The Chinese tourism market is currently enjoying a new trend of popularization, individualization, and normalization, but public tourism services have become the key factor affecting tourist satisfaction and destination competitiveness. Because the tourism industry was regarded as a highly market-oriented industry for a long time in China, there is a lack of awareness of the significant reasons for establishing a public tourism service system. This lack of awareness leads to several obstacles in our practical exploration of this field. Lagging academic circles and ambiguous theoretical studies on this topic also restrict the practical development of public tourism services. Here, we first examine the existing research arguments related to the understanding of public tourism services. We then focus on Li Shuang's discourses on public tourism services by pointing out the inconsistency in her understanding of some core concepts and the misuse of some theories borrowed from other fields of social sciences, together with her erroneous understanding of the practice of public tourism services. We argue that Li Shuang wrongly understood and applied the theory of new public administration and Ostrom's polycentric governance theory into public tourism services, because the variety of public tourism services does not mean that the government is not responsible for the delivery of tourism services by providers. Polycentric governance theory is not suitable for application in the field of public tourism services because tourists, who are in an unusual environment, cannot become protagonists in influencing the governance of the tourist destination. Economic theories--such as the public goods theory--cannot completely explain why we need to provide public services in the tourism market or who should bear the primary responsibility for them. Nevertheless, political science and public administration theory could be better suited to answering those basic questions. On this basis, we raise our understanding of public tourism services, in which we articulate their attributes, contents, subject and object, temporal-spatial conditions, modes of providing, and the reason for their existence. We argue that the main content of public tourism services includes three aspects; tourism infrastructure, destination promotion, and an equality guarantee. These three aspects include 11 factors; tourism infrastructure, tourist attractions, availability of destination-convenient public transport, tourism planning, regulation of the tourism market, tourism equality guarantee, tourist quality training, tourism consumption environment, destination promotion, destination information services, and destination market cultivation. We further argue that the public tourism service itself is nonprofit and for the common benefit. The public tourism service provider is intrinsically the government and its public sectors. The object of tourism services is the visitor. Attractive destinations are marketed so that visitors will contribute to the economy. The government may have several providing mechanisms, but the provider of public tourism services is still the government. The commonality and objectivity of tourist needs and the local interests of the destination mean that the government must provide public tourism services. The general Chinese economy, the tourism service system, and non-governmental organizations are currently imperfect. The tourism administration system manages the majority of the public tourism service functions, but they do not understand the nature of these, and the quality and effectiveness of services are far from realizing tourists' expectations and needs. Therefore, at this stage, simply copying and practicing a misunderstanding of the Western theory of new public management in China would be misguided. Both improvement of service practices and theoretical clarification are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]