information services of China and Canada with writing and publishing services. The classification of the second type of film, video, and audiovisual industry services is relatively clear, including four categories: film services, video services, photography services, and recording and music publishing services. More special are cultural and artistic services and cultural information transmission services, of which cultural and artistic services are mainly related to literary and artistic creation, cultural performances and cultural facilities services, while cultural information transmission services mainly include Internet information services, value-added telecommunications services (cultural part) and radio and television transmission services, of which radio and television are no longer in the same category as film and audio-visual industries. The fifth category of cultural, creative, and design services is still divided into two categories: advertising services and design services, while the proportion of other cultural services in the last category is relatively small, including other cultural related services. Among them, news publishing services, cultural creativity and design services, as well as film, video and audiovisual industry services, account for a relatively large proportion of cultural service trade between the two countries and are core components with higher added value. This classification system categorizes the cultural service trade that is the same in the classification systems of China and Canada into one category, avoiding cross overlap. At the same time, it also classifies the cultural service trade of new formats, which includes comprehensive content. In addition, the characteristics of this classification system can be seen from the following three aspects.

1. Emphasize cultural diversity and follow the development trend of cultural service trade

From Table 2, it can be seen that this classification system places more emphasis on cultural diversity, covering both traditional cultural service trade and emerging cultural service trade. The cultural and artistic services focus on the statistical classification of traditional cultural service trade, which is of great significance for exploring and protecting the traditional cultures of China and Canada; Cultural information transmission services include Internet information services, value-added telecommunications services (cultural part) and radio and television transmission services, which conform to the development trend of cultural service trade. In recent years, the rapid development of cultural economy around the world has intensified the competition in the international cultural market. In order to speed up cultural innovation in the era of big data and the Internet, the proportion of traditional cultural industries and emerging cultural industries will change. The classification of cultural information transmission services conforms to the development trend of cultural service trade and promotes the continuous optimization of the cultural trade structure of China and Canada. At the same time, this classification system can not only meet the current demand for statistics on cultural service trade between China and Canada, but also serve as a demonstration for exploring a more universal classification system for cultural service trade that is suitable for other countries.

2. Comprehensive and clear classification

The cultural service trade classification systems of both countries classify advertising services and design services into one category, with clear classifications. However, the proportion of other cultural services in the overall statistical system is relatively small. Considering the history and current situation of cultural resources in each country, in order to reflect the particularity of a country's cultural service trade, the compatible classification system of China and Canada categorizes services related to libraries, museums, archives, conference and exhibition services, and other cultural related services into one category, fully considering the cultural characteristics of each country.

3. Provided standards for data statistics on cultural service trade between China and Canada

In terms of data sources and statistical methods, the Service Trade Department of the Ministry of Commerce of China is responsible for compiling and publishing service trade data, while the State Administration of Foreign Exchange of China is responsible for compiling and publishing China's international balance of payments statistics. The International Revenue Division of Statistics Canada is responsible for compiling and publishing Canada's balance of payments statement, and collects most of the service data through a comprehensive annual survey of international transactions of over 3000 Canadian companies. Therefore, there are many departments involved in data collection and compilation in China, and it is necessary to strengthen cooperation and collaboration among various departments to strive for the accuracy and authority of data. Canada's international balance of payments department has a more reasonable work arrangement in data collection and statistics, which is worth learning from. Meanwhile, the cultural service trade classification system in Table 2, which is compatible with both China and Canada, can provide a unified statistical standard suitable for both countries' governments in data statistics, as well as provide a demonstration for other countries to compare data, thereby ensuring the completeness and comparability of cultural service trade data between countries and improving the statistical level of cultural service trade in each country.

Five concluding remarks

This report compares and studies the classification systems of cultural service trade between China and Canada based on statistical criteria. Due to the different statistical systems and methods used, as well as the different sources of data, there are significant differences in the classification systems of cultural service trade between China and Canada. Moreover, there are various systems for classifying cultural service trade internationally, and each country also refers to international standards and develops a classification system for cultural service trade that is in line with its own national conditions. There are still significant problems in the statistical work of cultural service trade. Therefore, in order to compare the current situation of cultural service trade between China and Canada from a statistical perspective, it is necessary to propose a classification system for cultural service trade that is compatible with the situation of both countries. This report proposes a new classification system for cultural service trade based on the combination of the cultural service trade classification systems of the two countries, and refers to the classification of cultural service trade in the International Service Trade Statistics Monitoring System and the International Service Trade Statistics Manual to make it more compatible. At the same time, both countries can refer to the new classification system to optimize and improve their own statistical classification systems, facilitate data collection and statistics, and promote the continuous development of cultural service trade.

In addition, analyzing the classification systems of cultural service trade in China and Canada and proposing a new classification system suitable for both countries has laid the foundation for proposing a classification system with greater universality for more countries and regions. It has also taken a crucial step towards making the existing cultural service trade indicators of various countries comparable. At the same time, it has certain significance for improving China's cultural service trade statistical system and promoting the exchange and development of foreign cultural trade among countries.